New scenario for testing Operation Sapphire Fury

[daveoreno]

I would welcome any comments or criticism. This is my first scenario so I welcome any advice.
been meaning to try my hand for a few years now.

This scenario will require the Chains of War add on as it has Amphibious operations using the cargo functions.

Thanks,
Dave


(Scenario posted to the "Ready scenarios posts")

[Whicker]

ok, that looks really good.
Very nice description/briefing.

I poked around a bit but didn't play, but it looks very well done. If this is your first I would say right off the bat I will start you at an A+.

I find it is always best to have a little help on the intel with some spy work. That bit of lua is interesting, haven't seen that before.

minor edits to the briefing:
- 3rd paragraph or so 2nd sentence: "NSWC assets have have also confirmed" extra 'have'
- necessary is spelled wrong in a couple places

[daveoreno]

Thanks for taking a look.

[daveoreno]

Just to excite a little interest I wanted to mention that this 28 hour long fast paced scenario involves...


-Realistic OOBs
-Realistic dynamic weather
-Multiple scripted events
-Player Special Action choices
-Space based reconnaissance
-Stealth on Stealth BVR fighter battles
and
-Opposed amphibious operations

[Whicker]

I try to abide by the scenario brief as best I can, regarding:
"You are to avoid open conflict with Chinese surface forces unless they attempt to hinder this operation"

how should I view subs? If I find a sub I would like to sink it, are they considered surface forces? some of the language is fairly specific as to not just bombing anything that moves. I would prefer more specific rules of engagement, especially for subs, but also AC and ships. Something like anything within x miles of either the carrier or amphib groups should be sunk/shot down (in the absence of other outright hostilities), otherwise just keep an eye on it?

[magi]

daveoreno.....
im giving this a play just turned the clock on.... one thing i notice is the sh-60b seahawk... have all been converted or replaced with the mh-60r romeo series a few years ago... they have greater capabilities... sensors and data-link.....
im going to change all of them out... and possibly the sonobouys... ill see...

this looks like its going to be fun.....

[Whicker]

finished with 7 hours left with a total disaster of -3610 so apparently I broke the lowest score possible lol.

Scoring seemed a little harsh. Lost 500 points right off the bat cause I took a patrol boat out and it hit a mine pretty quick. They were there (PBs not mines) so I though I should use it for something but not sure what that would have been. You can do the scoring via one lua event and it is easier to control what type of unit gets what score, so it would be easier to count the PB as a lower score than the CGs and what not, also cleans up your events/triggers/actions quite a bit.

I didn't do any of the special actions, had plenty of cruise missiles and while I was running out of fighters I was still ok. Lost the Princeton I think.

I thought I actually did ok (not triumph but ok), so I was a little surprised at the score. I did lose 4 f35s and 7 f18s and about a dozen choppers (and the Princeton)... and a P8. But I took out 3 subs, 30 fighters (17 J31s) and half dozen or so badgers, and accomplished the mission with plenty of time to spare. I did not attack any of their ships, just did what the mission said to do, didn't want to attack the carrier but I suppose I could have.

I thought the badger attack needed some air cover, they were sitting ducks, lucky they didn't all die.

As far as I could tell there were no problem, no lua errors or anything.
I didn't like the limited loadout for the cobras, seems unlikely they wouldn't have anything besides rockets. And the first thing I did was detach the sub from the carrier group - doesn't seem like you would want it on station like that.

In looking at the scoring it looks like you are doing one score for loosing an AC and another score if it is an F35 - so it is doing both on any f35 lost, not sure that is intentional or not, they are expensive so maybe it is intended. I do tend to loose them for some reason.

[templar42]

Hi daveoreno,

Thanks for this scenario - I'm less than 3 hours in and really enjoying it. The J-31 adds real difficulty, especially as I'm not detecting emissions from them and they appear to be on internal loadouts. Too many scenarios have OPFOR stealth fighters that aren't stealthy enough! I think I noticed that the cloud cover disappeared during the scenario, which, again, is a really welcome bit of realism not seen enough.

Just a few points that I noted down so far:

I may be wrong, but it doesn't seem realistic to have the Fleet Class USV sailing in formation as part of an ESG. The database lists it as LCS based, so why not give the player an LCS with it embarked? If you choose a relatively toothless LCS configuration (not hard!) it shouldn't affect the balance.

