EDIT 4/28: Attached Play test Version 3.0 in this message (Link in thread). Please read the Notes in the Description (yes they are long). Thanks for your help play testing and looking forward to your advice for improvements! The A/I nuclear missions have given me trouble but think I have them ironed out! [8|]
Original post: So with the demise of Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in Command Modern Ops (CMO), am working on its replacement(s) now set in 2022. Honestly Arctic/Mediterranean Tsunami, 2019 were some of my first scenarios (like 2nd and 3rd) and I've both learned a lot since then and rethought the scenario. So I'm going to wrap the 2019 background concept into a new scenario(s) (maybe a series?) called "Putins War Bodo Express, 2020." It is going to use the background from the Arctic/Med Tsunami scenarios moved forward to 2020 with more 5th G aircraft but lower unit density. Still a good number of units but not as many and in less areas. One major failing of Arctic Tsunami was it tried to do everything from the Ice Pack south to the GIUK Gap and from The Kola to Greenland from the Barents Sea SSBN Bastion to Iceland. This is (hopefully) going to break things down into a number of smaller scenarios.
BTW, Arctic Tsunami, 2019 is still playable in the old game, just something is incompatible with CMO on the NATO sideand it locks it up? Tried rebuilding it again this week, no joy.
Putins War The Bodo Express, 2022 Play Test Version #4 4/30
Moderator: MOD_Command
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
Putins War The Bodo Express, 2022 Play Test Version #4 4/30
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
totally cool.....
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Scenario Description. If someone sees some wordsmithing please provide suggestions/corrections!
CMO: Putin’s War: The Bodo Express, 2022
Al “Beirutdude” Sandrik
The Time Is: 27 June, 2022 17:00:00 Zulu/18:00:00 Oslo Time
AOR: Scandinavia and North Sea
Playable as NATO or Russia
2 Days Duration
The Baltic Crisis finally erupted into a full-scale NATO-Russian/Belorussia conflict on the morning of June 6th. The Baltics and the Suwalki Gap were rapidly overrun by the evening of the 7th with Russian forces reaching Kaliningrad, advancing along Highway A16/E28 From Vilnius to Kybartai. They then turned southwestward reaching Highway 63 in Poland, where they paused.
On the morning of the 7th Russian air forces bombed the Norwegian expeditionary air base and port at Banak, Norway, near the Nord Kapp. That afternoon Russian Paratroopers seized the air field with Naval Infantry conducting a follow up landing at the port. A brief, but pyrrhic, naval battle broke out between Royal Norwegian Navy and Russian missile boats and naval fighter bombers. While many of the Russian boats were sunk or disabled, the four Norwegian Skjold-class corvettes died valiantly.
The Norwegian Northern Brigade, reinforced by territorial units and the USMC’s 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU)/Battalion Landing Team (BLT) 2/6 (deployed to the Setermoen Military Camp for Arctic Training at the onset of the battle) staged a fighting withdrawal across the Nord Kapp. They eventually established a defensive line (Forward Extent Battle Area (FEBA)) along the Rossaelva River on the 14th. By June 16th the 26th MEU/BLT 2/8 completed its air lift from Cherry Point, North Carolina to marry up with the prepositioned USMC equipment in Norway and further reinforced the new defensive line.
To get at the Norwegian Air Force bases near Narvik, Tromso and Bodo the Russian Air Force decided to risk transiting over northern Finland and Sweden, it was mistake. Both nations decided to resist the overstretched Russian air forces, while trying to avoid ground combat. So now even though Swedish and Finnish Air Forces/Radars were not fully integrated into NATOs air defense the former neutrals were combatants and would have to be dealt with in the coming battle. While both are somewhat friendly to NATO (neutral game wise), allowing NATO aircraft to overfly a their territory “cooperatively” but both nations are not fully integrated into the NATO defense structure, their units are not under NATO control, nor does NATO see their radars.
