New Scenario for Testing: Grim Reapers Inspired US vs Chinese CVBG Battle

[Craigkn]

This scenario is inspired by the Grim Reapers (https://grimreapers.net/) DCS scenario putting a 2025 US Carrier Battle Group against a 2025 Chinese Carrier Battle Group. The original scenario is a DCS scenario developed by the Grim Reapers; this version is adapted for C:MO.

As C:MO is more strategy as opposed to DCS's action focus, this scenario is tailored towards more realism. The Type 003 carrier, for example, has 48 aircraft slots, so cannot accommodate the original 60 fighters that the Grim Reapers scenario listed. In DCS, the US carrier air wing is also larger than it would most likely be.

I added a few surprises as well, the US Navy player will need to locate the Fujian, approach without being detected, and launch a decisive blow, while preparing for possible counter attacks.

Original Grim Reapers video: https://youtu.be/DRt2I39qU5U

[Craigkn]

(note this is a fixed version of .002 that I uploaded an hour ago, this here is the correct working version)

The core of this scenario is leading the Carl Vinson into a position where it can decisively strike the PLAN CVBG - if the USN units are discovered and tracked, very bad things will happen. Stealth (strategic stealth, not literal) and speed are the key advantages of the USN. Avoiding, or destroying, Chinese ISR assets before they can provide targeting data is the order of the day.

Updated version, with some fixes and changes:

- Hopefully Fixed many PLAN missions not firing
- Gave both sides satelites
- Significantly buffed PLAN:
-- Increased KJ-600s from 2 to 4
-- Added ASW focused SAG to complicate sub operations
-- Diversified PLA rocket forces units
-- Added some nasty surprises from the PLA naval militia

[Craigkn]

Changelog for .003:

- Replaced PLAAF strike mission with a strike patrol. I could never get the strike mission to fire, the PLA's ISR is not enough, so we will try a patrol mission. Added a bit of risk to the whole endeavor.
- Fixed satellites. Also noticed that many Chinese satellites are sitting on top of each other, in the same orbit. The Yaogan-30 series in particular; a dozen or so are right on top of each other.
- Added more ISR options for China, who really cant seem to find the USN CVBG. Some quietly float. I will have to see if that helps PLAN's early ISR.


Note, there seems to be a sweet spot between 28 and 35 knots, for "outrunning" a ballistic missile - as in exiting its terminal sensor range. Fast ships live, slow ships die.

[thewood1]

Glad you did this. I started working on something similar last night before noticing this thread. There were a lot of issues that jumped out at me as a player of CMO. The Grim Reapers' scenario looks about like how a pilot would envision this scenario working vs. how a fleet commander sees it. I'll give your a run through and see what it looks like. Thanks for the work on this,

[thewood1]

One thing I noticed is that none of the civilian ships are IDed. All commercial vessels should have the AIS so that navies can see immediately if the are civilian or not. You can throw in a random one here and there that is transmitting just to keep the USN honest.

Another suggestion is make a couple of the civilian ships Chinese or NK as a separate side that is neutral to the US but friendly to the PLAN. That will allow them to spot for the PLAN without being attacked by the USN. Its part of the real-world kill chain for the Chinese ASBMs.

Those are the kinds of things that a game like CMO can do over DCS that make it a lot more real and not just a shoot-bang scenario.

[Craigkn]

thewood1: There is a whole subplot with the civilian, and "civilian", ships in the game. Let me know how that plays out. The intent is for the People's Armed Forces Maritime Militia to play a large role in midgame.

Could you try version .004 below? I have made quite a few changes (hopefully improvements), mostly to the Chinese side's AI.

version .004 changelog:

- split PLA into three sides; PLAAF, PLAN, and PLARF. This helped with deconflicting missions and general clarity of what the side was doing. Also added a non-function side "AI" for some back end purposes.
- redesigned the PLAAF, PLAN, and PLARF missions
- Added more PLAAF activity as the CVBG heads west
- Added a DDG to the Carl Vinson BG to account for the added PLAAF missions
- Added a final mission to launch TLAMs

[thewood1]

I understand why the civ ships are there. I'm just saying in the real world, most ships would have AIS active. In fact, the subplot could be false AIS transponders on enemy vessels used for spying. I do this a lot on my own scenarios.

[Craigkn]

One issue for me is that the game shows weapons range rings on the PLA militia units, seemingly without being really detected (you can’t view the mounts on contact details). So finding the bad guys is a bit easy once you know what to look for - I wish this was not the case but it seems to be a game mechanic.

[Craigkn]

The most recent Infographics Show video on a hypothetical WW3 China vs. Taiwan / U.S.; the first bit is similar to this this scenario:

https://youtu.be/h-gxgeFdCTk

I found the Chinese UAV’s pretty easy to track and splash, so I found alternate, yet to me plausible, ways to address China’s ISR issues.

[thewood1]

OK, have some time rest of week to play this. Will let you know how I do.

[thewood1]

Couple hours game time in. Your ISR solution is very cool and unexpected. Its also very plausible. One thing to also try is something I do a lot; use commercial fishing vessels on a side allied to China and neutral to the US. And take a lot of points away if the US kills them. There is no way for the US to sort through them and it forces them to make hard decisions.

[Craigkn]

I noted one big issue that may be unavoidable - weapon engagement rings on ships. It seems once you get a solid fix on a ship, if they have weapons, a weapons engagement ring is displayed. This causes an issue with one particular maritime militia ship, however the other units have MANPADS which also show (if you zoom really close in). This somewhat spoils the attempt of having a covert launch platform.