The Super Hornet loadouts are a little eccentric, I think. An entire squadron is equipped with MALD for example. Most players don't want to use MALD because there is a bug in Command that causes the AI not to engage decoys unless it's at Weapons Free (I recall seeing a thread about this a while back). Maybe a few aircraft might be given Maverick or HARM loadouts?

Also, given that ATFLIR is present in good numbers on the CVN, it's odd that the AIM-120 loadouts at the start don't have it. If you're making a point about its utility against the J-31 I'd understand that, but can I at least start with two aircraft ready with an AAW ATFLIR loadout?

This may be a database problem, or a mistake when you armed the ship, but LHD 1 Wasp is armed with 80 LGBs - I think the problem is that they're not in her carrier magazine, so they show up as a shipboard weapon.

USS Portland has HN-5B MANPADS teams embarked. Are these supposed to be Filipino allied units? Or should they be replaced with Stingers?

Lastly, I quite agree with very harsh penalties for F-35 losses. IRL it would be an event of considerable magnitude, so it's good that the player is incentivised to take care of them. However, it doesn't seem right that the player scores the same 50 points for killing a J-15 as he does for killing a J-31. It might not be as devastating for the Chinese to lose a J-31 as for the US to lose an F-35, but it's certainly still a much bigger blow than a semi-hopeless Flanker copy getting smoked. In the same vein, I haven't been able to kill a red force AEW aircraft yet, but I will be disappointed if I only get 50 points when I do!

On a somewhat pedantic level, I noticed there are two separate aircraft each named 'Green Knight #5', and you spelled 'Texaco' as 'Texeco' - both doubtless late night typos!

[AceOfSpadeszzzzzz]

I think Reagan is currently carrying VAW-125 which is equipped with E-2Ds rather than E-2Cs...?[&:]

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: Whicker

I try to abide by the scenario brief as best I can, regarding:
"You are to avoid open conflict with Chinese surface forces unless they attempt to hinder this operation"

how should I view subs? If I find a sub I would like to sink it, are they considered surface forces? some of the language is fairly specific as to not just bombing anything that moves. I would prefer more specific rules of engagement, especially for subs, but also AC and ships. Something like anything within x miles of either the carrier or amphib groups should be sunk/shot down (in the absence of other outright hostilities), otherwise just keep an eye on it?

Yes! I entirely agree. Basically I wanted to make it so that the player is not entirely sure how to proceed, but that once the PLAN forces have fired their first shot the player then is weapons free. I will update the ROE to make this clear.
Thanks.

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: magi

daveoreno.....
im giving this a play just turned the clock on.... one thing i notice is the sh-60b seahawk... have all been converted or replaced with the mh-60r romeo series a few years ago... they have greater capabilities... sensors and data-link.....
im going to change all of them out... and possibly the sonobouys... ill see...

this looks like its going to be fun.....

I’ll make the change to the Romeo. Thank you very much.

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: Whicker

finished with 7 hours left with a total disaster of -3610 so apparently I broke the lowest score possible lol.

Scoring seemed a little harsh. Lost 500 points right off the bat cause I took a patrol boat out and it hit a mine pretty quick. They were there (PBs not mines) so I though I should use it for something but not sure what that would have been. You can do the scoring via one lua event and it is easier to control what type of unit gets what score, so it would be easier to count the PB as a lower score than the CGs and what not, also cleans up your events/triggers/actions quite a bit.

I didn't do any of the special actions, had plenty of cruise missiles and while I was running out of fighters I was still ok. Lost the Princeton I think.

I thought I actually did ok (not triumph but ok), so I was a little surprised at the score. I did lose 4 f35s and 7 f18s and about a dozen choppers (and the Princeton)... and a P8. But I took out 3 subs, 30 fighters (17 J31s) and half dozen or so badgers, and accomplished the mission with plenty of time to spare. I did not attack any of their ships, just did what the mission said to do, didn't want to attack the carrier but I suppose I could have.

I thought the badger attack needed some air cover, they were sitting ducks, lucky they didn't all die.

As far as I could tell there were no problem, no lua errors or anything.
I didn't like the limited loadout for the cobras, seems unlikely they wouldn't have anything besides rockets. And the first thing I did was detach the sub from the carrier group - doesn't seem like you would want it on station like that.