Over the first two weeks of the battle NATO was largely out of position with the larger surface combatants remaining south of the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom (GIUK) Gap to set up a screen for a Russian naval threat that wouldn’t materialize. The Russian Northern Fleet, absent the Navy Flag Ship Admiral Kuznetsov (now permanently disabled with the sinking of the PD-19 Dry Dock and the December 2019 fire) chose to only contest the Norwegian Sea, remaining north of the GIUK Gap. That doesn’t mean they weren’t active and over the first two weeks of the conflict the Royal Norwegian Navy was hunted down and sunk piece by piece. By the 19th only one Norwegian submarine, operating out of Tromso, was active qith the remaining vessels being repaired in Oslo or UK ports.
Conversely, NATO was also active. Recognizing the need to further reinforce the North Brigade and Marines defending Norway, the USN and USMC quickly loaded two Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), The first ARG (TF 22.1) was built up around the Mayport based USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) and included a Maritime Prepositioned Ship which was just completing rehab of its stocked equipment at the USMC Support Facility, Blount Island, Jacksonville Florida (By the way, USMC Blount Island is one of the USMC’s best kept secrets, probably 90% of the population of Jacksonville doesn’t know it is there!). The Iwo Jima’s ARG loaded the 24th MEU/BLT 1/8 in Morehead City, North Carolina on the 14th.
The Second ARG (TF 22.2) was built around the Norfolk based USS Bataan (LHD-5) and loaded the 28th MEU/BLT 3/8 and additional elements of the 11th Marine Regiment (Artillery). Both departed and rendezvoused south of the GIUK Gap on the 26th. Their mission was simple sail to Norway and unload their MEUs and their associated Medium Tiltrotor Squadrons (VMM) to Bodo and then exit the area as quickly as practical. Follow up convoys with additional replenishment supplies were departing Philadelphia and Savannah and would need the anchorage area in the coming days.
The ARGs would not be alone. With American carriers hard pressed fighting Iran and near Syria the Royal Navy (RN) would support the reinforcement mission with a carrier battle group built around their new HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08 - V/STOL) carrier. Two composite squadrons of F-35 Lightning IIs were deployed along with AEW/ASW helicopters. Two RN SSNs and one USN SSN would also support the operation.
On the other side of the hill, the Northern Fleet threw everything into stopping the Marines arrival. Recognizing the northern flank could be lost if the Marines arrived every Northern Fleet surface vessel and submarine available were thrown into the fray. Naval Aviation was instructed to ignore losses and if necessary, to transit Scandinavia (Sweden and Finland) to get at the amphibs.
For both sides the fate of the northern front rested on the coming battle. The pause has allowed for rest and reconstitution of some of the units. The Norwegian Air force 318 Squadron was refitted with some of the remaining F-16 MLUs turning over their remaining F-35s to the two other F-35 squadrons. Airfields were repaired and, as much as possible, ammo/PGMs resupplied.
Notes:
1. Sweden and Finland are neutral to NATO only in that they are not integrated into the NATO defense structure well enough to integrate their radars. So you can overfly both nations as NATO and fight alongside both nations, They're just neutral because of sensors. Russia can only overfly the northern part of both as a belligerent but the south belongs to the Baltic TVD and has a No-Fly Zone.
2, Russian MPA aircraft, have their own “Side” and are friendly to Russia BUT you don’t control them. I had to separate them out to build a no-fly zone over Scandinavia that wasn’t desirable for the other Russian air units. Let’s face it, can you see an IL-38 May overflying a SAM site near Banak or near F-35s! I can’t but that is what the A/I will do, so, this had to be done to give the A/I a fighting chance with the MPA. Sorry if you enjoy “mowing the lawn” with ASW aircraft.
3. I didn’t see the sense in really getting into cargo operations! So unloading the amphibs is simulated by getting the NATO amphibs into the Bodo Box and staying there for 12 hours. Please do not delete the five (5) Bodo Anchorage Box Reference Points (locked) or you lose the VPs (like 10,000 possible!).
4. As this scenario is designed to be played from both sides feel free to delete all the other reference points as the A/I’s missions are not set for humans. I did indicate FEBA with some locked Reference Points, once you know where it is, go ahead and unlock/delete them to remove more clutter. If you want to look at my missions just go into the editor and unclick the box in the lower left hand corner for each mission.
5. I did set initial aircraft load outs for the A/I, you have plenty of time to reset them for all but the Backfires/Blackjacks as the Russian player before you need to get into operations. Loadouts are pretty strict at the airfields. Remember the war is two weeks old, but I tried to make sure all aircraft have two loads outs at their bases. You can move around but will likely run low on supplies.
