Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

Any chance for any of these payable on both sides ?

When I started out with scenario design I tried to make them playable from both sides, but I found it to be a lot of work for little gain. For one, you have all kinds of RPs out there for the A/I missions you defeat for the human. So I'm going to say no. Consider once the air battle over the Baltic/Gotland is done and Russia has gained control of the seas around the island, really reducing Gotland is just a matter of mopping up the defenders. Not saying they wouldn't fight gallantly, but I really think it's a Russian victory if they tried it.

Let me look at it, but my initial thoughts are no.

Ok, Thanks for the reply

I think adding some Danish F-16s and German Tornado's with the Swedish AF could be a nice little air-to-air battle over the island/Baltic. Have to look at the balance of naval forces. Let me see...

Nice !

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

Any chance for any of these payable on both sides ?

When I started out with scenario design I tried to make them playable from both sides, but I found it to be a lot of work for little gain. For one, you have all kinds of RPs out there for the A/I missions you defeat for the human. So I'm going to say no. Consider once the air battle over the Baltic/Gotland is done and Russia has gained control of the seas around the island, really reducing Gotland is just a matter of mopping up the defenders. Not saying they wouldn't fight gallantly, but I really think it's a Russian victory if they tried it.

Let me look at it, but my initial thoughts are no.

I think one has to consider that NATO will have assets here and there and of course full AWACS coverage.

Just an example of Anti Mine vessels from NATO.

https://www.iltalehti.fi/politiikka/a/2 ... RqJXEdht_w

I was going to have three or so Baltic States MCM and a few Patrol Craft escape to Sweden and cooperate with Swedish forces. Some mines off Gotland and a mine sweeping operation by the player could be interesting. More reason for Russia to go heavily airmobile though.

One other thing about having a scenario go both ways is, unless you want to do a bunch of Lua scripting, you have to assign loadouts to aircraft and I prefer toe allow the player to do so. If I do go both ways will be one scenario for the Western player and one scenario for Russia.

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

I was going to have three or so Baltic States MCM and a few Patrol Craft escape to Sweden and cooperate with Swedish forces. Some mines off Gotland and a mine sweeping operation by the player could be interesting. More reason for Russia to go heavily airmobile though.

One other thing about having a scenario go both ways is, unless you want to do a bunch of Lua scripting, you have to assign loadouts to aircraft and I prefer toe allow the player to do so. If I do go both ways will be one scenario for the Western player and one scenario for Russia.

Make sure to give Sweden plenty of these then .
https://www.saab.com/products/the-rbs15-family

Tricks to using one scenario to feed a follow up! Victorious Russian aircraft staging to their new bases in the new "CIS Baltic Republics" as RT is calling them.

You might want to look into Operation Gudrun based on the books by Wilderäng. He is still very active on Twitter with these Questions.
I think he could provide up to date info on Swedish hardware.

Finland also has 64 new F-35 on order, plus a bunch of F-18. Maybe some of the Baltic Air Assets would rebase to Finland/Sweden if needed?

Still curious how those Air Mobile units would move over Baltic Sea without Air Superiority. At best they might
land some units but I think 80% of those Choppers would be shot down by Air or Ground.

This one here BeirutDude.

https://corporalfrisk.com/2016/08/26/aa ... on-gudrun/

This could be updated I guess. Patriot is a factor now too.

I wouldn't include Finland, as I couldn't see the Russians opening up that huge front if they didn't have to and I doubt Finland would jump in if they could avoid it. Even if Finland were engaged their efforts would be along their border not near Gotland.

I'm going to assume the Russians stopped at the Suwalki Gap and didn't enter/attack into Poland. In this case, they gave the Pole's a guarantee (just as the Baltic attacks commenced) of their territorial integrity if no NATO attack was launched on Kaliningrad or Belarus from Polish territory. Having to make a snap decision Poland did not allow any NATO forces to use their territory and ordered the NATO Forward Forces in SW Poland to exit Poland ASAP.

That leaves the U.S., Germany, Denmark, the UK and Sweden to defend Gotland (with various assets). NATO Standing Forces + Danish/Swedish/German naval assets and air assets.

Finland and Sweden has a defense collaboration so they would more or less have to unless they broke that treaty .

Anyway that last scenario should provide some real data but it would need some updates obviously.

https://www.government.se/government-po ... and%20NATO.

"The aim of the cooperation between Sweden and Finland is to improve their defensive capabilities, conduct joint operations and promote common defence interests, such as improving the security situation in the Baltic Sea Region."

Obviously they don't have to but it would be bad form, maybe revenge for 39 but still .

This is a good summary even if a bit dated on the defence plan regarding Gotland. Regular Google Translate should do it .

https://kkrva.se/forsvara-gotland-varfor-och-hur/

Make sure to give Sweden plenty of these then .
https://www.saab.com/products/the-rbs15-family

When you say 'plenty', could you be more specific? With land, sea and air variants, and the amount of money Sweden is spending on them - there cannot be that many.

