Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now!

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/16/2014 3:11:30 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Hello Gentlemen,

Please find attached the scenario Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 for testing. Comments and AARs welcome.

Regards,
Feltan

Pertinent Information:

<SCENARIO DESCRIPTION>

GOODNIGHT IRENE (2016)
Scenario Date: Late October 2016
Scenario Created: July 2014, v1.9; tested on CMANO v1.4
Playable Sides: United States
Scenario Design: Feltan
********************************************************
This scenario postulates that the influence of the United States in the Persian Gulf region rapidly diminishes in light of ongoing political, financial, military and world events. The final act of withdrawal, which was intended to foster peace and goodwill, turns into a much more difficult exercise as coincidental world events take center stage. The context for this scenario is as follows:
2014
• The United States continues withdrawing forces from Afghanistan.
• Islamic guerillas make great strides against the teetering government in Iraq.
• Scandal grips Washington, D.C. as several high-profile congressional investigations dominate the news cycle during the hot summer months further destabilizing domestic and international faith in the US Government.
• Diplomatic talks concerning Iranian nuclear ambitions essentially collapse as Iran continues to claim peaceful intentions but fails to comply with international demands.
• While the “Arab Spring” is nearly forgotten by midyear in the West, radical Muslim elements in the Middle East are quietly expanding and making political plans based on the successful revolts in Libya and Egypt.
• Israel continues throughout 2014 to deliver the message that a nuclear armed Iran is an existential threat to the state of Israel.
• The US mid-term elections in November deliver a rebuke to the current administration; both houses of the legislature are now solidly in the opposing party’s control. Government gridlock and a slew of Congressional investigations are forecast for the next two years.
• The central government of Iraq collapses and the country reforms as three rump nations roughly centered on the Kurds to the north, the Sunnis in the center, and the Shiite in the south. There is no clear central government authority, and civil war and tribal affiliations dominate local administration. US diplomatic personnel and contractor personnel were successfully removed.
• Late year attempts to revive talks on Iranian nuclear proliferation stall and devolve into hollow promises of future meetings. Sanctions and trade embargoes are strengthened.
2015
• The year starts with increasing worldwide economic difficulty; the United States Federal Reserve is unable to stop burgeoning inflation and loss of faith in the United States’ monetary policy. Inflation ramps up through the year and unemployment surges. Interest rates climb, and spot prices for gold and silver hit record highs throughout the year.
• In February, Russia confirms that they are under contract to assist Iran developing additional nuclear power plants starting in late 2017.
• By the end of the first quarter of the year, the United States has removed all major combat forces from Afghanistan. While generally welcome news on the domestic front, this will culminate in a skeletal force of advisors in country that rapidly become isolated and ineffective and eventually limited to the fortress-like structure at Bagram airfield.
• As if explanation was needed, Israel modifies their message to reinforce the idea that any existential threat to the state warrants the full spectrum of diplomatic and military response.
• Iran achieves full scale domestic mini-sub production. Sources report six new mini-subs have joined the Iranian Navy in the last twelve months, with six more under construction and an unknown number planned.
• The President of the United States makes a mid-summer announcement at the United Nations that all US forces in the Persian Gulf will be removed to allow for the non-proliferation/peace process with Iran to gain renewed traction. The announcement further states that this will be accomplished prior to his leaving office in January 2017. A summit with Iran is scheduled for early 2016. The nations of the Persian Gulf Council are outraged and feel abandoned in the face of growing Iranian belligerence.
• The US and government of Djibouti ink a deal for a fifty year lease for land to build an airfield and small naval base to be known as NSF Djibouti in addition to extending the lease on Camp Lemonnier. Construction begins immediately.
• Bahrain gives notice that all US forces must be out of the country as soon as possible. Airspace for military over-flight will be denied starting in mid 2016.
• China, as the emerging primary consumer of OPEC oil and in light of the pending US economic meltdown, successfully lobbies during October to make the Chinese Yuan the worldwide reserve currency. The US stock market loses a quarter of its value within a month.
• Year end budgeting by Congress indicates a very austere allocation of resources for the US military going forward. In addition to the previously dreaded sequestration cuts, many new and existing programs are scheduled to be cut, some systems approaching obsolescence are extended, and the overall force headcount is slated to be reduced by an additional 25% by FY 2020.
2016
• The disposition of major surface forces is changing for the US. Starting in 2016, the Gulf area will only have one CVBG instead of two in the area of operations.
• The ramp-up to the US Presidential election becomes very polarized and unusually invective. Ongoing domestic and foreign policy is disjointed and ineffective. The world waits for a changing of the guard in Washington, D.C.
• The Persian Gulf States start looking to China for military patronage. Several weapons purchases are announced and economic & diplomatic ties are agreed upon. The US and Western powers are increasingly becoming unwelcome in the area.
• The US 5th Fleet in Bahrain starts relocating to NSF Djibouti which is rapidly expanding, and is slated to become the central Allied command and logistics support base for both Western Africa and Gulf operations.
• Russia surreptitiously makes several unknown but apparently very high-dollar weapons sales to Iran.
• By mid-summer, economic indicators in the US are grim: inflation has surged past 10%, published unemployment is above 20%, and gold is selling for $4000 a troy ounce and silver is at $60. With a few quarters of negative growth logged, the US is officially in an economic depression.
• Iran delays further nonproliferation talks until the end of the year.
• The US military and intelligence communities are asked to leave Oman and Yemen, and anti-terrorist operations in those countries come to an abrupt halt.
• June: China slated to send surface task force to the Persian Gulf at the request of several Gulf States.
• July: The corrupt central government in Kabul, Afghanistan collapses into anarchy and tribal warfare dominates the countryside. The few remaining US advisors are pulled out before the collapse.
• August: The Gulf States as well as Oman and Yemen are rocked with protests and riots by radical Islamic elements. While not on the scale of the Arab spring, the telltale signs of Al Qaeda sponsored unrest are evident.
• August: Western intelligence sources are confident that Iran has not only built a nuclear weapon, but appears to have secretly built many of them in previously undetected underground facilities.
• September: The last US forces in the Persian Gulf, at Manama, are packing up. Previously developed airfields and facilities have been handed over to host nations as a sign of good will.
• October: Iran conducts a successful nuclear detonation in the northeastern portion of the country.
• October: Iranian sub fleet puts to sea evening of 20 October 2016; several surface groups follow in the next few days.
• October: Merchant traffic in the Persian Gulf slows to a trickle as skyrocketing insurance rates require most ships to seek shelter or avoid the region all together.
• October: on the 23rd, the spot price of oil on the global market tops $150 (US) per barrel due to mounting tensions and vastly reduced shipping in the Persian Gulf.