6. Unlike a lot of my other scenarios you don’t receive points for destroying everything. The goal is to get to the anchorage for NATO and keep NATO out of it for Russia. That said, the vessels are high value units with big crews and political ramifications if sunk! Therefore, destroyed (and damaging some) ships/subs will gain VPs, BUT for NATO you have to get to Bodo to win!!!!
Originally created under CMO Version 1.01 Build 1134.1 – Data Base: DB3000 483
An .INI and Delta File have both been provided for rebuilds
Al “BeirutDude” Sandrik (ex-Beachinnole)
Al.Sandrik@gmail.com
CMO: Putin’s War: The Bodo Express, 2022
Al “Beirutdude” Sandrik
The Time Is: 27 June, 2022 17:00:00 Zulu/18:00:00 Oslo Time
AOR: Scandinavia and North Sea
Playable as NATO or Russia
2 Days Duration
The Baltic Crisis finally erupted into a full-scale NATO-Russian/Belorussia conflict on the morning of June 6th. The Baltics and the Suwalki Gap were rapidly overrun by the evening of the 7th with Russian forces reaching Kaliningrad, advancing along Highway A16/E28 From Vilnius to Kybartai. They then turned southwestward reaching Highway 63 in Poland, where they paused.
On the morning of the 7th Russian air forces bombed the Norwegian expeditionary air base and port at Banak, Norway, near the Nord Kapp. That afternoon Russian Paratroopers seized the air field with Naval Infantry conducting a follow up landing at the port. A brief, but pyrrhic, naval battle broke out between Royal Norwegian Navy and Russian missile boats and naval fighter bombers. While many of the Russian boats were sunk or disabled, the four Norwegian Skjold-class corvettes died valiantly.
The Norwegian Northern Brigade, reinforced by territorial units and the USMC’s 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU)/Battalion Landing Team (BLT) 2/6 (deployed to the Setermoen Military Camp for Arctic Training at the onset of the battle) staged a fighting withdrawal across the Nord Kapp. They eventually established a defensive line (Forward Extent Battle Area (FEBA)) along the Rossaelva River on the 14th. By June 16th the 26th MEU/BLT 2/8 completed its air lift from Cherry Point, North Carolina to marry up with the prepositioned USMC equipment in Norway and further reinforced the new defensive line.
To get at the Norwegian Air Force bases near Narvik, Tromso and Bodo the Russian Air Force decided to risk transiting over northern Finland and Sweden, it was mistake. Both nations decided to resist the overstretched Russian air forces, while trying to avoid ground combat. So now even though Swedish and Finnish Air Forces/Radars were not fully integrated into NATOs air defense the former neutrals were combatants and would have to be dealt with in the coming battle. While both are somewhat friendly to NATO (neutral game wise), allowing NATO aircraft to overfly a their territory “cooperatively” but both nations are not fully integrated into the NATO defense structure, their units are not under NATO control, nor does NATO see their radars.
Over the first two weeks of the battle NATO was largely out of position with the larger surface combatants remaining south of the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom (GIUK) Gap to set up a screen for a Russian naval threat that wouldn’t materialize. The Russian Northern Fleet, absent the Navy Flag Ship Admiral Kuznetsov (now permanently disabled with the sinking of the PD-19 Dry Dock and the December 2019 fire) chose to only contest the Norwegian Sea, remaining north of the GIUK Gap. That doesn’t mean they weren’t active and over the first two weeks of the conflict the Royal Norwegian Navy was hunted down and sunk piece by piece. By the 19th only one Norwegian submarine, operating out of Tromso, was active qith the remaining vessels being repaired in Oslo or UK ports.
Conversely, NATO was also active. Recognizing the need to further reinforce the North Brigade and Marines defending Norway, the USN and USMC quickly loaded two Amphibious Ready Groups (ARG), The first ARG (TF 22.1) was built up around the Mayport based USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7) and included a Maritime Prepositioned Ship which was just completing rehab of its stocked equipment at the USMC Support Facility, Blount Island, Jacksonville Florida (By the way, USMC Blount Island is one of the USMC’s best kept secrets, probably 90% of the population of Jacksonville doesn’t know it is there!). The Iwo Jima’s ARG loaded the 24th MEU/BLT 1/8 in Morehead City, North Carolina on the 14th.
