Scenario: The Second Crimean War (beta)

[Craigkn]

Playtesting request!

Note: This is an improved version of "Black Sea Hammer, Chapters 1 - 2 plus 3" that superseeds those scenarios - please review this scenario instead.

This is a large scenario I have been working on which depicts a semi-historical Russia-NATO conflict in the Black Sea and Crimean Peninsula. The player is the commander of NATO Battle Group South, a multi-national force of air, sea, and land units. The scenario starts out simple enough; air policing, show of force over the Black Sea - but then becomes increasingly complex.

In general, the Russian organizational structure is mostly historical for mid-2022, however I did increase nearly all of Russia's TO&E. Make sure you set your RWA to your liking - I have suggestions loaded, but please edit. For some reason, when editing the whole side, pressing the doctrine button on the main UI does not work, but going through the dropdown menus works.

The scenario is intended to be played as a sand box, and you have many, many options on ways to achieve the mission objectives. Russia will react to your operations, so be ready for anything.

The scenario does not really have an ending yet, and I am not sure what scoring ranges should be, but 99% of the gameplay is in place.

[Craigkn]

Small content update, added:

- anti-drone and MANPAD cargo / troops + flavor text to remind player they exist. The units are air droppable via the MV-22s to locations of the players choosing. Air base defense seems like a good idea.
- mission to establish a helicopter refueling base in Ukraine, to give rotary wing aircraft needed reach.

These missions will help give a job for the Osprey and Apache air units, increase commander workload, and provide additional options to deal with threats.

[DeHav]

I noticed you also have another post with what seems to be this scenario broken up into a campaign. Is this the latest version that should be playtested? I hope so, because I'm already a few hours in!

I'm enjoying it so far, and I'm quite impressed with the 'under the hood' stuff. The scenario is very well dressed and you've clearly put a lot of work into it! I like the way forces are gradually deployed, it's a good way to build tension and make sure the player always has something to do. I haven't even reached open hostilities yet, but I've got some notes from playing through the first few in-game hours. So far this seems like an excellent scenario with huge potential, so please do forgive my nitpicking:

- I would have the initial orders be given immediately, instead of 5 minutes in. Some people, like me, don't always wait for orders before setting up missions!

- For the B-52 flypast of Crimea, the orders tell you to go closer than the NNZs allow.

- The message log isn't cleared at the start, which is a bit confusing as there are messages from the future.

- Would Moldova really allow NATO aircraft into their airspace? I can accept it for the scenario, but a NNZ for Transnistria might be in order.

- Lots of Romanian infrastructure is grouped. I can see why you might want to do this, but perhaps centre the group somewhere central and name it.

- When the first attack happens, why doesn't the Romanian air force do anything? If it's for balance, perhaps have the aircraft not be ready or have them set to maintenance. I also learnt the hard way that the Apaches can't engage vampires with their Stingers. Seems silly that CMO models something doing 95 knots as a missile. This didn't matter in the end though, as I somehow managed to intercept everything.

- Two Flankers entered Romanian airspace trying to investigate some of the ferried F-16s that were landing. I'm pretty sure they weren't supposed to do that, so I held off shooting them down as I didn't want to screw up the plot.

- A message said I was getting 6x Typhoon from Spain and Italy each, but it was only 4. I never got the promised B-52/B-1 reinforcements, and there are two RAF Fairfords?

I'll try to continue providing feedback as I get further into the scenario. I'm curious to find out how and when things will truly kick off!

[Craigkn]

Good feedback, thank you. I waffled back and forth on if this should be a multi-scenario campaign, or one monster scenario - I finally decided to go with a monster scenario, as I wanted bad decisions made early on to impact later parts of the scenario.