<SCENARIO BRIEFING>

GOODNIGHT IRENE (2016)
You are the commander of the US 5th Fleet. This is a trying time, and you command the last expected surge of Allied forces in the region. While tensions are understandably very high, peace reigns. As the sun sets over the Persian Gulf on 23 October 2016, your missions in order of priority are:
• Insure the protection and security of US and Allied forces in the region.
• Protect neutral shipping, and insure the free flow of trade through the region.
• Insure unfettered rights of navigation and freedom of the seas.
• Maintain a non-belligerent posture, keep the peace, and do not provoke regional tensions.
• Complete the relocation of the US 5th Fleet headquarters and supporting forces to NSF Djibouti, Africa.
• Continue to conduct anti-piracy operation in the Horn of Africa area of operations.
• Continue to develop and expand new facilities in Djibouti with assigned resources.
The disposition of current forces under the command of the 5th Fleet is as follows:
• Bases:
o Camp Lemonnier
 Headquarters, Combined Multi-National Forces (CMF) (notional)
 Headquarters, Special Operations (notional)
o Naval Support Facility (NSF) Djibouti (operational and under construction)
 Headquarters, US 5th Fleet (notional)
o Naval Support Facility (NSF) Diego Garcia
• Forces at sea:
o CTF-50 (CVBG):
 CTF-50.1: on station
• USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76)(Flag)
• USS Cape St. George (CG-71)
• USS Chancellorsville (CG-62)
• USS Sterett (DDG-104)
• USS Preble (DDG-88)
• USNS Arctic (T-AOE-8)
• USS Tucson (SSN 770)
o CTF-51 (Contingency Response):
 CTF-51.1: conducting joint-combined training exercise YELLOW THUNDER on coast of Djibouti, to remain at anchor for duration of exercise
• USS Peleliu (LHA-5)(Flag)
• USS Green Bay (LPD-20)
• USS Rushmore (LSD-47)
• USS Cowpens (CG-63)
• USS Pinckney (DDG-91)
• USS Sampson (DDG-102)
• USS Topeka (SSN-754)
o CTF-52 (Mine Warfare):
 CTF-52.1: leading CTF-53.1, sailing to NSF Djibouti
• USS Scout (MCM-8)
• USS Gladiator (MCM-11)
• USS Ardent (MCM-12) (Flag)
• USS Dextrous (MCM-13)
o CTF-53 (Logistics):
 CTF-53.1: remaining 5th Fleet assets, personnel, supplies and remnants of US activities in the areas are aboard, sailing to NSF Djibouti
• USS Benfold (DDG-65)(Flag)(Detached from CTF-50.1)
• USS Fort Worth (LCS-3)
• USS Coronado (LCS-4)
• USS Milwaukee (LCS-5)
• USNS Matthew Perry (T-AKE-9)
• MV TSgt. John A. Chapman (T-AK-232)
• MV Maj. Bernard F. Fisher (T-AK-4329)
• USNS GySgt. Fred W. Stockham (T-AK-3017)
• MV Charleston Express (Leased Commercial Container Ship)
• MV Washington Express (Leased Commercial Container Ship)
• MV Yorktown Express (Leased Commercial Container Ship)
• MV Cape Taylor (T-AKR-113)
• MV Cape Texas (T-AKR-112)
• MS Amsterdam (Leased Commercial Cruise Liner)
o CTF-54 (Submarine):
 CTF-54.1: on patrol
• USS Olympia (SSN-717)(Flag)
 CTF-54.2: completed replenishment at NSF Diego Garcia and in route to area of operation
• USS Ohio (SSGN-726)(Flag)
o CTF-55 (Surface Forces):
 CTF-55.1: following CTF-53.1, sailing to NSF Djibouti
• USS Tempest (PC-2)
• USS Typhoon (PC-5)
• USS Sirocco (PC-6)
• USS Squall (PC-7) (Flag)
• USS Hurricane (PC-3)
• USS Monsoon (PC-4)
o CTF-150 (Combined Maritime Security):
 CTF-150: maritime security
• Brandenburg (F-215)(Germany)
• SPS Navarra (F-85)(Spain)
• Virgino Fasan (F-591)(Italy)
• Meuse (A-607)(France)(Flag)
 CTF-151: anti-piracy off the coast of Somalia
• HMS Kent (F-78)(United Kingdom)(Flag)
• HMCS Regina (FFH-334)(Canada)
• HMAS Darwin (FFG 04)(Australia)
 CTF-152: Persian Gulf security, currently disbanded
****************************************
Designer Notes:
1. The bulk of your victory points come from the successful arrival of CTF-53.1 at area GOALPOST.
2. The scenario can end early depending on events.
3. Every drone, plane and ship is important and valuable – minimize your losses.
4. Pay close attention to message traffic and follow orders.
5. It is helpful if in Game Options, you have “Special Messages” selected to “Raise Pop-Up.”
6. Good luck and good hunting Commander!