The Second ARG (TF 22.2) was built around the Norfolk based USS Bataan (LHD-5) and loaded the 28th MEU/BLT 3/8 and additional elements of the 11th Marine Regiment (Artillery). Both departed and rendezvoused south of the GIUK Gap on the 26th. Their mission was simple sail to Norway and unload their MEUs and their associated Medium Tiltrotor Squadrons (VMM) to Bodo and then exit the area as quickly as practical. Follow up convoys with additional replenishment supplies were departing Philadelphia and Savannah and would need the anchorage area in the coming days.
The ARGs would not be alone. With American carriers hard pressed fighting Iran and near Syria the Royal Navy (RN) would support the reinforcement mission with a carrier battle group built around their new HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08 - V/STOL) carrier. Two composite squadrons of F-35 Lightning IIs were deployed along with AEW/ASW helicopters. Two RN SSNs and one USN SSN would also support the operation.
On the other side of the hill, the Northern Fleet threw everything into stopping the Marines arrival. Recognizing the northern flank could be lost if the Marines arrived every Northern Fleet surface vessel and submarine available were thrown into the fray. Naval Aviation was instructed to ignore losses and if necessary, to transit Scandinavia (Sweden and Finland) to get at the amphibs.
For both sides the fate of the northern front rested on the coming battle. The pause has allowed for rest and reconstitution of some of the units. The Norwegian Air force 318 Squadron was refitted with some of the remaining F-16 MLUs turning over their remaining F-35s to the two other F-35 squadrons. Airfields were repaired and, as much as possible, ammo/PGMs resupplied.
Notes:
1. Sweden and Finland are neutral to NATO only in that they are not integrated into the NATO defense structure well enough to integrate their radars. So you can overfly both nations as NATO and fight alongside both nations, They're just neutral because of sensors. Russia can only overfly the northern part of both as a belligerent but the south belongs to the Baltic TVD and has a No-Fly Zone.
2, Russian MPA aircraft, have their own “Side” and are friendly to Russia BUT you don’t control them. I had to separate them out to build a no-fly zone over Scandinavia that wasn’t desirable for the other Russian air units. Let’s face it, can you see an IL-38 May overflying a SAM site near Banak or near F-35s! I can’t but that is what the A/I will do, so, this had to be done to give the A/I a fighting chance with the MPA. Sorry if you enjoy “mowing the lawn” with ASW aircraft.
3. I didn’t see the sense in really getting into cargo operations! So unloading the amphibs is simulated by getting the NATO amphibs into the Bodo Box and staying there for 12 hours. Please do not delete the five (5) Bodo Anchorage Box Reference Points (locked) or you lose the VPs (like 10,000 possible!).
4. As this scenario is designed to be played from both sides feel free to delete all the other reference points as the A/I’s missions are not set for humans. I did indicate FEBA with some locked Reference Points, once you know where it is, go ahead and unlock/delete them to remove more clutter. If you want to look at my missions just go into the editor and unclick the box in the lower left hand corner for each mission.
5. I did set initial aircraft load outs for the A/I, you have plenty of time to reset them for all but the Backfires/Blackjacks as the Russian player before you need to get into operations. Loadouts are pretty strict at the airfields. Remember the war is two weeks old, but I tried to make sure all aircraft have two loads outs at their bases. You can move around but will likely run low on supplies.
6. Unlike a lot of my other scenarios you don’t receive points for destroying everything. The goal is to get to the anchorage for NATO and keep NATO out of it for Russia. That said, the vessels are high value units with big crews and political ramifications if sunk! Therefore, destroyed (and damaging some) ships/subs will gain VPs, BUT for NATO you have to get to Bodo to win!!!!
Originally created under CMO Version 1.01 Build 1134.1 – Data Base: DB3000 483
An .INI and Delta File have both been provided for rebuilds
Al “BeirutDude” Sandrik (ex-Beachinnole)
Al.Sandrik@gmail.com
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
-
KnightHawk75
- Posts: 1850
- Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:24 pm
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Sounds interesting.