- The first air strike on Rom/UA border crossings is unattributed, from the players side, so it takes some time to determine that Russia was at fault, and that it was a deliberate attack on Romania. The second strike, Romanian military logistics, triggers Article 5 discussions, and it all goes rapidly downhill from there.
- Good point on Moldovia. I originally had a no-nav zone, but removed it. I put it back in.
- I hate that you cant engage the suicide drones with stingers, but not sure how to work around that, as they are classed as "munitions" in the game, and a anti-air weapon needs that specifically listed as a valid target for them to work.
- I set a no-nav zone for the various Russian factions to prevent nosy fighters from entering NATO airspace, at least before the conflict starts.
- I'll fix the messages
- Another tester noted that the Russian SAM sites had very poor LOS in some cases, so I moved them around a bit.

Attached is the most recent version.

[bsq]

In no particular order

Still no loadouts for those F-35A aircraft in Romania.

The LOS on the S-400's are now much better, but from GeoInt, not aware of any double headed S-400 systems anywhere in the area, but you have several. Is this for balance? Same goes for the S-350s, more likely to see S-300PMU

Like the new scene setting you have included. Will work out a usable magazine load to support the F-35A.

36 MiG-31K? True numbers converted more like 12. They dont have that many to waste on a mission not yet proven and one shot wonders. The conversion from BM to K, takes away the utility of the radar, doubt many more will be converted.

Su-27SM2/3 you have 84 - they havent converted that many. Might I suggest using SU-27P and SU-30 instead. They have a huge stock of AA-10s but not enough AA-12b to equip every single interceptor in the theatre. They just havent had time to make that many, given the long protracted development and the failure of the AA-12a which delayed the program. I understand the balance concerns wrt Meteor and AIM 120D, but that's what the S-400s are for under Russian defensive doctrine. If you give them parity with their interceptors AND give them all of their AD systems, you are tipping the balance too far. Russians see air defence one way (SAMs over interceptors), NATO see it the other way.

All of your A-50's are A-50U. The reality is that 6 gusting 7 of the 15 remaining frames have been converted at a very slow rate. IMO 50% of your A-50's should be A's.

Some of your LRA load outs are generous too. The numbers of Kodiaks for example exceed those they were reckoned to have produced according to most credible outlets prior to the shooting. 9 months in, if your scenario takes that into account means most of those have gone.

[Craigkn]

The F-35 loadouts is an ongoing oversight, I want them to at least have a minimal internal CAP loadout at the start of the game.

For Russian hardware, can you tell me what 'double headed' refers to? The S-400 sites have one real battalion, and then a decoy battalion. The decoy - as best as I can simulate in the game - is an advanced inflatable that generates a radar return and IR signature, but is the bouncy-castle type that we saw in the media a few months ago. The issue this creates is that from a opposing force perspective, there is no way to tell the difference between a decoy and a real battalion - so I did adjust the number of mounts on the unit (shown as a number on the unit icon), so a careful observer can tell the difference, but that must be discovered - which number is the real battalion, and which is the decoy.

The Russian OOB is not historical, or realistic. If I went with a as close to historical late 2022 OOB, the Russians would be absolutely steamrolled. The scenario is a "what if". What if Russia upgraded its forces more fully? What if Russia maximized its military industrial complex before going on military adventures? What if the 1990's were not completely stagnant, in terms of developing a military force? Its like setting the AI to "expert" mode for a more challenging scenario.

I also included extra units to aid in mission design - I know there are way more MIG-31K's than exist in real life, but for mission planning, it was easier to have a herd of them to call upon. Same with the herd of ALCM's, I wanted to imagine "what if they had a TON of missiles" and went with that. However I do model Russia using Iranian munitions as well, so its a bit of a blend of historical and not.

[bsq]

Thanks for the clarification on the loadouts and aircraft types you are using. I am several hours in now trying to run it without using either flame setting, just making the settings that the messages ask for then letting the sim run in the backgound till it gets stopped by the next message.

Can I assume that the scoring is still WiP, as it seemed a bit harsh having 'scrambled' to avoid the swarm, that my 3 preds got toasted and cost me the same as if I had lost the 3 EC-130s instead.

Double headed - 2 co-located systems at one site. Looking more closely this morning and I can see that it's just the way the editor reports them. When I check the names I now see S-400 and S-400 Decoy.