Special note to players for whom English is a second language:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Goodnight+Irene


Cultural Interlude:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1Sc77hTkx0




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/16/2014 10:58:53 AM   
NickD

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 2/14/2014
Status: offline
As an quick initial comment, the order of battle looks good, but the Nimrods are rather out of place - the UK scrapped them all a few years ago.

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 2
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/16/2014 11:20:44 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Thanks! I wasn't aware of that. Do you have a suggestion for a UK or an international maritime patrol aircraft?

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to NickD)
Post #: 3
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/16/2014 11:33:41 AM   
NickD

 

Posts: 163
Joined: 2/14/2014
Status: offline
Various European air forces have stationed maritime patrol aircraft in Djibouti to support their naval forces in the area, so they'd be the best bet. Australian AP-3 Orions could also potentially be re-deployed to the Middle East in the kind of situation this scenario is modelling (especially to support the Australian frigate in the area), but that's somewhat less likely.

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 4
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/16/2014 2:22:40 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
There were and possibly still are a couple Cdn CP-140s (P-3s) working out of UAE in support of the Cdn ships as well.

This looks good. Goin-In...

B

(in reply to NickD)
Post #: 5
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/16/2014 2:33:03 PM   
Rudd

 

Posts: 1501
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
Looks like a great opportunity to add one of the UKs' future MPA/MM A, possibly a weapon less SeaHerc;)
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2014/01/future-maritime-patrol-part-1-challenges-missions/
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=MI7GU4_eCcKQyASmrIGQBw&url=http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/photos/c-130/Variants/M12-1166510A002%2520SC-130J%2520Sea%2520Herc%2520Bro%2520Media.pdf&cd=2&ved=0CCAQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNGLZAKJTCWL1h4PjRtgFu_mdWWtjA
Sounds like an interesting scenario



< Message edited by Rudd -- 7/16/2014 3:39:20 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 6
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/17/2014 4:40:41 PM   
Lawdog1700

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 6/6/2014
Status: offline
This scenario is huge. I have never had time compression problems like I have had with this scenario before. It will not run any faster than 1:1 on my machine, which was top of the line (Alienware clone), about 4 years ago.