There would be 40 on the Visby's, 32 on the Goteborg's, and another 16 on the Goteborg's. Hard to pin down the Land based Btys but my suspicion is one Bty of about 72 missiles - 160 non air assuming no reloads. This of course also assumes they are all loaded all the time which is not a very good assumption.


Air launched ASMs can be expended very quickly, but this is a huge variable in scenarios. Considering what I have been able to find in open source, Sweden is spending ~1/10th of what Germany or Poland are on these missiles. My guess is that there are less than 48 available - is that reasonable?

B

Anyway that last scenario should provide some real data but it would need some updates obviously.

marcusm,

OH yeah!

1. Moved many of the Russian squadrons/cargo/S-300 & S-400s to more forward positions in the Baltics with reasonable losses.
2. MiG-31Ks moved to their current positions in Kaliningrad with their missiles.
3. One Russian airborne division (in transports and cargo) has been removed (so the player now can airdrop about 2 battalions during a 24 hour scenario)
4. WRT to Poland and Finland, How scenario design goes, sometimes you need to develop a convenient fiction to keep things under control. Otherwise where do you stop????? [:D] [:'(] [X(] Before you know it you have a scenario that stretches from Nord Kapp to Istanbul, and I've done it!!!!!!!!!
5. Added more Russian vessels from the Baltic Fleet (interestingly three of their main amphibs are in the Black Sea right now. That makes the cargo (amphib) operations more interesting. Definitely needs to be an airborne/airmobile/amphib (A Cubed? [:D] ) operation all timed closely. Just amphibs isn't going to get the job does right now.
6. Have the Standing NATO Maritime Group One (SNMG1) formed based on the current open source OOB on the NATO website.
7. So Sweden Cooperates/joins in with NATO, Finland sits it out, Poland, looking down the barrels of BTG's with T-90S's and SS-26C missiles, withdraws from NATO. What could possibly go wrong???????

Al

Before you know it you have a scenario that stretches from Nord Kapp to Istanbul, and I've done it!!!!!!!!!

Only counts if you go from Gibraltar to Moscow as well [:D]

Gunner98 wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 8:14 am

Make sure to give Sweden plenty of these then .
https://www.saab.com/products/the-rbs15-family

When you say 'plenty', could you be more specific? With land, sea and air variants, and the amount of money Sweden is spending on them - there cannot be that many.

There would be 40 on the Visby's, 32 on the Goteborg's, and another 16 on the Goteborg's. Hard to pin down the Land based Btys but my suspicion is one Bty of about 72 missiles - 160 non air assuming no reloads. This of course also assumes they are all loaded all the time which is not a very good assumption.


Air launched ASMs can be expended very quickly, but this is a huge variable in scenarios. Considering what I have been able to find in open source, Sweden is spending ~1/10th of what Germany or Poland are on these missiles. My guess is that there are less than 48 available - is that reasonable?

B

The problem is that a lot of it is classified but I can say that plenty were mothballed when the defence was scaled down. Mothballed doesn't mean destroyed though.

Still many of the variou Mk that can be updated and put in action

I used to work at Saab missiles so some knowledge exists

Personally think it is time to reassess the Russian capabilities after Ukraine. I think their abilities have been grossly overstated and the quality given more credit than they deserve. The quality is awful to say the least.

I think individual weapon systems aren't the issue for Russia. The design of the T-14 and the Su-57 are most likely good designs and built in small numbers make a good parade. But sustaining combat operations with sophisticated and advanced weapon systems is VERY hard. It requires a lot of planning and human management, as well as a lot of money. I think Russians build their weapon systems and severely skimp on the realistic planning and maintenance processes. Thats why there was this constant flip flopping between T-80/T-72/T-90/T-14. The T-14 looks good rolling out of the factory, but the T-72BM3 looks a lot better on the balance sheet when deployed.

Armchair generals see the neat looking T-14s and declare Russia is back. But its still fighting on the infrastructure and budget from 1997.

Problem is that it's based on statistics. Anyone who has experienced a VAZ Lada or any other Russian Machinery knows what I mean . They sinmply lack the ability to do finish and details.

Swedish Equipment is eons ahead when it comes to quality.

Anything related to attack on Sweden would get Finland involved too, since our sea supply lines go via Swedish coast with backup as Gothenburg - rail to Gulf of Bothnia Swedish ports - Finnish ports.

Finland has RBS-15M armed FACs and land-based ones too.

Sea routes are reason why we ordered new corvettes (in reality more like frigates) armed with Gabriel V and ESSM. Gabriel V will apparently be main SSM for navy and coastal defence in future.

F-35s will start to arrive 2025. F-18C/Ds have had few MLUs and are still good until 2030 or so.

marcusm wrote: Sun Feb 13, 2022 1:42 pm Since I don't have the game yet. Can you see if RBS15 is modelled in the Game? Also the Silent Swedish Subs.

RBS15 was mothballed for many years but it is still one of the most competent Surface to Surface Missile systems. It could give any landing craft serious trouble.

Yes they are in game.