Scenario for Playtest "The Gauntlet 1989" Updated V1.2 12-8-18

[BeirutDude]

Updated to Playtest Version 1.2 on 12-8 22:00 EST. Four big changes...

1. Tweaked the Teleport, now you must run the scenario for 1-2 seconds so the Soviet SAG missions move with it (they don't move on the Load Scenario trigger).
2. Tweaked Soviet SAG
3. Tweaked the AI missions
4. Tweaked teleport zones to make the scenario more challenging. Updated in this post and also below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATO vs. the Soviet Union in the Norwegian Sea, July 1989. This scenario is big! Really, really, really BIG! Please don't playtest if you're not willing to allow it to slow down at times! You have been warned...

This is my first attempt at using Lua Scripts and I've been working on it for a month and a half! So please be kind! [:D] [X(]

[Ancalagon451]

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

This scenario is big! Really, really, really BIG! Please don't playtest if you're not willing to allow it to slow down at times! You have been warned...

Challenge accepted [8D]

Ancalagon

[Ancalagon451]

I have just hit start after an hour setting missions and I have like a hundred goblin contacs signalled by SOSUS (including three soviet subs positively IDed in less than ten minutes of play), an horde of ground contacts in the north of Norway, the first of surely many missile strikes (half a dozen sandbox, no idea who launched nor who targeted my EMCON ships I hope it "only" was a radar sat) and a kamikaze Bear F flying straight to Evenes and all its very angry Norwegian pilots mounted in their very deadly Viper fighters. Not a very smart move I would say, perhaps a little tweak of whaever was its mission would be advisable.

I return to play now, later more news (I hope without more kamikazes).

Ancalagon

EDIT: Last report of today, I'm twelve hours in the scenario and everything has been fairly normal (as in intense, deadly combat almost non-stop normal) but the saga of the kamikaze MPAs continued with a grand total of 8 Mail, May and Bear F downed due to the stupid behaviour of flying at spitting range of my northern bases.

Also something happened during one bomber raid, not sure if WAD of not.
The first planes of the raid seemed to be Badgers of several flavours and where mercilessly downed by my fairly well positioned CAP (those little Harriers are pure gold).
But when the Backfires (positively identified as such) coming after them where getting dangerously close to launching range, unexpectedly turned tail and went home without launching missiles.
Later, revising the losses & expenditures log, I found that along the Badgers I downed four Recon type Backfires (Tu-22MR).
Perhaps the bombers depend of them for targeting and they aborted when they lose contact info?
Don't know, not even sure there is any issue here or is perfectly normal behaviour. Just telling you to be sure.

Will keep playing tomorrow

Ancalagon

[BeirutDude]

Not a very smart move I would say, perhaps a little tweak of whaever was its mission would be advisable.

This is a mission problem I couldn't solve for the MPA missions, But the initial Bear F should have had a course well north of there???

Last report of today, I'm twelve hours in the scenario and everything has been fairly normal (as in intense, deadly combat almost non-stop normal) but the saga of the kamikaze MPAs continued with a grand total of 8 Mail, May and Bear F downed due to the stupid behaviour of flying at spitting range of my northern bases.

This is were I really wish we could set waypoints for the missions and not just the unit.

[BeirutDude]

Also something happened during one bomber raid, not sure if WAD of not.
The first planes of the raid seemed to be Badgers of several flavours and where mercilessly downed by my fairly well positioned CAP (those little Harriers are pure gold).
But when the Backfires (positively identified as such) coming after them where getting dangerously close to launching range, unexpectedly turned tail and went home without launching missiles.
Later, revising the losses & expenditures log, I found that along the Badgers I downed four Recon type Backfires (Tu-22MR).
Perhaps the bombers depend of them for targeting and they aborted when they lose contact info?
Don't know, not even sure there is any issue here or is perfectly normal behaviour. Just telling you to be sure.

Will keep playing tomorrow

Ancalagon

Thanks for looking at the scenario.

Not sure what happened there as they've launched on me. I might play it again in God's eye view to see if it happens to me. I think you may be right you took out their targeting! There are satellites but...

[BeirutDude]

Too bad you can't set up a No Navigation Zone for just certain units. That would help for things like MPA transiting over a hot zone!

[Whicker]

why not make a new base just for the MPA stuff on one of the islands above the mainland? Bear island seems a fitting place - little island half way up to the bigger islands. then they could happily go about their patrol without getting slaughtered - initially at least.
Maybe not as real as you would like, but certainly having those AC fly past the F-16s is not realistic either.

[BeirutDude]

why not make a new base just for the MPA stuff on one of the islands above the mainland? Bear island seems a fitting place - little island half way up to the bigger islands. then they could happily go about their patrol without getting slaughtered - initially at least.
Maybe not as real as you would like, but certainly having those AC fly past the F-16s is not realistic either.