That being said, the scenario is brilliant. The events are very cool. I have only been able to play about the first 4 hours, but it has been fun so far.

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 7
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/17/2014 7:59:09 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Am also about 4 hours in, had it running at 5:1 and 15:1 with no problem. All good so far, fantastic scope and the events so far have been excellent - had me running for my gas mask! Only three minor comments:

-the font colour for the 'French snigldigiggits' in the radio transcript was difficult to see in a separate message window against the black background - had me rolling on the floor though..
-several of the Iranian ships have duplicate names - as far as I can tell in game mode (haven't gone to editor yet.
-I think - but am not quite sure yet - that the 'Do Not Move - USS Wisconsin' should probably be re-named 'USS Main' - just a premonition..

Back in...

Oh yeah, found this site which may be useful if you haven't been there before: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57412768/Iranian-Naval-Forces

b

(in reply to Lawdog1700)
Post #: 8
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/18/2014 12:49:12 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Thank you all for the comments to date. A few comments in return:

- I didn't name Iranian ships. I could not find consistent sources that corroborated each other; the numerous speed boats don't appear to be named, and since this is 2016 some are projected assets.
- The neutral tankers and cargo ships are all real, you can Google their names to get pictures if you want.
- I made up names for neutral sailboats and fishing vessels just to add flavor.
- The BB "Do not move" is a belts & suspenders type trigger construct to insure conflict kicks off appropriately. There is a "Do not move" Iranian vessel close by -- a patrol boat.
- I don't run or test separate message windows ... maybe I should!
- The scenario is large, and high levels of compression can be an issue. I found compression worked fairly well early on, and again late in the scenario. My experience was that you wanted 1:1 anyway during the more, hmmmm, exciting parts.

Gunner, the link is excellent if not a tad dated. I pretty much reinforces much of what I found on several other sites. Thanks.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 9
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/18/2014 1:22:53 AM   
Jorm


Posts: 545
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Melbourne
Status: offline
Playing now

looks good,

could possibly use single unit bases for some of the player AB's to speed game up ?

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 10
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/18/2014 2:57:21 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorm

Playing now

looks good,

could possibly use single unit bases for some of the player AB's to speed game up ?



Jorm,

You are quite correct. When I started, I had some other plans that required detailed airfields, and I vacillated back and forth on that content.

When the scenario got to v1.9, the other plans didn't make the cut but the airfields remain.

I am guessing I could reduce AU by 150+ with that change, but it would be a real PITA to do at this point.

Regards,
Feltan

< Message edited by Feltan -- 7/18/2014 3:58:15 AM >

(in reply to Jorm)
Post #: 11
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/18/2014 12:27:32 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Well done. You gave me an option and I took it - to my demise . Going back to an earlier save and will be a touch more prepared this time - those mine hunters are sooooo slooooow and that 50 Cal MG just doesn't cut it against a Silkworm...

Went fishing with my PC's - quite fun: PC's 12 - Boghammer's 1

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 12
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/20/2014 5:42:10 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Ok
Have tried to run the straights twice now - disaster both times. On the plus side, the Cyclone's and the LCS's were all pretty much 'ammo expended' before they went down (well one LCS remaining with nothing but flairs!)! The USS Benfold is down to about 50% on 5" Ammo, all missiles expended except for 4 RUM 139 ASW shots and she's already sunk two subs! She is running at flank speed into another herd of Patrol boats, about a dozen, and there are 8 more missile boats waiting to flank her, but I have some Hornets with Poons on the way to sort them out. One T-AK sunk and another dead in the water, no close escorts.

I'm going to restart - this is a tough scenario - fantastic! All seems to be working fine, nice job.

B

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 13
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/21/2014 11:54:57 PM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Ok
Have tried to run the straights twice now - disaster both times. On the plus side, the Cyclone's and the LCS's were all pretty much 'ammo expended' before they went down (well one LCS remaining with nothing but flairs!)! The USS Benfold is down to about 50% on 5" Ammo, all missiles expended except for 4 RUM 139 ASW shots and she's already sunk two subs! She is running at flank speed into another herd of Patrol boats, about a dozen, and there are 8 more missile boats waiting to flank her, but I have some Hornets with Poons on the way to sort them out. One T-AK sunk and another dead in the water, no close escorts.

I'm going to restart - this is a tough scenario - fantastic! All seems to be working fine, nice job.

B


I am glad you are enjoying it.