[Craigkn]

Made some changes/corrections:

- Set Romania to Radar: Active. Verified that Bulgaria and Turkey both have active radar settings.
- Added flavor text for most events
- Fixed/improved the text of a few events
- Moved the Russian LRA strike on the NATO SAG to later in the game, ideally after the war has started
- Other small fixes as needed

[Gunner98]

Just opened this up and crawled around a bit. Have not started but have a few observations. These are all nit-picks so disregard as you see fit:

• The Scenario description opens with …8th month of the war… while the side brief and the message say…9th month.
• The bulk of all three briefs is identical to the point I almost clicked passed the message until I noticed the tasks at the bottom. My preference is to reduce duplicated text as it gets a bit distracting. Just add the new stuff.
• The task of Maritime Patrol is quite specific, ‘12nm south of Odessa…’ but Odessa is not indicated by a marker. Perhaps just set up the mission, lock the RP if it is important and task the player to assign forces (or do it as a startup mission)
• Not sure of the difference between the task to set up the ADIZ and the task to set up air policing.
• Are there time limits or imperatives for the B-52 mission
• Was unsure of which units (AC & ships) were under my control, until I tried to make them do something and then it either worked or received a message. Perhaps some indication in the brief as to what is and isn’t yours.
• The Aegis Ashore BMD site at Deveselu Romania is probably worth including in the scenario. It adds some key defence and will be a major target in its own right
• Having the base air defence systems in Bulgaria and Romania on the player side and the base itself on an allied side is awkward. You cannot group them with the base to clear the map and unless you intend that the player be able to move them, they would be under another chain of command and should probably be on the allied side as well
• It would be very reasonable to have a couple NATO AWACs stationed at Aktion Greece. That is one of their FOBs and they would be tasked with supporting the Air Policing task vice assigning US assets to doing it
• The US E-3s generally work out of Ramstein but an F-16 Sqn (480th) works from Spang, and that is normally where the F-22 and F-35 deploy to or at least stage out of
• The RAF wide body heavy lifters work out of RAF Brize Norton (near Fairford), Coningsby is a Typhoon base
• The Global Hawks would probably come from the NATO AGS command at Sigonella. If the US ones were involved they would fly out of RAF Mildenhall or probably Ramstein
• All the US heavy lifters in the UK work out of Mildenhall. Lakenheath is the 48th Ftr Wing currently with 4 Sqns including a new F-35 sqn, and F-15C converting to F-35 and 2x F-15E Sqns. The F-22s would be at Spang in Germany
• Very odd that the Turks don’t have any A2A capability
• I see you have a lot of events, which I have not gone through, I wait to see what happens.
• The SNMG is in violation of the Montreux Convention:

• o No more than 9 ships may pass at a time - OK there
  o No more than 15000 tons may pass at a time – this one is the problem
  o No ship more than 10000 tons allowed - OK there as each DDG-51 and the Type 45 are ~8K
  o No more than 30000 tons from any one nation – OK, the US will have 19,000
  o No more than 45000 tons from non Black Sea countries – again OK since there will be 27,000 tons
  o So you can get round this by having one of the DDGs in the Black Sea already and the LCS either in the Black Sea or following in the Med. The Turk doesn’t count against the tonnage but 2x DDGs at once is pushing the limits.

EDIT OK, I now see your message about the SNMG. I think that Turkey would be very reluctant to break the convention no mater the circumstances, it protects them more than anyone else and gives them legal authority over the straits. Allowing the group to pass in two groups skirts the issue. Also the 'Turkish Straits' which include the Dardanelles, so the group is already in violation at the start of the scenario

OK I'm going to set up and hit play now. This looks good.

[Gunner98]

OK, may have just had a game issue. If the SNMG was supposed to doc at Aksaz, they may have but only on ship (the Arleigh Burke) is in the port. The other ships have disappeared

Port of Aksaz.JPG (130.78 KiB) Viewed 1611 times

. I've saved the game and taken this screenshot

[Craigkn]

Gunner98, thank you for your extensive comments.