In looking at the scoring it looks like you are doing one score for loosing an AC and another score if it is an F35 - so it is doing both on any f35 lost, not sure that is intentional or not, they are expensive so maybe it is intended. I do tend to loose them for some reason.

First of all...”Wow” thank you my friend! I really appreciate the deep dive. I’ll bet you can believe it’s is my first scenario now!
Secondly I think the scoring is pretty messed up all right. From what you told me of your experience, I think you should of had an “average” for completing the mission but getting dinged for losing the Tico class and the F-35s..

I could not figure out how to do the scoring other then the canned events, so for example the score goes through the ship hoop and then through the class hoop. All my scripts are adjusted versions from other scenarios. Could you possibly provide me a sample of some lua code that could assign points more effectively and efficiently? Or perhaps if you could steer me towards an existing scenario that does this so I could look at the code?

I could add fighter cover for the badgers, but I think they are striking from beyond the range of the land bases. This is just a desperation move by the PLAN similar to the Cold War suicide attacks that the soviet naval bombers were prepared for.

I will look at the cobra load outs.

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: AceOfSpadeszzzzzz

I think Reagan is currently carrying VAW-125 which is equipped with E-2Ds rather than E-2Cs...?[&:]

Ahh yes but there is a plan to switch to the E-2C’s starting next March! Ha Ha just kidding.... I’ll make the change.
Thank you.

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: templar42

Hi daveoreno,

Thanks for this scenario - I'm less than 3 hours in and really enjoying it. The J-31 adds real difficulty, especially as I'm not detecting emissions from them and they appear to be on internal loadouts. Too many scenarios have OPFOR stealth fighters that aren't stealthy enough! I think I noticed that the cloud cover disappeared during the scenario, which, again, is a really welcome bit of realism not seen enough.

Just a few points that I noted down so far:

I may be wrong, but it doesn't seem realistic to have the Fleet Class USV sailing in formation as part of an ESG. The database lists it as LCS based, so why not give the player an LCS with it embarked? If you choose a relatively toothless LCS configuration (not hard!) it shouldn't affect the balance.

The Super Hornet loadouts are a little eccentric, I think. An entire squadron is equipped with MALD for example. Most players don't want to use MALD because there is a bug in Command that causes the AI not to engage decoys unless it's at Weapons Free (I recall seeing a thread about this a while back). Maybe a few aircraft might be given Maverick or HARM loadouts?

Also, given that ATFLIR is present in good numbers on the CVN, it's odd that the AIM-120 loadouts at the start don't have it. If you're making a point about its utility against the J-31 I'd understand that, but can I at least start with two aircraft ready with an AAW ATFLIR loadout?

This may be a database problem, or a mistake when you armed the ship, but LHD 1 Wasp is armed with 80 LGBs - I think the problem is that they're not in her carrier magazine, so they show up as a shipboard weapon.

USS Portland has HN-5B MANPADS teams embarked. Are these supposed to be Filipino allied units? Or should they be replaced with Stingers?

Lastly, I quite agree with very harsh penalties for F-35 losses. IRL it would be an event of considerable magnitude, so it's good that the player is incentivised to take care of them. However, it doesn't seem right that the player scores the same 50 points for killing a J-15 as he does for killing a J-31. It might not be as devastating for the Chinese to lose a J-31 as for the US to lose an F-35, but it's certainly still a much bigger blow than a semi-hopeless Flanker copy getting smoked. In the same vein, I haven't been able to kill a red force AEW aircraft yet, but I will be disappointed if I only get 50 points when I do!

On a somewhat pedantic level, I noticed there are two separate aircraft each named 'Green Knight #5', and you spelled 'Texaco' as 'Texeco' - both doubtless late night typos!

I'm really glad your enjoying it so far. I don't really remember playing a good stealth on stealth scenario that had too much challenge. I really doubt the Chinese will be able to place this many J-31 (or any for that matter) on one of their carriers but it does add some spice to the mix!

Your right about the USV sailing with the fleet! I'll change that. If you sail where your supposed to the player won't need them anyway.
I was not aware of the AI behavior towards MALD-J's all I know is that that I use them all the time in any mission that I can because they always worked so well. Maybe I'll just limit the number of them.