[thewood1]

Since this is single player, just put in your briefing not to click on ships until IDed. I'm kind of doubtful militia ships would be firing on a CVBG. Its a good way to get destroyed. Militia ships are more one step up from policing or coast guard. I would sub in commercial allied ships. There's more of a threat from their recon and comms than any militia ship.

[thewood1]

Did a little research on PLAN militia forces. From a few books on PLAN fources, most militia ships are just commercial fishing vessels that get a subsidy. Most of those are unarmed, with the excpetion of being permitted to carry small arms. There is a category that is small that is called the professional militia that might be armed with machine guns and rarely even a manpad. The logic behind this is training. There is very little invested in armed training. Most of the investment is comms equipment and training to use that.

https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws. ... tDHuLIq7wR

From the above:

IDENTIFYING MILITIA VESSELS
▪ Direct identification in official Chinese sources or state media remains the most straightforward
and conclusive indicator of militia activity. However, it is unlikely that most maritime militia
vessels can be identified in this way. This makes behavior-based identification—informed by
remote sensing data and traditional on-site reporting—the most promising avenue for continued
identification.
▪ On-site photography and video, as well as ship-to-ship automatic identification system (AIS)
data collection, offer the greatest potential to directly identify militia vessels and document their
behavior. This both enhances the opportunities for follow-up research and creates an immediate
impact by revealing the militia’s size, scope, and activities to a broad audience in a convincing
fashion.
▪ Commercial satellite imagery and AIS data play an important role in identifying and tracking
militia deployments. These tools may prove even more effective in the future, given what has been
learned about the militia’s behavior and geographic distribution.
▪ Association with known militia vessels and ports are strong indicators that a vessel warrants
further study, as are large subsidies indicating that a ship is an SBFV. Large vessels over 50 meters
operating in disputed waters—especially understaffed vessels with less than 10 crew members—
are also deserving of further scrutiny.
▪ By coupling continued reporting efforts from actors in the South China Sea with additional
research using open-source Chinese-language materials and remote sensing data, the complete
identification of the maritime militia is not only possible, but likely.

It looks like there is most likely an organized effort to track these ships. But I would bet there are a lot of holes in the net. I think using commercial fishing vessels on a neutral side is good way to do it.

[thewood1]

Spoiler:

Your solution to ISR is the key to this scenario. I am incredibly intrigued by it. Its the equivalent of an ISR minefield you have to get through.

I thought I had cleared a path through them. I was wrong. I missed one. Next thing I know I have a rain of missiles coming. Not sure how truly realistic that is, but after a little research, its very plausible.

The one thing I would consider is putting a little delay in the launching of the missiles based on sighting from the buoys. I suspect the telemetry and links of the kill chain would be significant.

I would also remove all weapons from you militia ships. I see no need for them.

[Craigkn]

Thank you for the feedback. I am glad the ISR solution worked out well - the PLA UAV's never survived long enough to get a fix on the carrier, and knowing the carriers general location is not enough. However if the player ignores them, bad things will happen. I wanted to try to use the WZ-8, however its sensor range is quite short, so I am not sure how to best employ it.

I am hesitant to add a delay for the ballistic missile launches. A key issue is speed - if the CVBG is traveling at flank (35 knots) - often the faster ships can outrun the sensor range of the inbound ballistic missiles. This really hurts the UK ships and US auxiliaries - their flank speed is not enough to clear the engagement zone of the DF-26's and in my playthroughs, they tend to get sunk. The DF-100's have a little different engagement profile, and I was able to outrun them in some cases. I have not tested this, but my hunch is that any ship that has a max speed under 30 knots is a sitting duck.

Good point for the maritime militia ships. I'll see about adjusting them.

[thewood1]

I think the briefing should be explicit that PLAN units and militia have been spotted dropping ISR buoys at likely entrance points to the Philippine Sea. A high priority should be to clear a path. I would also hint that a zig zag pattern would be recommended to avoid easy tracking of ships. For both sides.

[Craigkn]

Just in time for the long weekend - here is an updated scenario. I incorporated most of thewood1's comments, I also worked on balance a bit. The mission is more clear - enter the Philippine Sea, sink the target, exit the area to the south. I changed the USN and PLA OOB's a bit, and replaced one of the DDG's with a LCS, which might be more useful in the early stages of the scenario.

One issue that I cant seem to figure out is how to trigger an AI-ran aircraft strike mission on ships. Rockets fire fine, but getting the aircraft to launch seems to require more targeting information for the AI-side. I avoided this issue by establishing ASuW patrols in the general area that the targeted ships should be in, and it works, but I cant really simulate a massed air strike (think of "Dance of the Vampires" in Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising (cool reenactment here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo8FhChnyq0)). I can cheat a little; set the strike package to its own side, give that side omniscient vision, and then trigger the strike at an appropriate time, but I would prefer to use game mechanics to do this.

[AndrewJ]

I downloaded the most recent version, and when the scenario starts there are two Vinsons present.



One is over by Saipan, with the other ships, and has its full load of aircraft on board.

The other one is adjacent to Taiwan, and has no aircraft.

[Craigkn]

That is odd, I downloaded the scenario that I uploaded and was unable to replicate the second CVN. I would recommend downloading the scenario again, or just deleting the CVN in the editor.