The version of the game you are playing have two missions fire too soon; the Russian LRA strike on NATO ground facilities should trigger later in the game and Russia Aerospace forces OCA mission over the Black Sea should not fire until later. These triggering early do not break that much, and will be fixed in version .005

Going backwards through the list:

- Turkiye permitted the USS Forrest Sherman, as part of an exercise, to visit Askaz, in September 2022: https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News- ... ort-visit/ . I decided, for gameplay purposes, to create a pretty robust SNMG2 and assume Turkiye permitted them into the Sea of Marmara.

- I wanted to include Turkiye, however - the scenario, as-is, crawls on my new (2022) computer. I wanted the focus of the scenario to be Crimean Peninsula and south Ukraine, and I don't imagine Turkiye would engage that far north, so I kept most of their airforce out of the game.

- The cargo planes are moving ordinance from stockpiles in the UK, Germany, Italy, and Spain, to forward deployed units in Romania and Bulgaria - so I placed the airlift units at those bases. I am assuming that a NATO air policing mission would be lightly armed, mostly to show the flag, but as geopolitical circumstances worsened, steps would be taken to shift heavy ordinance into theater.

- I did not model Aegis Ashore, as in my playtesting, I never had ballistic misses that it could target (I was thinking of it as a SAM system, not a target), but it is of course a prime Russian target, so a defense of it subplot would be realistic.

- I originally had NATO E-3 units out of Aktion, along with NATO MRTT tankers, but for reasons I cant recall, I removed them - but your argument is very valid, and I will replace the USAF E-3's.

- The split between NATO units and Romanian and Bulgarian - particularly with air bases and facilities - seems to draw complaints. Maybe I assume that Romania and Bulgaria would give over their air and sea assets to NATO command as well? Maybe I make the NATO side one faction.

- The ISR and NATO Logistics units are non-player units on purpose. I did not want the war to start as soon as a RQ-4 was shot down.

- For basing of USAF drones, I tried to follow this OSINT: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4 ... nd-ukraine , but over time may have moved units around.

General comments, I followed this escalation ramp for the Russian sides:

1. Russia begins offensive jamming of NATO aircraft
2. "Oops" targeting of Romanian border crossings (see Russia striking a Polish village on the UKR border today - 11/15/2022 - as an example)
3. Much more serious strikes of Romanian logistics centers. Romania begins calling for Article 5 responses, but it does not happen immediately
4. RQ-4 shootdown over international waters - the temperature is getting very hot in the theater
5. Large scale strike on Oil Platforms. Very soon after, Article 5 is invoked and war begins

[Gunner98]

All makes sense, thanks.

For the SAG, perhaps having it spread out at the start and in line with Mx Conv would give the player another challenge - do I gather it together? Or keep it spread out with its sensors and AD? Where? When?

I think there is an issue with a group going into a port, have you noticed that? I think I'll put up a report on the Tech forum. Aksaz only has 1 ship left - the rest have disappeared.

[DeHav]

All makes sense, thanks.

For the SAG, perhaps having it spread out at the start and in line with Mx Conv would give the player another challenge - do I gather it together? Or keep it spread out with its sensors and AD? Where? When?

I think there is an issue with a group going into a port, have you noticed that? I think I'll put up a report on the Tech forum. Aksaz only has 1 ship left - the rest have disappeared.

I had an issue with it too. Try switching to the individual unit view. What happened for me is the lead ship docked, so the group icon disappeared leaving the other three ‘invisible’. They were still there, and detaching them put everything back to normal.

I’m unfortunately experiencing sim freeze issues in all scenarios (have posted in tech support) so I’ve been unable to continue my playthrough

I earlier referenced the Romanian AF inactivity at the start. What I meant was that as soon as the Harops were detected, wouldn’t they at least scramble a couple of aircraft to investigate? It felt a bit silly that they just sat there with inbound vampires.

[Craigkn]

Update .005 Changelog:

- Fixed several event messages, reduced redundancy in messages.
- Adjusted NATO OOB per recommendations.
- Fixed several Russian Long Range Aviation missions to fire at the appropriate time
- Deleted the NATO SAG's group, each individual ship will proceed to Aksaz. The player can then deploy and organize them as they see fit
- Created a NATO Air OOB message to clearly state what air assets the player has under their command at the start of the scenario

For the SAG, the intention is for it to be broken up anyway; the Turkish MCM ship would be assigned to an appropriate mission, while the DDG's head north to help protect Romania. Don't forget the substantial MCM capabilities of the USS Charleston (LCS), that may come in handy at some point!