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Can I request that you not break the scenarios up into smaller bites? I love those huge, complex scenarios where you're doing five things at once.
Edit: Also, if I'm remembering this one correctly, a little buff-up to the Russian forces couldn't hurt.
Edit: Also, if I'm remembering this one correctly, a little buff-up to the Russian forces couldn't hurt.
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Or do both 
In contrast, I tend to like the more moderate sized ones where I'm not overwhelmed with so much happening at once and so many things to control (I realize that's probably closer to potential reality but it depends what level you see yourself at).
In contrast, I tend to like the more moderate sized ones where I'm not overwhelmed with so much happening at once and so many things to control (I realize that's probably closer to potential reality but it depends what level you see yourself at). ----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Can I request that you not break the scenarios up into smaller bites? I love those huge, complex scenarios where you're doing five things at once.
Edit: Also, if I'm remembering this one correctly, a little buff-up to the Russian forces couldn't hurt
Ouch! Yup, admittedly my scenarios get to be too large. I think this is more of a Moderate sized scenario. I think the vessels are more balanced in this scenario. Air is harder in that theater as the distances are soooooo large, but adding Sweden and Finland into the fray will make a big difference.
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Oh I wasn't being sarcastic, I really do like those big scenarios! Think NATO Supreme Commander rather than tactical commander. But that's just my take, I know not everyone feels the same. Looking forward to it in any case.
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Oh I wasn't being sarcastic, I really do like those big scenarios! Think NATO Supreme Commander rather than tactical commander. But that's just my take, I know not everyone feels the same. Looking forward to it in any case
Then I think you will like it. Its actually a bit like the "The Gauntlet, 1985" scenario I did but brought to modern times. Less ships and aircraft than either that one or Arctic Tsunami, 2019 (about 1/2 of the previous 2). That said it is still pretty big. Battlefield is the same as the two mentioned with air battles over northern Norway (and now northern Finland/Sweden) and a naval battle for the Norwegian Sea.
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
good little read.... sounds very interesting....
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
I should have it out for play testing by the end of the week. I was just tweaking some A/I mission parameters and I need to add the Russian/NATO scenario descriptions and its ready to play test.
- Attachments
-
- Capture.jpg (165.26 KiB) Viewed 1584 times
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
-
HalfLifeExpert
- Posts: 1411
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:39 pm
- Location: California, United States
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
I've just downloaded it, and i can't seem to stop the SSN USS New Hampshire from automatically firing alot of Tomahawks at Bodo airbase right after I un-pause. This doesn't seem right to me. Can you have a look?
-
KnightHawk75
- Posts: 1850
- Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:24 pm
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Didn't happen for me, not in first 10 seconds anyway. weird, double check that land doctrine is set to hold on that sub, it was for me. Did you happen to remove it from it's mission where it inherited the hold setting from?ORIGINAL: HalfLifeExpert
I've just downloaded it, and i can't seem to stop the SSN USS New Hampshire from automatically firing alot of Tomahawks at Bodo airbase right after I un-pause. This doesn't seem right to me. Can you have a look?
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
I've just downloaded it, and i can't seem to stop the SSN USS New Hampshire from automatically firing alot of Tomahawks at Bodo airbase right after I un-pause. This doesn't seem right to me. Can you have a look?
This has been a weird (recent) problem.
In fact I have also had this crop with the the Russian SAG, also in this "Putins War" Scenario
With the scenario I'm posting today the WRA seems to be doing (occasional) funky things? Sometimes the Blackjacks fire in automatically and sometimes they don't (A/I side) but when I have manual control of them I can launch with no problems. Also I had to change out the KH-101s for Kelts because SOMETIMES the aircraft would reach the launch point and "fire" but no weapons appear! Again doesn't happen all the time but its there. I actually built a little KH-101 test scenario and they fine there? I'm stumped but have spent two days trying to get the Blackjack missions flying right and have it working as well as it will! In any case that the other scenario and I hope this is fixed with this version (tested it ten times this morning with no firings)...
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
-
HalfLifeExpert
- Posts: 1411
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:39 pm
- Location: California, United States
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Thanks, I'll try it out shortly
UPDATE: Okay, I seem to have control over the New Hampshire's Tomahawks again, thanks!
