Mediterranean Tsunami 05-01-2019 Version 6.0

[BeirutDude]

This is the companion scenario to the Arctic Tsunami 05-01-2019 scenario I did a few months ago. Was delayed by Hurricane Irma! The civilian traffic took me two weeks of my free time to build. You CAN win as the Russians and in fact last night I sank first the USS San Jacinto (CG-56) and then the USS Eisenhower (CVN-69) to submarine tactics for a Triumph despite loosing my Syrian (Khmeinem) Air Base and all of my Russian squadrons! I also totally destroyed the Russians with a loss of only 6 F/A-18C/E/Fs in another play test. This scenario is a HARM/SEAD chess match that rewards those who really consider their missions and will frustrate you if you don't [:D]. Enjoy.

[Excroat3]

Just started this one, and I would first recommend moving the CVBG further away from Syria. Right now, my aircraft take off already in range of the S-400, which means that my AEW aircraft keep getting smacked out of the sky as soon as they take off. Going to move the group back myself, restart, and proceed from there.

[BeirutDude]

I actually set that up deliberately to challenge players to keep the Hawkeye alive. You can move the carrier if you want and I'll take your advice and move it back a bit. Way I look at it, One way or another you have to close on the SA 400 site to get at Khmeinem AFB and Tartus.

If you do go with my position, I’d suggest you radiate for about 15 seconds then shut down, hit the deck and travel at military speed at right angles to the Growler path for about 10 minutes. Move the AEW patrol box and repeat above. I've found after a bit that one can keep the Hawkeye alive most of the time in a hot, real world situation.

Good luck.

[AlexGGGG]

I posted AAR in here - tm.asp?m=4385606

thought too much spoilers in it

Generally, I felt it is fairly easy to play on NATO side.

I did not find any anomalies bug-wise, and totally enjoyed the scenario.

[AlexGGGG]

Playing Russian side, Moskava is a spelling error. Correct would be Moskva or Moscow.

[BeirutDude]

Playing Russian side, Moskava is a spelling error. Correct would be Moskva or Moscow.

Thanks for catching that.

[BeirutDude]

thought too much spoilers in it

Well I figure in Syria and the east Med the Intel is pretty good on both sides. When I design a scenario I try to go for realism and simulation over a game and try to balance it in the Victory points. So I look at what is really there (and those are the Russian forces in Syria based on open intel). I thought about adding Syrians and having the IDF and Syria going at it in a side war to make the situation more complex maybe I should.

Generally, I felt it is fairly easy to play on NATO side.

A CVBG/CSG is an awesome force despite what detractors would have one believe.

I did not find any anomalies bug-wise, and totally enjoyed the scenario

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for the AAR interesting to see how others solved a problem. As a designer you look at it from how you would solve it and it is interesting to see how others do so!

[AlexGGGG]

I will probably wait a bit if you happen to have an update, and I will then play Russian. I tried coupla times and it never went well - not enough SAM/AAW capability, although by a reasonable small margin. As it is now, Russian side looks like diesel subs vs. CVBG scenario, all the rest not being a factor.

[AlexGGGG]

Ahahahaha I played Russian and I won royally. And I found a way to keep Khimeim base almost intact. This is possible because of the exploit in automatic plotter for TLAM strike. Moar detailed AAR to follow as soon as practical.

Triumph 3265

SIDE: Civilian
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------



SIDE: Biologics
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------



SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
8x F/A-18E Super Hornet <--- Aircraft mostly were destroyed with the carrier was damaged
7x F/A-18C Hornet
8x MH-60R Seahawk
6x MH-60S Knighthawk
2x C-2A(R) Greyhound
8x F/A-18F Super Hornet
2x E-2D Advanced Hawkeye


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
3x AN/SSQ-53F DIFAR
9x AN/SSQ-62E DICASS
53x RIM-174A ERAM SM-6MR Blk I
13x GBU-38(V)2/B JDAM [Mk82]
4x AGM-88C HARM
16x AGM-88E AARGM
4x AN/ALE-55 FOTD
30x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
20x GEN-X [RT-1489/ALE] Active Expendable Decoy
10x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4
8x RGM-109C Tomahawk Blk III TLAM-C
120x RGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
5x Anti-torpedo Torpedo [Countermeasure Anti-Torpedo]
1x AN/SLQ-25A Nixie
1x RUM-139B VLA [Mk46 Mod 5A(SW)]
1x RUM-139C VLA [Mk54]
2x RIM-66M-5 SM-2MR Blk IIIB
3x AIM-9X Sidewinder
7x RIM-162A ESSM
5x RIM-162D ESSM