[bsq]

Running the latest version (5) with beta 1300.1

Mostly good so far, a few issues most quickly resolved themselves before I had finished thinking 'unified command'

In order to defend the 95th base, the Lancers and Vipers head south - is this correct. Seems a bit odd, given the shared data from Legion (G550 CAEW),, the axis of the attacks and the fact that this is all briefed.

I expected the MCM vessels in the Romanian ports to have their mine countermeasures mission to be activated at some point after the message saying to clear the approaches to Constanta. Three hours after the message, they are still tied up alongside. After a subsequent message stating that minefields had been found in several locations, all MCM under AI control remains unmoving?

Some OOB notes for you.

• CVW's only have 5 Growlers in their VAQ - you provide 6.

• VFA-2 arrives as VMA-2 - a typo I am sure. If a full USN Sqn, it should have 12 not 10 aircraft.

• To complete 4 FS requires an extra 18 F-35A, not the 6 you provide. It's still a half squadron as it is authorised for 24 aircraft.

• To complete 510 FS requires another 18 F-16C not the 6 provided

• 391 FS is authorised for 24 aircraft, so 10 is a detachment, not the full Sqn.

• There are still too few tankers in theatre. USAF relies on AAR as a force muliplier, on any given day right now you could literally walk across Europe on the back of the tankers that are airborne. Most USAF tankers are single point boom, so to support a set of fighters there will be several on any given towline, all stacked in altitude to deconflict the airspace.

OK, so I am a few hours from the declaration of Article 5. Observations here:

• 1 Way Attack Drones. Well they werent from anywhere other than Russia, that, to my mind, gets us to Article 4 - ' Cease and Desist' in simplist terms.

• AS-23 Kodiak attacks - well they can only be launched from LRA assets - so once (accident) two (hmmm) three (straight out Article 5.

OK, your planning says it will take more, so I'll get my targeteers ready, or so I thought

• I started with the one location that will likely unhinge the entire southern pennisular and what do I find? Its moved. So it should I hear you say - but its moved 5 miles offshore - oops - now I can kill it with sea skimmers - you kindly set the sea state to 5, so several LRASM will do the trick, but I am sure tnat is not what you meant to happen - it should still be on those cliffs, with excellent fields of fire (as it is IRL).

• Then I looked at the next bit of the puzzle, Novorossisyk, and this is no position to defend the port facilities, or the approach to Krymsk - should have no problem filing missiles through the gaps in cover to strike both locations.

I'll keep looking as I set up my target lists for my strikers to see if I can find anymore issues.

For reference, I am 9 hours and 36 minutes in as I sign off on this bit.

[Craigkn]

Great comments, thank you. I have been working on China scenarios, but planned on returning to the Black Sea for a rewrite, and your detailed notes will help improve the scenario quite a bit.

[bsq]

More for you then. I am persisting with this as it seems very stable on my laptop, despite the high unit count.

So taking up from where I left off. Never seen a TU-22M of any flavour with 3 missiles. Just because they can, doesnt mean they should. It's overkill anyhow as I have nothing to stop them with. THAAD's not interested, SNMG2 is too far away (but shoots anyway - WRA issue that needs fixing now I know they will try) and all my CAP cant shoot at them till they are out of the cruise mode and then present very hard crossing targets.
That aside, waited a bit, watched the carnage, ground my teeth a bit at being tied down to some doctrine I wasnt getting and in the end let every Flanker I was shadowing have a 'heater'. Still couldnt make anything go red other than the SU-27SMs (that went red, then went bang in short order).

Then the fireworks started. In around 20 minutes, they launched everything at me rocket wise. THAAD and PAC-3 got most of the ballistic missiles, the fighter CAPs took out the GLCMs, SLCMs and ALCM's.

