ChezDaJez
Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
|
quote:
To write a good AAR you need plenty of time, but above all a decent english. Consider guys that many of the people that are writing AARs are non-english-born speakers...it's a lot easier to explain yourself with some of the Action Reports cut and pasted.... I've tried to eliminate most of the combat reports from my AARs, but still i need them cause it would simply be too difficult for me to find the right words to say something....
However i think a good AAR needs to be understandable...so full of maps and screenshots. It's like when you read a book and there isn't any map...i go crazy!!!
I agree that the AAR must be understandable but I would hope that wouldn't stop someone who doesn't write English as well as a native English speaker. Seriously, I'm amazed at times at how well many players such as yourself write in English. Even when it's not the best use of words, it's still completly understandable. I only wish that I could do the same in Spanish, a language that I studied for 4 years and and had to use when I lived in Spain for over 3 years. I can barely read it let alone speak and write it.
What makes an AAR interesting? Strategy and tactics! I read them to learn what other players do. So commentary illustrated with maps and graphics help to keep me oriented to the situation and allows me to see the big picture at a glance. That doesn't mean I need a graphic or map with every post but just often enough to where the strategic trend becomes apparent. Tactical maps of battles fought are also very interesting, especially when illlustrated with arrows and timelines. If you are planning an offensive somewhere, I would love to read what your objectives are and what plans you have for when things don't go as you wish. I want to hear your thoughts and comments and how you perceive things are going.
Style and content are important too. It doesn't have to be written from a supreme commander or news reporter viewpoint though I prefer those. One of the best I read however was a first-person account of the war through the eyes of a Zero pilot. I don't remember who wrote it but it was very good. Try something different.
You should also avoid "cut and paste" combat reports whenever possible. Use only pertinent parts of the combat report to reinforce the commentary and please edit them. Reading a long combat report is boring, especially when it is filled with dozens of lines that read "6 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet." Reduce it down. Take the following report:
Day Air attack on Kendari , at 33,71
Allied aircraft
F-5A Lightning x 6
B-17E Fortress x 206
B-24D Liberator x 85
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 12 damaged
B-24D Liberator: 4 damaged
Japanese Ships
CL Nagara, Bomb hits 24, on fire, heavy damage
DD Michishio, Bomb hits 1
DD Murasame, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
Japanese ground losses:
174 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Port hits 21
Port supply hits 9
Aircraft Attacking:
36 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
42 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
27 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
20 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
20 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
12 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
6 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
8 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
8 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
15 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
9 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
4 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
9 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
6 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
5 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
2 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-17E Fortress bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
3 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 6000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's boring! It can be reduced down to read:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kendari bombed by 206 B-17E Fortress and 85 B-24D Liberators at 6000 feet.
Allied aircraft
F-5A Lightning x 6
B-17E Fortress x 206, 12 damaged
B-24D Liberator x 85, 4 damaged
Japanese Ships
CL Nagara, Bomb hits 24, on fire, heavy damage
DD Michishio, Bomb hits 1
DD Murasame, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
Japanese ground losses:
174 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Port hits 21
Port supply hits 9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything is still there and it might take a little longer to do but it increases the readability greatly. If the AAR is readable, no one will read it regardless of how dramatic the play. It doesn't matter to me if you can write like Shakespeare or a kindergartner, just make it factual and interesting.
Just my .02 cents.
Chez
_____________________________
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
|
Printable Version
Fame and Infamy in the Pacific - 
mine's not good. I was hoping after changing the style of writing of my AAR vs swift that more people would read it. Y'all still not like the 'newer' style? 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread