New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest Battle

[Gunner98]

OK
Here is an experiment in long scenarios – and unfortunately Scenario creep got the better of me. In a nutshell, you are in charge of convoy operations in the North and to a much lesser extent South Atlantic. You have significant forces at your disposal but also some rather unique challenges. A few points:
• I was not intending to build this scenario, simply use the story as background for the rest of the campaign. Now that I have, I think it works
• The scenario 38 days long and probably the closest to WITP-AE that I’ve seen. Its not for the faint of heart
• The game seems to run smoothly with it, AU count is about 2800, at one point the Pathfinder que had 27 paths being worked, and I was getting between 2-600ms on 30x time compression – not bad!
• There are two pre-amble Caribbean Fury scenarios that are only in outline form. When I saw Feltan’s Havana Daydreaming, I put them aside. Couldn’t compete. But I’ll have to build them now to complete the story.
• There are a lot of unique units and moving parts, some might say – ‘but that unit disbanded in 91 and this is 94!’ Remember that this is an alternate history and it started diverging from reality in 89 and to a greater extent in 91. Sit back and enjoy trying to merge F-18s, F-4s and A-4s into a coordinated attack :-0
• The scenario is not finished. Things that will be improved:
o Changeable weather
o Currently the game checks for random spawning every hour, have requested a change to the trigger that would extend that. So many of the spawns have only a 2-4% chance of actually triggering.
o Ammo fixed at the piers, it’s a bit hit & miss at the moment
o Argentina will be more of a problem
o Nigeria is going to be a PITA
o More direction and challenge with Cuba
o There will be a few more surprises for Gt’moe and the Panama Canal zone
o Daily sitreps
o The AO/AOR fleet passing through from time to time to lend a hand and need protection
o Damaged ships from the fight around Iceland and Norway coming through needing protection and docking space
o Spawning Soviet subs: there are almost 50 of them out there but I suspect that they will be attrited quite quickly so will need to re-spawn some of them.

I look forward to your comments and critiques. Enjoy.

Change log NF 12.6 V1.2
• Put Assentation island in the correct place
• Added St Helena’s island airport (where I had Assentation) it only has a 2000 Ft runway so not much good for the large MPA but it may be useful somehow
• Added Cape Town Airbase/airport
• Added a Sqn of SAAF C-47s! Yes, folks the Dakota is back! Doing MPA and ELINT
• Added a South African AO to the mix just for fun
• Added points for sinking Venezuelan ships, 5 pts for any ship and an additional 10 for an FFG so you can recover about half what you lose if neutrality is violated
• Replaced the helos on FFG-10 Duncan
• Did not replace them on FFG-14 Sides (see AC distribution below)
• Added some radar coverage
• Went though the Soviet subs and made sure they were all on a mission
• Made sure all the Soviet sub missions were Passive radar
• Picked up and corrected a couple duplicate unit errors
• Cut the number of Reserve P-3s in half (all ready no maint) and reduced the regulars by 1/3 with 1/3 of them on maint
• You now only get 93 FS for the first 4 days then it flies to Norway for NF 13.1
• Fixed some ammo issues
• Random Weather added – thanks to wqc12345 for the script
• Nigeria is more of a PITA
• Argentina is more of a problem
• Venezuela is now more interesting

Change log NF 12.6 V1.3
• 2x Hawk Sites Panama
• 1x Hawk site G’tmo
• Cleaned up briefing
• Tightened up neutrality violation events and zones
• Added an intelligence assessment for Venezuela including mention of a 90 mile neutrality zone.
• Fixed up some scoring issues
• Sorted out the Lua and teleport issues for reinforcements
• Fixed up some of the TGs
• Fixe up the Sparrows at Jacksonville, of course each model of F-4 takes a different version of Aim-7 and Aim-9!
• The Nims can take Sidewinders but only in the Harpoon loadout. Added some Harpoons 
• Ports for Panama
• Radars and ports for Argentina
• Ports for Nigeria
• A few more surprises

[michaelm75au]

You had a note that the player needed to keep track of who was loaded or unloaded ...
For the un/loaded merchantmen, could you use LUA script to append 'Loaded' to the name when the loaded trigger fires, and remove the 'Loaded' when the unloaded trigger fires?

Attached is sample LUA

[Excroat3]

Just wondering - Why 12.6? Are the scenarios you are working on other than this going to fill the gap between 11.1 and 12.6? Or are you moving on to the next "Fury" series?

[magi]

interesting....

[Gunner98]

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

Just wondering - Why 12.6? Are the scenarios you are working on other than this going to fill the gap between 11.1 and 12.6? Or are you moving on to the next "Fury" series?

Yes, there are a bunch of other scenarios wither in near complete, shell or complete fantasy that will fill the gap. It is evolving sort of like this:

9 series: assembling the forces
10 series: pummeling Iceland
11 series: amphibs at work
12 series: Moving to Norway
13 series: prep for assault on Norway
14 series: amphibs in Norway
etc

This one spans a whole bunch of those. It starts at the tail end of the 9 series and will continue until the counter invasion of Norway is well underway so I grabbed a spot somewhere in the middle.

B

[Gunner98]

ORIGINAL: michaelm

You had a note that the player needed to keep track of who was loaded or unloaded ...
For the un/loaded merchantmen, could you use LUA script to append 'Loaded' to the name when the loaded trigger fires, and remove the 'Loaded' when the unloaded trigger fires?

Attached is sample LUA

Thanks michaelm - I'll give that a try.

B

[B52H]

If you add more challenges with Cuba, I'd suggest adding some RF-4Cs based out of Birmingham for photo recon, a few F-16s out of MacDill, USNR aircraft based out of NAS Cecil Field, and some SAC B-52s out of Barksdale and NAS Dallas (if it hadn't closed in the alternative timeline) to deal with Nigeria and Cuba. Also, regarding Northern Fury in general, were any of the post-1989 BRAC legislatures ever passed due to the reemerging Soviet threat?

[Excroat3]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

Just wondering - Why 12.6? Are the scenarios you are working on other than this going to fill the gap between 11.1 and 12.6? Or are you moving on to the next "Fury" series?

Yes, there are a bunch of other scenarios wither in near complete, shell or complete fantasy that will fill the gap. It is evolving sort of like this:

9 series: assembling the forces
10 series: pummeling Iceland
11 series: amphibs at work
12 series: Moving to Norway
13 series: prep for assault on Norway
14 series: amphibs in Norway
etc

This one spans a whole bunch of those. It starts at the tail end of the 9 series and will continue until the counter invasion of Norway is well underway so I grabbed a spot somewhere in the middle.

B

Alright, makes sense, thanks! Another question (minor spoilers?): If Argentina goes hostile, should the player consider that as an Article V violation, or a British internal issue? Also, should there be any SAM defenses on the island?

EDIT: Just noticed that Argentina is not set to go hostile against NATO so ima delete some stuff.

[Gunner98]

ORIGINAL: B52H

If you add more challenges with Cuba, I'd suggest adding some RF-4Cs based out of Birmingham for photo recon, a few F-16s out of MacDill, USNR aircraft based out of NAS Cecil Field, and some SAC B-52s out of Barksdale and NAS Dallas (if it hadn't closed in the alternative timeline) to deal with Nigeria and Cuba. Also, regarding Northern Fury in general, were any of the post-1989 BRAC legislatures ever passed due to the reemerging Soviet threat?

The B-52's are busy. The one wing assigned to TAC is in the process of pummeling Iceland and SAC (still exits) has it's main role of nuclear deterrence to concern itself with.
The FR-4C's will work, not sure about more F-16s - have to keep the challenge up for a long time.

BRAC did not happen. The 3 wings of F-16 did not get shut down, cannot recall the numbers at the moment but the one at Hone Germany stays there, the one in Spain has to move and I haven't figured out where. 20th out of Upper Hayford stays, and therefor the ones stateside remain as well. There are some other Sqn changes that don't happen.

Net result is an additional 14-15 Sqns of F-16, 2-3 A-10 and 1 F-15. To cover that, production for the F-16s ramps up, the ANG is much slower to convert, and ther is still a wing of F-4G and another of A-7 active. (that could work in Cuba) and a bunch of other stuff.

I can PM you the detailed breakdown if you wish.

B

[Gunner98]

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

Alright, makes sense, thanks! Another question (minor spoilers?): You keep mentioning that Argentina is going to be a problem, and when I was looking through the forces of both sides I noticed that the British have no chance of holding them off, if the Argentinians go hostile immediately. If Argentina goes hostile, should the player consider that as an Article V violation, or a British internal issue? Also, should there be any SAM defenses on the island?

Trying to work the balance here. Argentina will not be going hostile immediately, and there is some stuff enroute to help the Brits, it may not go hostile at all. But it is a significant threat. Haven't worked out the details but it will be an Article V, however the only ones able to help is the USN, and its fairly busy.

Your right, there should be a Bty of Rapiers around Mt Pleasant.

Tx

B

[mikmykWS]

Just to chime in. Great work!

This is an example of exactly what we need.

Mike

[wild_Willie2]

Wow Gunner, you outdid yourself once more with this one. Although running this scenario through 30 days will be though, as I only get 150-300ms pings on 30x time compression.

Thanks for the excellent effort.

W.

[Gunner98]

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

EDIT: Just noticed that Argentina is not set to go hostile against NATO so ima delete some stuff.

If you want to get rid of some units to gain some computer speed you could go to 'Biologics' and delete a bunch there.

Edit - carful that you don't delete your reinforcements which are currently residing on the Biologic side.

[Excroat3]

I actually meant that I deleted one of my questions I had asked you in my post (the comment about the Argentinians going hostile immediately) Just when I deleted that, you quoted my post with everything still in it. My comment didn't mean that I was going to delete stuff in the scenario, just was going to delete stuff in my post. However, at 1x compression I get 150ms, so I'm going to have to delete the biologics as you said in order to play the scenario.

[magi]

Two immediate impressions… I'm not sure where to start.... and I definitely need a way bigger monitor.. Like a drive-in movie theater screen would be really nice......

[ojms]

Really excited by this but it looks like a lot of work just to get setup.