Now I will mention two real negatives.

Turkey - has no defences against CM's or BM's - IRL it has Hawk, SHORAD and importantly a full up S-400 system or two. It should not have taken hits without any replys unless its just to give the AI some points...

NATO SAMs - give the player command of this. The S300 (Bu) and the Patriot (Ro) just fire till they are empty or have to reload with no weapon logic I can fathom. Let the player have them under NATO control. SHORAD fair enough but these are 'my fighters' and whilst they are on the ground I want to have control over their defence. I didnt lose any - yet, but I will if the Bulgarian bases or the 86th takes a hit and that would be a game changer, completely undoing the balance you said you wer aiming for.

I dont have enough fighters. Sorry thats just the short of it. The new A2A modelling means weapons expenditures are very high, for little gain. Yes I could use that to game it and take out all the RuAF fighters, but then I would risk the missiles raining down on me. I was burning all the weapons on a 2 ship CAP every couple of minutes because over 75% of shots were being out-run. The only way I could get a guaranteed kill was to close to heater range where the target got less warning of the shot. Because of the balance you were after, they have me at 4 to 1. I could burn all my CAPs and missiles and still face more than 90% of the Ru orbat with all my birds re-arming.

For over 180 BVR missiles fired, I have killed 4 x Su-27 and stopped a wave of 70 cruise missiles.

Whatever I lose next (probably my forward support units now the CAPs have had to use all their missiles because I couldnt rely on affiliated SAMs) I will run it to see if my CM strike removes the southern S-400 having carefully routed the missiles round the S-400 FoV.

[Craigkn]

More great comments. I am thinking back to how I sequenced the RU missions, and the idea was to increase the NATO commanders workload, and from my perspective the air strikes themselves were not that much of a risk - eventually RU ran out of ALCM's, but NATO's AAM's kept on flowing into the theater. However I havent played this one in a few months, so my memory may be faulty.

I saw that there are new cargo changes that could replace the LUA scripted resupply missions for the NATO air bases, essentially the player themselves would use the cargo features to move ordinance from its home base to the front.

[bsq]

***May Include Spoilers***

Now I have taken stock of the first 14 hours of activity here is what my impressions are overall.

Good Points

It's a well scripted scenario with lots to keep the player busy and thinking all the time. At first it's a slower burner, with the stockpiling of weapons needed to commence a war of attrition neatly done. I dont reckon you need the cargo rules, I think the way you have done it is just fine. If the weapons aren't where the player elects to 're-base' their forces, then perhaps give them some inter theatre transport assets, such as C-130's, to move stuff once its been scripted in to your intended MOB's.

There's a good mix of platforms and I think the comments around the Montreux Agreement are valid, but the fact that the Turkish Navy gets 'dealt with' would more than offset the problems around the agreement - after all 'they (the Russians) started it'

Use of National and NATO command structures makes the player think - but also see the negatives here. The balance here is not quite there.

The mix of 5 G and 4 G air is about right, but see my comment on overall balance

Points to Consider

A2A balance. Whilst the ratios are right 5G vs 4G, the overall numbers are low, perhaps below force minimums if this were a main effort for NATO. For Russia you have made it main effort. More than 50% of their fighters are commited and most of LRA, together with the combined effects of double figures of A2AD systems. Your cause is not helped by the new air to air BVR modelling. It may have worked before it was changed but now it has been changed many of the advantages you sought to balance, NATO has lost by the new model - this is not a criticism of the new model, nor the scenario, it's just the way it is right now.

Airspace. I wouldn't fly there - period, not with the lack on integration and deconfliction, we would be as likely to fly into one of the national missions as we would a Russian missile. I say this with an awful lot of RL experience. We would have an ATO, we would know where our partners are flying etc and having no sight (unless you use the editor to check) makes it difficult in the sim and would be deadly IRL - it's why ATO's exist. It's why they are published in advance and we would have sight of them. I dont mean the in game ATO planner - that IIRC only shows you your side not allied sides.