UPDATE: Okay, I seem to have control over the New Hampshire's Tomahawks again, thanks!
-
HalfLifeExpert
- Posts: 1411
- Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:39 pm
- Location: California, United States
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
Okay, so I've been playing it over a few play sessions. While I've been doing fine in the air war, the naval aspect has me stumped:
SPOILER ALERT BELOW:
How exactly am I supposed to do anything (short of submarine torpedo attacks) against the Peter Veliky group?!?! They have LASERS!!!! I tried to overwhelm the lasers with 12x Paveways per ship plus Multi-Mission Tomahawks as partial Decoys, and I got massacred. Not a single hit (all ordinance shot down), and over half of my aircraft destroyed.
I'm thinking that you should limit or remove the lasers.....
SPOILER ALERT BELOW:
How exactly am I supposed to do anything (short of submarine torpedo attacks) against the Peter Veliky group?!?! They have LASERS!!!! I tried to overwhelm the lasers with 12x Paveways per ship plus Multi-Mission Tomahawks as partial Decoys, and I got massacred. Not a single hit (all ordinance shot down), and over half of my aircraft destroyed.
I'm thinking that you should limit or remove the lasers.....
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
So I could remove the Admiral Sergey Gorshkov from the group, but one of the things I try to do when I develop a scenario is to postulate what could happen and develop, as best I can, from open sources a simulation that is possible. One reason neither the Admiral Kuznetsov or Admiral Nakhimov appear this time (but did in Arctic Tsunami, 2019), is the change in the situation with the loss of the PD-50 Dry Dock and and the Admiral Kuznetsov fire make her unlikely to ever sail again (IMHO). Admiral Nakhimov, if she every comes out of refit, is slated for Pacific fleet and I just assumed for 2019 she would be available to Northern Fleet having just finished refit (as was projected in 2018 when I developed Arctic tsunami) and they built a SAG around her when the war started. Well she's still in Kola and who knows if she ever gets underway (completion now moved back to 2022!). Likewise the Petr Velikiy, is not the CMO 2022 variant as she is unlikely to have a complete overhaul with the loss of PD-50.
Where am I going with this? Game scenario vs. simulation. I really do try to develop a simulation as to what might happen in the event of a modern conflict (some would argue with my success over the years and that is fair) and the Admiral Sergey Gorshkov, with her 5P-42 Filin Lazer, system would be a major part of that conflict. I think the composition of that SAG is quite realistic for what Russia could put together 2020-2022 timeframe. So what I need to consider is what counter does NATO have to her and her systems both for scenario balance and realism (would NATO deploy some B-1Bs with LRASMs?). or maybe, as you suggest, one (or more likely two) NATO SSNs near the SAG teleport box? Maybe both? I know I have sunk the Admiral Sergey Gorshkov once or twice in my play testing, but most times come on the bad end of those Sizzlers [X(].
This one issue, I struggle with, sometimes a potential opponent comes up with a good system and there isn't an easy counter. The PRC's DF-21F and DF-26 ASBMs for example are real game changers for the South China Sea. Perhaps the 5P-42 Filin is as well? Open to suggestions!, but again, looking to simulate what could happen in a NATO-Russia confrontation in the Scandinavia area. Maybe I'll start with some B-1Bs with LRASMs. Not many, say just two aircraft at Iceland?
Where am I going with this? Game scenario vs. simulation. I really do try to develop a simulation as to what might happen in the event of a modern conflict (some would argue with my success over the years and that is fair) and the Admiral Sergey Gorshkov, with her 5P-42 Filin Lazer, system would be a major part of that conflict. I think the composition of that SAG is quite realistic for what Russia could put together 2020-2022 timeframe. So what I need to consider is what counter does NATO have to her and her systems both for scenario balance and realism (would NATO deploy some B-1Bs with LRASMs?). or maybe, as you suggest, one (or more likely two) NATO SSNs near the SAG teleport box? Maybe both? I know I have sunk the Admiral Sergey Gorshkov once or twice in my play testing, but most times come on the bad end of those Sizzlers [X(].