I like it. Spetnaz and Paratroopers seized the island with transports flying in the needed loadouts and fuel. Let me look into this![8D]

[BeirutDude]

Doable!!!!!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_ ... ,_Longyear

Could be the Tom Clancy Iceland Scenario only easier (in some ways and harder in terms of environment!). Some will disagree but it would solve the problem. I'll keep the Whales to the Nord Kapp area and move the Mays and Bears to Longyear! THANKS!!!!!

[BeirutDude]

Update based on Whicker's suggestion above. I stretched how many aircraft Longyear could take, but it really might be able to take almost a squadron!

Update, version 1.2 is below.

[Gunner98]

Svalbard is a good option, you can reasonably expand it with Weather shelters (the canvas ones can be put up in a day or so.

Another option I've used is the hypothetical floating base. Cannot recall name and am away from the game but you can position it anywhere to get around this issue.

I'll try and give this a run next week.

B

[BeirutDude]

Svalbard is a good option, you can reasonably expand it with Weather shelters (the canvas ones can be put up in a day or so.

The problem is the Tarmac space. Looking on satellite imagery it can only hold 6 to 8 Il-38 May/P-3C Orion sized aircraft, but the only people who know this are You, me and anyone who reads this! [8D] [:D] [X(] I did expand the Tarmac over what it can really hold but doubt the Soviets could have dome so fast enough with permafrost!

I'll try and give this a run next week.

Thanks!

[Ancalagon451]

OK, been playing until a little more than a day and half. The tally of MPAs stands at near forty. Whatever solution you implement make sure they don't come closer to 250nm from the Norwegian coast because my Vipers have been carrying interceptions at 200nm with no fuss.

That thing about the bombers not firing, forget it.

The second raid came and the mothershaggers fired.

Almost fifty high speed missiles [X(].

Albeit the raid was succesfully defeated, with plenty of casualties in the reconaissance elements (but very few between the bombers themselves), three missiles where downed by Phalanx bursts. So it was a VERY close call.

On top of that their deployment was a highly resillient one, since I managed to down several tankers when they there mustering before the raid and I thought that would impede them to prosecute their mission. Instead they endured and carried on. Very impressive.

Between SOSUS and plenty of MPAs the submarine menace has been minimal, with the two glaring exceptions of the Oscar ships. One of them single-handedly almost wiped the STANAVFORLANT SAG (only one ship survived), and the other one attacked the Ex-Roosevelt SAG sinking one ship.

The soviet SAG resulted to be a submarine-proof one (damn Udaloy with VDS and Silex ASROCs everywhere), so after losing two subs I switched tactics and atritted it with Bucaneers, Orions and TASMs until it dissapeared.

I'm not sure of it's strategic purpose, if it's mission was deny the airspace to my MPAs to protect the soviet subs, then it was badly positioned to do so. Almost all of them where sunk many hours before the SAG started to being a menace.

I have deployed in Bodo all the Bucaneers, Phantoms and Strike Tornados and, after a fairly intense use of al of them (except Tornados, all downed in a badly planned strike against the SAG), I'm not feeling constrained by the available supplies.

In fact I feel that I could have redeployed the Fighter Tornados without problem, and that would have enabled me to intensively raid the bomber mustering zone and strangle the strikes in their craddle, so to speak.

So, unless there is a truckload of action pending in the second half (perhaps something related with that massive Red Army in the north?) you shoud reduce substantially the ammunition available in Bodo.

Unfortunately tomorrow I'm going on travel and my laptop doesn't have the guts for such a heavy scenario, so the second half report will not be done until next week, sorry.

Hope this wall of text is helpful to you, and thank you for your work.

Ancalagon

[BeirutDude]

So, unless there is a truckload of action pending in the second half (perhaps something related with that massive Red Army in the north?) you shoud reduce substantially the ammunition available in Bodo.

Done, actually across the board! I about quartered AAMs across all of the bases. It gets to easy to throw everything including, the kitchen sink, and those bases probably had ALL OF NATO's AAM stocks for a year of combat!!!!!! Not quite but yeah good call! [8D] [:D]

[BeirutDude]

I'm not sure of it's strategic purpose, if it's mission was deny the airspace to my MPAs to protect the soviet subs, then it was badly positioned to do so. Almost all of them where sunk many hours before the SAG started to being a menace.

Yeah, Originally it was closer to the NATO SAGs and teleported with the subs but then I moved it to try to protect the strike. I have a new thought for trying to protect the Backfire strike....

[BeirutDude]

Updated to Playtest Version 1.2 on 12-8 22:00 EST. For big changes...

