Re: 2028 The Grey War campaign
Posted: Thu Apr 09, 2026 7:26 am
Nikel wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 1:15 pm Loviisa NPP, well it is a strategic Finnish asset that you are trying to protect, not civilian. What is the difference with the government buildings?
Created new side for Loviisa and updated the unit type
Charlie1 and 2 are the mothership containers that you have to destroy. I thought the naming was done with the event that orders you to sink them. But perhaps it is done through recon. Also there is a Charlie3 in the North.
Charlie1 naming now seems to work again
You did really well on the mission, well done! Hornets die pretty easily to the S-400 that covers the Kuopio Airbase, either need to stay back or fly really low.Nikel wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 6:19 pm - There is a problem now with the pics in the hosting site. May you upload them separately with the scenario?
I tried to fix all the links so that they dont expire. I need to host them online since Steam version requires that
- Also include the pics you use on steam to illustrate the scenarios, they are beautiful. Edit, downloaded in very good resolution from your first postBut why not to embed them in each scenario?
I´m not sure what you mean by "embed"? Put them into scenario description ingame?
- Loviisa NPP has a town marker, you may use "Structure, Power Station Nuclear" unit that is more appropriate.
Changed
- The consequences of the decision to give F-18s are not explained.
The consequences happen on the When the levee breaks scenario
- Dispersal in the South coincides with the russian attack, so instead of landing, the ACs are in engaged defensive. I used them to destroy one of the radars before being ordered to do so
Its bit against the orders about not attacking cross border targets, but Im sure nobody noticed
- NATO aircraft and F-35 both are counted when a F-35 is destroyed, -5 points instead of -3, intended?
Yes intended, loss of a F35 is a huge loss for FAF
- FLASH: MISSION TASKING - COUNTER-STRIKE ORDER (Air force) message. Typo: space missing in "Vuojärven varalaskupaikka(FARP)".
- *** FLASH FLASH FLASH *** PRIORITY: OPERATIONAL IMMEDIATE // TARGET OF OPPORTUNITY message. Typo: "DEEMEd"
Both fixed
- Is it possible to arm the F-35 given by NATO?
The ferry flight? Yes and no, they will fly in in Ferry-louadout since they have been crossing the atlantic from the assembly Factory in Texas and Yes you can land them to one of the FARPs and the use the quick turnaround to fit AMRAAMS to the them if you time it right.
- Enontekion, Kajaanin, Mikkelin (also named Mikkeli), could land ACs in the dispersion. But then they could not take off ("Waiting for runway to become available"), because they were severely damaged.
So the russian side may attack this secondary (provincial) airports? I think it is not what is said in the messages. Only FARPs are safe?
Yeah, all normal airfields are well known to enemy and it depends on the enemy AI where they choose to send some of the drones and missiles, but in this scenario all the FARPs are safe since there are so many of them and Russia tries to strike without FAF having time to spread to the FARPs to begin with.
- ATU coastal Jaegers, consider reduction of time needed in the zone to assign points to the player.
Now greatly reduced
- Russian fighters seem to be not very active defending the bombers.
Its possible they dont except much problems, plus they cant really see the F-35s flying to intercept them and are relying on S-400 batteries to prevent hostile aircraft roaming free.
- Scenario ends abruptly by time when there are still MiGs-31BM in the interior of Finland and Okhotniks drones in the South, deactivate earlier their missions?
Its intended that this scenario only decipts the first hours of the war and thus the fighting will be going on even when the scenario ends. This will be picked up in a next scenario where other Nordic NATO countries join the fight (few hours later)
- Full scoring log attached, is it useful for you?
Always good to have look. What killed your ships? And the Globaleye? I never lost these during testing but the scenario has changed quite a bit since then.
- The lua error is indeed gone
I post this in case it indicates a problem, also appears in the lua history file.
Thanks, not a real problem, asset is just out of Zircons and cant fire any longer--- STARTING UNIQUE HVT STRIKE SEQUENCE ---
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKEP4T]
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKET3L]
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKEP61]
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKET5V]
--- STRIKE SEQUENCE FINISHED ---
--- STARTING UNIQUE HVT STRIKE SEQUENCE ---
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKEP4T]
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKET3L]
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKI3FK]
ERROR: Engagement failed for [CWVLA7-0HNKLFDCKEP61]
--- STRIKE SEQUENCE FINISHED ---
AS OF: 10-Oct-28 10:30:03
SIDE: NATO
===========================================================
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
8x F/A-18C Hornet [F-18C]
2x F-35A Lightning II
SIDE: Russia
===========================================================
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
16x MiG-29K Fulcrum D
2x MiG-31BM Foxhound
2x Radar (48Ya-K1 Podlet)
1x Radar (Rezonans-N OTH)
1x S-70 Okhotnik-B UCAV
2x Su-33 Flanker D
4x Su-34M Fullback
5x Su-35S Flanker M
6x Tu-22M-3M Backfire C
Once more big thanks to you!
Ive updated the zip file in the OP with v1.3.
When you load the scenario the doctrine for this group is on HOLD, and they cannot defend, contrary to the second naval group.