This one issue, I struggle with, sometimes a potential opponent comes up with a good system and there isn't an easy counter. The PRC's DF-21F and DF-26 ASBMs for example are real game changers for the South China Sea. Perhaps the 5P-42 Filin is as well? Open to suggestions!, but again, looking to simulate what could happen in a NATO-Russia confrontation in the Scandinavia area. Maybe I'll start with some B-1Bs with LRASMs. Not many, say just two aircraft at Iceland?
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
-
BeirutDude
- Posts: 2814
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:44 am
- Location: St Johns, FL, USA
RE: Putins War The Bodo Express, 2022 Play Test Version #4 4/30
So with the conversation above with HalfLifeExpert and his and my concerns about scenario balance and simulation
1. Added two (2) B-1Bs with 48 AGM-158C Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), based on my research by 2021 that will represent more than 1/2 of the U.S. available inventory. That said, given the value of the target SAG with Russia's only active BCGN and the importance of Norway on NATOs northern flank I think that is reasonable. I considered only one (1) B-1B and 24 missiles and might pare it back in the future. Its a one shot only deal and they deployed with the missiles so no other loadouts.
2. Added the new French SSN Suffren (Q284, BTW indicated as an SS in CMO?). Thought adding the French vessel would be interesting.
3. Added the new USS Vermont, Virginia Class SSN. She is homeported out of Groton, CT.
4. Both Submarines teleport near the Russian SAG's teleport area, with the scenario load.
So I think, this should help with HalfLifeExpert's concerns and my concerns. Also adds lots on cool NEW weapons systems for the Navy's! Maybe a Win-Win? [8D]
Tweaked Play test 4.0 is below...
1. Added two (2) B-1Bs with 48 AGM-158C Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), based on my research by 2021 that will represent more than 1/2 of the U.S. available inventory. That said, given the value of the target SAG with Russia's only active BCGN and the importance of Norway on NATOs northern flank I think that is reasonable. I considered only one (1) B-1B and 24 missiles and might pare it back in the future. Its a one shot only deal and they deployed with the missiles so no other loadouts.
2. Added the new French SSN Suffren (Q284, BTW indicated as an SS in CMO?). Thought adding the French vessel would be interesting.
3. Added the new USS Vermont, Virginia Class SSN. She is homeported out of Groton, CT.
4. Both Submarines teleport near the Russian SAG's teleport area, with the scenario load.
So I think, this should help with HalfLifeExpert's concerns and my concerns. Also adds lots on cool NEW weapons systems for the Navy's! Maybe a Win-Win? [8D]
Tweaked Play test 4.0 is below...
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985
I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
in the previous version i started last night.... i would like to mention a red sub spawned in my QE group... thats kind of mean....
-
KnightHawk75
- Posts: 1850
- Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 7:24 pm
RE: Replacement for Arctic Tsunami, 2019 in the works
ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Play test Version 3.0
So with the conversation above with HalfLifeExpert and his and my concerns about scenario balance and simulation
1. Added two (2) B-1Bs with 48 AGM-158C Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), based on my research by 2021 that will represent more than 1/2 of the U.S. available inventory. That said, given the value of the target SAG with Russia's only active BCGN and the importance of Norway on NATOs northern flank I think that is reasonable. I considered only one (1) B-1B and 24 missiles and might pare it back in the future. Its a one shot only deal and they deployed with the missiles so no other loadouts.
2. Added the new French SSN Suffren (Q284, BTW indicated as an SS in CMO?). Thought adding the French vessel would be interesting.
3. Added the new USS Vermont, Virginia Class SSN. She is homeported out of Groton, CT.
4. Both Submarines teleport near the Russian SAG's teleport area, with the scenario load.
So I think, this should help with HalfLifeExpert's concerns and my concerns. Also adds lots on cool NEW weapons systems for the Navy's! Maybe a Win-Win? [8D]
Though I was able to get a hit on one of the russian RKR ships before version3 with a well coordinated rk penguin, slammers, and tomahawks, all arriving at about the same time, but 1 single hit after blowing nearly my entire load told me they'd have to be taken out with subs. I figured my planned paveways runs for 'round two' along with another small round of slammers would probably end up the same way but have not gotten to that point yet. I think even with the b1 additions it'll still be rough unless timed just right (but it will save some time), but having an extra Virginia and Suffren around (particularly that they spawn farther north) should help provide a more timely alternative approach. Then again it's supposed to be a challenge right.