1. Tweaked the Teleport, now you must run the scenario for 1-2 seconds so the Soviet SAG missions move with it (they don't move on the Load Scenario trigger).
2. Tweaked Soviet SAG
3. Tweaked the AI missions
4. Tweaked teleport zones to make the scenario more challenging.

[JPFisher55]

BeirutDude, the above file has the wrong scenario. I played Arctic Tsunami and enjoyed it.

[BeirutDude]

OMG! [8|]

Sorry About that everyone! Actually I was wondering when I was going to do something like this as I'm juggling two very similar scenarios at the same time! I blame being older than dirt, tired when I zipped them last night and thinking ahead to adjustments to Arctic Tsunami 2019 when I zipped this one! [X(] [:D]

The current version of The Gauntlet 1989 is in the attachment below. [8D]

Glad you enjoyed Arctic Tsunami 2019, I actually made a few very small adjustments to it this morning and posted those in the ready for the Community Pack thread, but they were very minor updates. [8D] [:)]

[Ancalagon451]

OK, I finally decided to give the new version a try, and dear sir, It's a monster.

The repositioning of the SAG and switching from Kirov to Kiev changes everything. And the first three hours where nothing but enduring missile strikes, avoiding enemy subs just under my ships (did you tweak their teleport zones or was just bad luck on my part?) and making hastly planned and in the end uneffective ASuW strikes.

I lost all the STANAVFORLANT and all the Invincible escorts. The carrier itself along with the last SAG survived and that decided me to continue. During the following lull I lost two subs to the Soviet SAG (again) and attrited it to death with Harpoon and Sea Eagle missiles (also again), Forgers are able to deny airspace to enablers and patrolling MPAs (as opposed to striking ones) but no more than that.

Once the SAG was sunk things more or less switched back to routine except that it's last ditch missile attack literally depleted my ships of SAM (last few missiles were confronted only with chaff and CIWS). So I had nothing to defend me from the next bomber raid except less than two dozen fighters. Half of them armed only with Sidewinders.

I did it [8D].

I managed to position and sustain a CAP north of parallel 70º, with Tornados coming all the way from Scotland. The rest of the fighters from Bodo and a Flanking Invincible, and I strangled the strike in its craddle.

After that, it was a waiting game for the amphibs arrival and unloading, with a moment of sheer terror then some Soviet strike fighters decided that the ships were much more valuable targets than the rubble of Andoya and the other northern bases (damn ruskies with a working brain).

Triumph at the end but a damn bloody one.

Now relevant points:

Great idea the changes in position and composition of the SAG, it covers both the bombers and the submarines.

The munitions cut in Bodo it's very annoying (as it should) but it's still posible operate all Phantoms and Eagles from there during almost all the scenario duration. Not having Tornado F.3 munitions there, was a nasty surprise (as it should).

The problem of kamikaze MPAs is solved. Only once I saw one, overflying Norwegian bases (and the fool even survived since it did it when there was no ready interceptors [:D]), so you can chalk it to a fluke and call it done.

I put a Side level doctrine forbidding refuel and UNREP to avoid whatever happened last time, until the devs give it an eye. The ships have more than enough fuel to make the trip at flank speed, so you should delete or put back in their groups the tankers. Micromanaging them it's very annoying.

As of right now the biggest problem is, and sorry for the bluntness, one of boredom. After the frantic start you have more than a day to recompose yourseld, destroy the SAG and preparing for the second round, and that it's a little too much. Not sure what can be done without excessively beefing the enemy.

But the worst offender it's not that but the time after the second strike, when you still have more than two day of play and probably more than one for the amphibs to arrive and unload. I played all that time on the background while I was studying Chemistry [:-].

Here I do have a pair of suggestions.

First, cut in half unloading time. Not realistic, I know, but this one seems to me one of those times when you have to compromise for sake of enjoying the game. You can (and should) cut a day from game time to maintain the time presure. Also put a special message indicating the completion of unloading and perhaps another informing of the start when the ships arrive to the landing zone. I play with events not visible and I only discovered that the ships where scoring when I happened to check the scoring log.

Second, once there are ships in the landing zone, reassign all tactical strikers to anti-ship duties. Some Fencers did it accidentally in my playtest and they managed to damage several escorts.

Third, SSGNs shouldn't play to be SSNs after they expend their missiles, I'm not sure if there whould be enough time to do it but you should try rearming them. Give them a home base in Kola with proper magazines, and a retreat doctrine to send them to base when their primary offensive weapon is depleted (and lets hope the devs have programed them to consider only their missiles as primary weapons).

All this would make the second part of the scenario much more engaging. Also much more deadly, so perhaps you should put some extra ships with a readying time of twenty hours in Scotland and use them as reinforcements.