Integration and deconfliction is something that just has passing mention within the forums, I see it noted every now and then, but not with any conviction as to the RL consequences of not doing it. I'll give you an example of what I have set up in the game right now. I have a hold in NE Romania. 2 RP's (turning points) around 90 nm apart. I have set up 6 support missions using those points. FL160, 180, 200, 220, 240, 260 and I have stacked my waiting OCA on that orbit ready for the off. In front of that is two layers of DCA, 5 Gen forward, 4+ Gen Back. This was working until a mass wave of SRBM and CM's made me burn all my BVR's shooting the CM's and most of my covering THAAD/PAC-3 burnt to shoot the BMs, leaving my OCA with little cover against the following wave of OCA - Sweep SU-27SMs bristling with AA-12b's. In the resulting melee the AA-12bs out performed the AIM-120D's 4 to 1 So whilst your AA-12b use will certain balance the NATO 5Gen, it appears to be a complete anathema to the 4G plus swing role jets (like the F/A-18Ds and Fs)

To truly make this work over the entire theatre means I need to know where everything is or plans to go (back to the ATO). Whilst I understand why your Russian forces are split into various components (it makes crafting the scenario easier), having the NATO assets split thus causes immense issues when you dont know who is doing what outside of your direct command. Bases and direct base defence can be on one allied side or more, but the actual striking power of NATO would come under the command of one of the CAOC's (which are abstracted, but in reality they are represented by the player).

ISTAR is integral, it must be made to work for the player and it must be defended (I have a 'dog in that fight' IRL). To have it seperated makes no sense. If I need to get my SIGINT assets (beit manned or unmanned) 'out of Dodge' then I need to do it before the AI reacts. The AI plays the game like 'noughts and crosses' (move, react, move, react etc) whereas the player can play it like chess (many moves ahead, 2nd and 3rd order effects considered) and this requires unity above that afforded by playing one side and letting the AI run the mundane (but vital) tasks (ISTAR, AT, DefPats etc). Sorry devs, but the analogy is the best I could come up with.

I am running this in editor mode, not to cheat, but to understand why X or Y happened. A case in point here, I crafted a careful strike against the S-400 near Mys Fiolent. I used the LOS tool to work out a 'safe' route for my CM's and despite all of this, on the final run in, whilst still 15 nm distant they all got taken down by something. I replayed back 60 seconds, switched sides and despite the LOS tool saying the FCR had no LOS until around 4 nm they were still hacked. Not a fault of your scenarion, but an issue with either what the LOS tool was telling me, or the misunderstanding of how the S-400 missile datalinks work (in the game - IRL not a chance this would have happened, the routing was, by the LOS tool, perfect).

I am going to roll it back to the point where I lost patience with the lack of Article 5 action, despite the provocations, and see if I can see if any of the tales of woe can be attributed to me 'not following the script'. Certainly the failure of my Tomahawks to even get nearer than 15 nm needs another look to see why that happened the way it did. More to follow...

[Craigkn]

Thank you again for the extensive comments. I cant answer all of your points, but I will try to cover some of them! I started building this scenario about a year ago, based off of another designers similar (but much smaller) scenario, Black Sea 2019. I felt with the war in Ukraine, and Russia's increased militarization of Crimea, that a larger scenario could have some interest. I think I am going to rewrite the scenario with two factions; Russia and NATO, giving the player control over all of their assets. Some specific comments:

- Article 5: The reason for the delay in staring the war is I wanted to show a clear escalation ladder that Russia was following. Jamming, then a drone shootdown (did it cross into "Russian territory"?), then a 'unattributed' ALCM strikes on Romanian and Ukrainian border crossings (which would take time to investigate, Russia could blame Ukraine, etc), then the loitering munitions (suicide drone) swarm attack. The strike on Romanian military logistics was more overt, granted. During all of this, I would expect Russia to try to deflect, deny, sow doubt - work on fracturing NATO, maybe get Russian proxies to call for calm and a through investigation. Unless NATO observed a Russian aircraft launching a missile that hit a NATO member, Russia could claim it was someone else. So that's why I slow walked Article 5. The Tupolev Tu-22M strike on the oil platforms was the first "overt" act of war, and IIRC war is declared very soon after. Once Russia thinks Article 5 is imminent, they take the advantage and go hostile.