I'll look into making the ATFLIR AIM-120 loadout change. (hope that won't tip the balance too much)

I'll switch to the stingers, (I think I missed them in the cargo load list. Its hard to search in this list as its not like the DB viewer).

Regarding the points...definitely need a little fine tuning. I'll make sure that you get more points for a PLAN AEW or a a J-31. I need to figure out how to do this without a million different events. I will get my scoring cleaned up a bit. Its on my list!

I'll fix the typos.

Thank you so much templar42, It means a lot to me that you and the others on this forum are helping me so much. I would really like this to be a first class scenario.
Dave

[Whicker]

I kinda like the MALDs, used them on the sams fairly effectively. I would have thought the bug was that they just fly in circles at a certain point.

For lua scoring I wrote about it here:
https://commandops.github.io/posts/lua-scoring-example/

and I used it in my Red Vs Blue Battle for Hispaniola scen that is in here somewhere - month or two ago. I think it works really well and allows you to do more clean scoring in an easier way.

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: Whicker

I kinda like the MALDs, used them on the sams fairly effectively. I would have thought the bug was that they just fly in circles at a certain point.

For lua scoring I wrote about it here:
https://commandops.github.io/posts/lua-scoring-example/

and I used it in my Red Vs Blue Battle for Hispaniola scen that is in here somewhere - month or two ago. I think it works really well and allows you to do more clean scoring in an easier way.

Thanks [&o] I think I can do this...

[Whicker]

I should probably add that I came up with that myself (lua scoring), haven't seen anyone else do something like it... but it seems to work really well. It has not been validated by anyone else.

I'd recommend trying the sample scen I posted in this thread to see it in action (lua scoring) - just a bunch of units in a fight so you can see the scoring happen without waiting for a real scen to do something.

tm.asp?m=4527370

[magi]

templar.... the reason there are no IRST loadouts.. is he is using f/a-18e 2016 models and you would have to have 2018 f/a-18e for that sensor...
i agree with you about the LCS... this is a perfect mission to have one and the arg is some what under escorted... i added one to my play...
i agree that the loadouts are very un-ideal.... and i changed them in editor... to start with loadouts that make everybody happy in a scenario is really hard... although if you think mission and doctrine you can get perty close....

whicker.... you make me laugh.... i really like that...

daveoreno.....
i really like what you are doing here.... i believe great scenarios.. like fine art has many nuances and layers of events... even if minimalist...
all your details... the platforms... commercial vessals.. biologic's...changing weather.. the embedded recon unit etc etc... very nice indeed..

however.. i believe you should update the assets and munitions to current types... the munitions is easy... i swapped out the sh-60 for mh-60r's... and going to change the f/a-18 for 2018 variants that are irst able....
adding an lcs would be cool.. but is your call....
the fligft I burke while able to service seahawks would probably not embark with one as they do not have facilitates for them... it is good that you are using a sm-3 bdm version...

the thing that bothers me the most is.... we would never fight this way.... being so close to the objective.. without having done some recon/irst before we got here....
if at start you had a mq-4 and a p8 based from clark doing recon missions.. it would be more plausable....
or increase the time line... start the groups a few hundred more nm's away.. and they can do their recon/isrt on the ingress to mission area...

here is my wish list.... up dated platforms... and lcs... some mq-4's.. p8's and a couple few tankers at clark afb.... some mine sweeper helicopters on the portland or the wasp would be right... the portland has no embarked aircraft.. i put a kiyhawk on it...
i think clark should have enough f16's or something for a cap.... because they look like a target...
and i think it would be really cool if you had a red strike on clark even if it is unsuccessful... because it would be a surprise and add another event to the game....

i hope i am not seeming over assertive here.. because i am really pleased with what you are doing here....

best of luck.... magi

[daveoreno]

ORIGINAL: magi

i hope i am not seeming over assertive here.. because i am really pleased with what you are doing here....

best of luck.... magi

Are you kidding..? This stuff is golden. I'm going to work boys!
Dave

[magi]

ORIGINAL: daveoreno

ORIGINAL: magi

i hope i am not seeming over assertive here.. because i am really pleased with what you are doing here....

best of luck.... magi

Are you kidding..? This stuff is golden. I'm going to work boys!
Dave

Whata Guy........ I’m playing now... thank you very much......