First job is to change the ship fuel setting to 25% as per this bug I found:

tm.asp?m=4086909&mpage=1&key=&#4086978

Second is to ensure all the ships have a relevant home port as there are no AO/AOE ships, if this isn't done then ships will run out of fuel. I would have thought there might be one AO for the carrier groups at least? plus maybe one RN AO in the Caribbean?

Keep up the good work!

[Gunner98]

ojms

I was debating about the home port for allied ships but decided to leave it up to the players; e.g Spanish ship grouped with an escort gang and they are off NYC but ship decides to drive to Spain for fuel! If the player does it he knows and can only blame himself [8D]

The Sov's all have homeports and the 25% return spring though.

I've got a good track on all the AO/AORs and have them pretty busy in the campaign; with 6 carriers, 3 Amphib TGs, 2 BBSAGs and about 6 smaller SAGs, they get thirsty. Although I should check out some of the NATO tankers, the Brits are busy but maybe there are others. On my list. Thanks

[ojms]

Spain had this ship (only one of) during that period:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marqu%C3% ... ada_(A-11)

although it's not in the DB!

France had five of these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durance-class_tanker

during that period, they are in the DB.

The Italians had two of these:

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Stromboli

they are in the DB.

The Royal Navy had a lot during this period:

Three of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover-class_tanker
Two of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Rosa ... hment_ship
Two of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Vict ... ment_oiler
Three of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ol-class_tanker_(1965) (one went out of service Jan 1994 but I would assume that wouldn't be the case in this time line)
I think two of these https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaf-class_tanker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaf-class_tanker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFA_Oakleaf_(A111) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFA_Brambleleaf_(A81) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RFA_Orangeleaf_(A110)

Most of these appear to be in the DB.

Hope this helps, although I assume you're already well aware of the inventory of NATO!

[Gunner98]

Was just forming a reply. There is some room to add a couple:

------------------------------

OK the South African's have an Oiler! You just never know!

I had the Canadian ships busy: Protector on the West Coast, Provider supporting STANAVFORLANT (fiction, STANAVFORLANT didn't really exist at the time) and Preserver at the time was in the Med supporting the SNMG2 (historic) but I could shuffle the decks and keep the Preserver or Provider at home.

The French are really tapped out, they had 5 with one in refit, one in the IO, one in Westpac, one with each CV

The Dutch have a couple; I'll make one available

The Spaniards, have an interesting history on their tankers! Including an impounded smuggler [:-], I'll need to do some more looking for them but their CV should have something.

Germans, Italians and Greeks all built new ones in the mid 90's. Their cold war era vessels are getting a bit old.

And I should put a smaller Brit (Rover Class) down in the South Atlantic as well. The Fort George & Victoria and Orangeleaf are with the CVs, I’ve got Bayleaf in the gulf, Oakleaf in the Pacific and Brambleleaf in refit. Fort Rosalie in the Med, Fort Austin in the IO. I’ve spread the Rover’s out but will put one in the Falklands and one coming out of refit in Portsmouth

AO/AOR's were a real weakness for the USN at the time. With only 4 Sacramento, 7 Wichita and 5 Jumbo-Cimarron the USN was hard pressed to keep 8 CVBG's going. That’s why the Kaiser class was rushed into service historically. For the NF campaign USS Supply was rushed into service and the las to Kaiser’s were completed.

NF has 4 CVBGs fighting in the North Atlantic, 4 Fighting in the West Pacific, 1 in the Med, 1 in the IO/PGulf and the Kennedy makes 11 (Forrestal & Ranger are parked, America is in DDock). Having 6 CVNs out there eases the load but the rest of the fleet is at sea and burning fuel.

The locations at War Start were:

2nd Fleet (Lant) has: 2x Wichita, 1x Sacramento, 1x Supply, 2x Cimarron & 6x Kaiser: Total 8 to support 4 CVBGs (including the Kennedy in the Gulf, now 10 to support 4 CVBGs in the north and Kennedy)
3rd Fleet (EPac) has: 2x Wichita, 4x Kaiser: Total 6 to support 2 CVBGs (4 moved to 7th Fleet with 2 CVBGs, 2 needed to cover distance)
4th Fleet (SAmr) has: 1x Kaiser (on West coast heading to 7th Fleet)
5th Fleet (IO/Gulf) has: 1x Wichita, 1x Sacramento, 1x Cimarron & 1x Kaiser Total 4 to support 2 CVBGs (2 stayed with Sara, 2 went to the WPac with Lincoln)
6th Fleet (Med) has: 1x Wichita, 1x Sacramento, 1x Cimarron & 1x Kaiser Total 4 to support 2 CVBGs (America was in the Med until end Jan then DDock, 2 followed Eisenhower into the Atlantic, 2 remained for Nimitz)
7th Fleet (WPac) has: 1x Sacramento, 1x Cimarron & 4x Kaiser Total 6 to support 2 CVBGs (Now 10 to support 4 CVBGs)

Refit & Drydock: 1x Wichita, 1x Kaiser

[Gunner98]

I like that Italian ship for the scenario. She only carries enough fuel for 3 of the thirstier escorts, so will be popping back to port regularly.

Thanks

B