- I originally had Turkey in the scenario in a larger way, but my system performance was so poor, I felt I needed to reduce unit count. I did not think that in a WW3 scenario that Turkey would strike into Crimea, so I just cut most of their forces. When I rewrite the scenario, I will probably keep them out of it as well. I like the idea of a few Turkish vessels in the Black Sea, so I may keep that - but, not sure. I think that Turkey, in WW3, would find ways to gain an advantage for Turkey, so - Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Syria, Iraq - may be their focus.

- For AAW issues, what settings are you using for your missiles? Which aircraft and loadouts? The Russians should all be set to fire at NEZ, and I think I turned off crank. In light of the S-400 threat, I only used F-35 and F-22 over the Black Sea. The Eurofighters kept close to the coast - but lobbed Meteor's out when I had the chance, and the F-16's were mostly MALD-J trucks for early SEAD missions. Once the S-400's were rolled back, I got more aggressive. During the early fighter surges, I also equipped the F-15E's with AAW loadouts, switching them back to ground strike later in the game. I would like to hear more about this - the USN / China scenarios I am working on also have very heavy AAW components, so its good to learn as much as I can. A few playthroughs, disabled BVR missiles from targeting cruise missiles, and only used the short range (AIM-9X, IRIS-T, ASRAAM) against them. I think (?) that the F-16 has an all AIM-9X loadout option that I used. Russia runs out of cruise missiles at some point, so its a storm to be weathered, but it does not last forever.

- For NATO OOB; the idea behind this theater is it was more of a secondary theater, the real fight was in the Baltics and Poland. A bit of an air policing mission was reinforced, and then *boom* a war broke out. I planned on a NATO air wing (Eurofighers), a USAF air wing, and a USN air wing on TDY. I am tempted to move the date up to 2023 and sneak in better missiles (way more AIM-260's). Question: what would be a reasonable NATO OOB? I like "sandbox" scenarios that are challenging, but give you multiple ways to skin a cat, so a bigger OOB would be fine with me. The player also has the three B-52 and B-1's, once they are ready to fly, that's a very big hammer to strike with.

- Getting the NATO Surface Action Group into the Black Sea ASAP is important. The DDG's are a hard counter to anything Russia has. Between the NATO SAG, and the USAF bombers, the NATO side is massively overpowered. Park the SAG off the coast of Sevastopol and just shot down anything that shows up. Other than a Kinzhal strike (which happens once, and IRL the Kinzhal are not proven against mobile targets), Russia has no real counters against the SAG.

- The key role for the scenario was killing the S-400's. The key missions (to my mind) are the SEAD missions taking out the S-400 sites. A strike package that I particularly liked was a single F-35, 2-3 F-16's with MALD-J, 6 x RAF Eurofighters with Brimstone 2's, and 2 x EA-18's. Leading with a swarm of MALD-J's, fly the Eurofighters right on the deck, launch the Brimstone swarm at max range, using the F-35 for targeting information, and to lob AARAM's to scare off any Russian CAP. The Growlers helped with jamming and AARGMs. Usually 24 out of the 36 brimstones were shot down by the S-400, then a few more taken out by the Pantsir - between the 6 or so Brimstones that would get through, and the AARGM's, something expensive on the S-400 was taken out and the site suppressed. Its a bit irritating that we cant get better BDA reports - I should have a better idea of what was destroyed. Coming up with inventive SEAD strike packages is a big part of the scenario, and the player has a wide range of options.

- What did you think of the militarized oil platforms? Killing some of them was needed to get access to the S-400's, and due to game issues, oil platforms are considered "ships", so you can only strike them with ship-capable weapons.

- Russia isn't showing very advanced TTP's in Ukraine. I think I'll park the S-400's in a good spot and not move them. I may also have one side for all of Russia, the complicated command and control structure may be overdone. Turning Crimea into a very tough IADS network might be what I do, and let the player sandbox that a bit.

That is what I can comment on at the moment - glad to continue this conversation.