observation/suggestions

-  all area targets IMHO need to be looked at for tonnage and objects requirements.
    After you have gone there 4 to 6 times with less than a 50/50 change of living it just might lower the frustration level on these targets.
   A % of damage would be nice to see (like airfields)
   For me  they will be the last targets to work on for now. Down the road this couldl just end up being low level on everything and the hell with living or aircraft supply.
   Like it was a couple of campaigns ago.

- maybe less AI fighter groups (they tend to look like squirrels) and more 4 to 6 bomber groups with escorts that may look like breather raids (high and low).
  This might encourage smaller groups of Hurricanes and Spits going up together to protect our targets
 
-Could we lose the 10 to 20 109's having a Sunday afternoon sightseeing tour of England at  20k plus


I'm sure there will be more to follow (as my old brain remembers them).... as we hash this out.......

Could we please just keep it on topic in this thread.

Thanks, Bird. These are all good suggestions. I've been gradually refining the point-area targets as we have been seeing how they work in reality, mostly revising to make them less difficult in general.

(Though do remember most targets are designed to be taken out with a group of bombers now, that does create some problems if you are only flying single. One though is to have certain targets that are more designed for a single bomber or pilot to take out, like the local radar.)

Also the objectives remaining & objectives scouted listings now include % destroyed--as you say, it's frustrating to not know where you stand.

Others are good ideas, too - Fatal might have to work on them.

I wonder if the large # of high level fighters on a Sunday are due to many Red raids of various areas, which tend to trigger a Blue fighter response of the type you mention. Maybe they then wandered over from the Blue to the Red side of the pond? Anyway, I'm not sure why there would be so many of those, unless something of that type.

Thanks for the feedback, it is very helpful.

BTW, regarding area targets (which is basically anything with the word "area" in the name of the target, plus things like airports that are big fat targets that can be hit from 20,000 feet, the whole point of them is to create a type of target which is best suited for large groups of bombers doing area bombing from 15000 feet and upwards.

That was the most common type of bombing raid in WWII. They weren't necessarily trying to get one bomb on one 10x10 meter spot. Rather, they were trying to drop $X tons of ordinance on $Y area--which might be a large industrial area or plant, a military base, an airport, etc. And they knew that wouldn't necessarily completely destroy that entire area, but it would disrupt and dishearten the enemy while destroying at least a portion of it.

So if you take yourself and 6 or 8 Wellingtons or Blenheims in at 16000 or 19000 feet and if you score a good hit then you should see a bunch of progress towards the target, if not taking it out right there.

On the other hand if you're planning to do it via low-level single-aircraft Blenheim runs then yeah, it's going to be quite a bit of a grind.

Also if I may say--we're used to thinking in terms of "A Mission" that lasts 5 or 6 hours and has maybe 6-8 targets, and it's possible (and necessary) to take out all 8 of those within one 5 hour period.

So, that creates an certain expectation about how difficult a target is and how long it can (possibly) take to take it out successfully.

So now we are thinking more in terms of multi-day or even multi-week missions with more targets but also considerably more difficult targets. Maybe targets you can't possibly take out with just one run of one bomber.

But the targets are also far more significant. Taking out an entire airport or an entire industrial or manufacturing area is a huge blow to the enemy, far more than just bombing one certain building or fuel dump.

In those terms, the change in thinking I'm suggesting is to consider that some of these major objectives are not the equivalent of what we used to think of as "an objective" but they are more of the scope and scale of what we used to think of as *an entire mission*.

Now I don't think every objective can or should be that type. Quite a number of them are still more or less minor targets and a load of two from a Blenheim or even a HurriFB or Stuka or two could take them out.

But if you're talking about taking out a whole large city's industrial area, or a large factory complex that is producing X or Y essential war goods, or a large, extended military base like an airport or large industrial area is more like a whole extended mission all in itself, not just a simple doink type target.

Those differences in difficulty are reflected in the scores given for the different targets - maybe we should start displaying those numbers so people have a sense of the priority & difficulty HQ assigns to various targets/missions as well as HQ's guess at relative difficulty.

Thank You Flug for all your time, effort and expertise in making our campagin server the best one out there. This also applies to Fatal as well.
I see you already have percentages up now.....this is great to see and very helpful in knowing how effective ones bombing is and what has to be done to finish it.
Also the level of difficulty for each target, good to know when planning a bomb run
An observation:
-noticed yesterday that cover will only load as pairs and not groups . I always put a space between type and quanity. Will check again this morning.

I like the idea of that bit of grind. Hitting Calais or Bolone (whatever its spelled) I could hit 2-5 targets in a run low level due to the nature of the point targets. This made it worth it even if I had 50/50 odds or didn't come back at all because I made the points.

I do like to optimize the fun out of games...

But these area targets will and do force people like me to fly more historically and care more about my bombers, flight plan, ect.

I like the change, and the gind it will cause. Will for sure be a more meaningful win once it hits 100%

Could we lose the 10 to 20 109's having a Sunday afternoon sightseeing tour of England at  20k plus

So much this. All it really does is create a no fly zone.