SIDE: Russia
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x RK Tarantul III Mod [Pr.1242.1 Molniya]
1x MRK Nanuchka III [Pr.1234.1 Ovod]
6x Su-30SM Flanker G
9x Su-25SM Frogfoot A
1x PL-877V Kilo [Paltus]
6x Su-24M2 Fencer D
1x Bunker (Comm Center)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
1x RGB-16MK [Search, Passive Omni]
6x SA-N-4a Gecko [9M33]
23x AK-630M 30mm/65 Gatling Burst [400 rnds]
18x SA-N-4b Gecko [9M33M3]
5x SA-N-6a Grumble [5R55RM]
41x SA-21b Growler [40N6]
24x SA-22 Greyhound [57E6]
18x PK-16 Chaff [TSP-60U]
56x 30mm 2A38M Burst [50 rnds]
306x 23mm ZSU-23-4 Shilka Burst [50 rnds] <--- !!!
6x PK-2 Chaff [TSP-47]
140x AK-130 130mm/54 Twin Frag Burst [2 rnds]
1x SA-16 Gimlet [9M313]
36x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
11x AA-10 Alamo C [R-27RE, LR SARH]
16x 53-65K WH <--- spent 12 of these against the carrier and still did not sink it
2x Generic Acoustic Decoy
17x AA-10 Alamo A [R-27R, MR SARH]
8x AA-11 Archer [R-73M]
8x AA-10 Alamo B [R-27T, MR IR]
7x AA-8 Aphid [R-60TM]
9x 30mm Gsh-30-2 Burst [50 rnds]
9x 30mm Gsh-30-1 Burst [30 rnds]
6x AA-11 Archer [R-73]
16x SS-N-12 Sandbox Mod 2 [P-1000] <--- useless
21x 23mm Gsh-6-23 [50 rnds]

[BeirutDude]

Ahahahaha I played Russian and I won royally. And I found a way to keep Khimeim base almost intact. This is possible because of the exploit in automatic plotter for TLAM strike. Moar detailed AAR to follow as soon as practical.

Triumph 3265

Cool, So I tweaked the scenario a bit and did move the carrier west a bit to allow players to set up missions and get the AEW patrol up. I gave the Russians too many reloads so I need to tweak them down a bit and based on your original input added a few other possibilities for the CVBG/CSG to contend with.

Glad you got a win with the Russians. The really only way to do that is to get in on the Eisenhower which you did.

[AlexGGGG]

I played it again and got this AAR for you, with a score of 10000 for ORIGINAL version, not tweaked

tm.asp?m=4386956

[BeirutDude]

THANKS for your help. Learned a lot from your AARs.

[BeirutDude]

Withdrawn for now.

[Andrea G]

Hi BeirutDude,

I played the scenario on the NATO side and I want to report a little bug I found.

Every time that I re-started the scenario from save file the first thing that happened as soon as I hit the run button was the event of the IDF Panther being shot down.
It happened several times, one for each time I started the game from save.

01/05/2019 05:47: Score changed from 50 to 65. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

01/05/2019 06:12: Score changed from -240 to -225. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

01/05/2019 08:10: Score changed from 85 to 100. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

01/05/2019 09:16: Score changed from 100 to 115. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

01/05/2019 10:43: Score changed from 835 to 850. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

01/05/2019 11:13: Score changed from 890 to 905. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

01/05/2019 11:58: Score changed from 1355 to 1370. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

02/05/2019 00:33: Score changed from 11440 to 11455. Reason: Event Action: 'NATO -15' has been fired (part of Event: 'An IDF Panther has been destroyed')

Moreover as you see the points were added to the NATO score and not subtracted.

If you look at the losses there is only one IDF Panther lost.

SIDE: Israel
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x AS.565SA Panther [Atalef]
4x F-16C Blk 30 Falcon [Barak]
4x F-16D Blk 30 Falcon [Barak]
1x 340 Aliyah [Saar 4.5, Helo Pad]
1x 501 Eilat [Saar 5]
1x 340 Romah [Saar 4.5, Nirit Upgrade]

Hope it helps, if you need I have also the last save file.

Greetings
Andrea

[BeirutDude]

Hmmmmmmm, "Just when I thought I was out (Done with a scenario)...they pull me back in" [:D] [8D] [:)]

Looks like your IDF guys got completely into the fray. I did remove the "Collective Responsibility" from the IDF, NATO and Russia to make these encounters more one-off's as apposed to fully joining the conflict.

On this particular issue, could you please send me a your save file? I'll take a look at it and see if I can reconstruct what's happening. Since there is only one Panther unit in the scenario I can make the event non-repeatable, that's not a problem, but I'm concerned/wondering if this might be happening with other units are well. Thanks!

Otherwise I hope you enjoyed it.

al.sandrik@gmail.com

[Andrea G]

I will send you the save file asap.

Really enjoyed the scenario. even with the deflagration between Israel and Russia.
Maybe a little too easy for NATO to win.

[BeirutDude]

So I looked at the events and I'm stumped. I thought maybe there was a "begin scenario" event left over that might have had it in there and there were none left (I had played with some). So I did make all "one off events" non-repeatable and maybe that will solve it.

As to it being too easy for NATO, well I'm of the belief (despite Russian bluster and some very good weapon systems, like the SA-300/400) the bottom line is they are just outclassed and a CSG/CVBG is just an awesome force. I doubt the Russians have more load outs for their SA-22 and SA-400 systems in Syria than I provided so once they are soaked off then it is a matter of time before they are destroyed.

The tweaked scenario is in both the finished scenario threat and below. Thanks.

[Andrea G]

As you said this is a scenario more interested in realism than in gameplay.

I agree that the russians in Syrian is unlikely to have an unlimited amout of loads.

[AlexGGGG]

Playing the latest update, Russian side, Moskava SAG is still named Moskava SAG. Should be Moskva SAG.

[AlexGGGG]

Playing Russia, as CVBG is now much further away, I can launch several of Su-30SM fighters and detect where CVBG is. Then, I can position subs to attack them and sink the CV before they launch attack on my bases. Then, depending on if I sunk Arleigh Burke or not, I have one or two waves of TLAMs to deal with, which does not seem very challenging, especially if it is only one wave (56x TLAMs).