All said still a good scenario as is, is just the lull on the second half annoyed me to no end.

Hope any of this helps you, and again thanks for your work.

Ancalagon

[BeirutDude]

OK, I finally decided to give the new version a try, and dear sir, It's a monster.

That's what happens when I have too much time on my hands!

The repositioning of the SAG and switching from Kirov to Kiev changes everything. And the first three hours where nothing but enduring missile strikes, avoiding enemy subs just under my ships (did you tweak their teleport zones or was just bad luck on my part?) and making hastly planned and in the end uneffective ASuW strikes.

I did tweak the zones to help with coordination of the initial strikes at the expense of latter strikes as you noted.

I lost all the STANAVFORLANT and all the Invincible escorts. The carrier itself along with the last SAG survived and that decided me to continue. During the following lull I lost two subs to the Soviet SAG (again) and attrited it to death with Harpoon and Sea Eagle missiles (also again), Forgers are able to deny airspace to enablers and patrolling MPAs (as opposed to striking ones) but no more than that.

I had a very similar playtest

Once the SAG was sunk things more or less switched back to routine except that it's last ditch missile attack literally depleted my ships of SAM (last few missiles were confronted only with chaff and CIWS). So I had nothing to defend me from the next bomber raid except less than two dozen fighters. Half of them armed only with Sidewinders.

Again I had a similar experience.

I did it .

I managed to position and sustain a CAP north of parallel 70º, with Tornados coming all the way from Scotland. The rest of the fighters from Bodo and a Flanking Invincible, and I strangled the strike in its craddle.

After that, it was a waiting game for the amphibs arrival and unloading, with a moment of sheer terror then some Soviet strike fighters decided that the ships were much more valuable targets than the rubble of Andoya and the other northern bases (damn ruskies with a working brain).

Triumph at the end but a damn bloody one.

Now relevant points:

Great idea the changes in position and composition of the SAG, it covers both the bombers and the submarines.

Thank you, I think it helps.

The munitions cut in Bodo it's very annoying (as it should) but it's still posible operate all Phantoms and Eagles from there during almost all the scenario duration. Not having Tornado F.3 munitions there, was a nasty surprise (as it should).

The problem of kamikaze MPAs is solved. Only once I saw one, overflying Norwegian bases (and the fool even survived since it did it when there was no ready interceptors ), so you can chalk it to a fluke and call it done.

So actually that is one reason for the Tromso area strikes. I was never able to vector the returning aircraft away from there so they are partly there to soak off NATO CAP.

I put a Side level doctrine forbidding refuel and UNREP to avoid whatever happened last time, until the devs give it an eye. The ships have more than enough fuel to make the trip at flank speed, so you should delete or put back in their groups the tankers. Micromanaging them it's very annoying.

So I tested it having the Orange Leaf Unrep Ocean and it turned into a disaster.

As of right now the biggest problem is, and sorry for the bluntness, one of boredom. After the frantic start you have more than a day to recompose yourseld, destroy the SAG and preparing for the second round, and that it's a little too much. Not sure what can be done without excessively beefing the enemy.

Was there a day two backfire strike? There should have been...

But the worst offender it's not that but the time after the second strike, when you still have more than two day of play and probably more than one for the amphibs to arrive and unload. I played all that time on the background while I was studying Chemistry .

Here I do have a pair of suggestions.

First, cut in half unloading time. Not realistic, I know, but this one seems to me one of those times when you have to compromise for sake of enjoying the game. You can (and should) cut a day from game time to maintain the time presure. Also put a special message indicating the completion of unloading and perhaps another informing of the start when the ships arrive to the landing zone. I play with events not visible and I only discovered that the ships where scoring when I happened to check the scoring log.

Not sure how to do that except on a ship by ship basis. I didn't want to just give points for a group as only one ship might make it so each ship gets points for unloading.

Second, once there are ships in the landing zone, reassign all tactical strikers to anti-ship duties. Some Fencers did it accidentally in my playtest and they managed to damage several escorts.

Good idea I will look at it.

Third, SSGNs shouldn't play to be SSNs after they expend their missiles, I'm not sure if there whould be enough time to do it but you should try rearming them. Give them a home base in Kola with proper magazines, and a retreat doctrine to send them to base when their primary offensive weapon is depleted (and lets hope the devs have programed them to consider only their missiles as primary weapons).

I agree realistic but they wouldn't have the time in the scenario.

All this would make the second part of the scenario much more engaging. Also much more deadly, so perhaps you should put some extra ships with a readying time of twenty hours in Scotland and use them as reinforcements.

All said still a good scenario as is, is just the lull on the second half annoyed me to no end.

Hope any of this helps you, and again thanks for your work.

Thank you for your help!

Ancalagon