Hints:
- F/A 18's configured for AAW can shoot down guided missiles.
- After they shoot down missiles, if you don't let them Winchester, that 20mm cannon can ruin a patrol boat's day.
- Just keep a good rotating AAW cover over the convoy and you'll avoid several problems.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 14
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/22/2014 8:41:01 PM   
Flankerk

 

Posts: 417
Joined: 6/21/2006
Status: offline

I'm struggling to be frank.
The area, messages and ROE are very atmospheric, but its the ROE I am having troubles with.
Its some of the best orders I've seen, and highly detailed.
Without trying to give too much away, at the point that things kick off, I have multiple ships at close range, and these fire first. Scratch ten of my combatants and I mean ten before I have fired. Score now a disaster before I have opened fire. I think about firing back, but the ROE state I can't hit Southern Iran, ports, or airbases? I am not clear what you are allowed to hit at this stage. I have the resources, but not clear what I can go for.
The last remaining convoy has a few, and I mean a few SAM's left but that's it. There is no real way I can run through the straits unless I launch a massive attack, which I am banned from doing.

I'm guessing I could of opened fire earlier, but that doesn't seem to be the way its ordered.

I suspect the only issue actually is those orders. The only other slight issue is that the one target, I think centre for Islamic studies is a coastal fort, which was a bit of a shock!

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 15
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/22/2014 10:45:46 PM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flankerk


I'm struggling to be frank.
The area, messages and ROE are very atmospheric, but its the ROE I am having troubles with.
Its some of the best orders I've seen, and highly detailed.
Without trying to give too much away, at the point that things kick off, I have multiple ships at close range, and these fire first. Scratch ten of my combatants and I mean ten before I have fired. Score now a disaster before I have opened fire. I think about firing back, but the ROE state I can't hit Southern Iran, ports, or airbases? I am not clear what you are allowed to hit at this stage. I have the resources, but not clear what I can go for.
The last remaining convoy has a few, and I mean a few SAM's left but that's it. There is no real way I can run through the straits unless I launch a massive attack, which I am banned from doing.

I'm guessing I could of opened fire earlier, but that doesn't seem to be the way its ordered.

I suspect the only issue actually is those orders. The only other slight issue is that the one target, I think centre for Islamic studies is a coastal fort, which was a bit of a shock!


Flankerk,

Thanks for the feedback. Some suggestions below.

ROE. Follow orders. The Iranians do provocative things in real life, but we avoid conflict. The base assumption going in is that if the US commander keeps his cool, conflict can be avoided. However, that would make a boring scenario. In this scenario, you will start off at a small disadvantage. It is built in.

The initial gunfire exchange should not go so badly for you. If you keep the three task forces in mutually supporting range, gunfire alone will wipe out the Boghammers in under one or two minutes. I can usually get by with 2-3 losses in the initial exchange. When things kick-off, the moment the message pops, I pause the game and manually assign gunfire to hit all the Boghammers multiple times from multiple sources. You don't want a fair fight. Lead with the MSMs or PCs, but have the DDG and LCSs within gunfire range.

You can't hit ports and airfields. Everything else is fair game -- and anything impeding your transit of the Straits is more than fair game. You have multitudes of legitimate targets to include radars, SSM mobile launchers, SSM fixed sites, SAMs and AAA. As in real life, this scenario puts limits on you (for a reason), and it is not a typical "carpet bomb everything" approach that will win. Besides, as you may have noticed, Iranian aircraft are not your biggest (or second or third biggest) threat. Think differently. Use the first few hours to build a robust intelligence picture of the battle space.

Don't worry too much about VP's early on. You will get a lot of VP's for getting convoy ships to GOALPOST area. If you lose a lot of merchants, you might be in trouble.

Some of the Iranian facilities may have misleading names. Chalk it up to asymmetrical warfare and deception planning on the part of your opponent. :-)

Keep at it, you will succeed!

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to Flankerk)
Post #: 16
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 12:59:37 AM   
VFA41_Lion


Posts: 228
Joined: 1/30/2014
Status: offline
Looks exciting. Trying it out now!

edit: just one spelling error that is kind of amusing; do you mean ensure, or insure? Ensure means to make certain of something, insure means to literally provide insurance...

< Message edited by VFA41_Lion -- 7/23/2014 2:02:26 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 17
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 2:10:02 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: VFA41_Lion

Looks exciting. Trying it out now!

edit: just one spelling error that is kind of amusing; do you mean ensure, or insure? Ensure means to make certain of something, insure means to literally provide insurance...


Guilty as charged, Sir.

It is an occupational hazard of being a technical nerd; like, I are an inguneer.

Regards,
Feltan


(in reply to VFA41_Lion)
Post #: 18
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 2:27:03 AM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
The ROE is a royal pain. The Iranians have declared that they'll attack American vessels but I'm told not to respond to provocation. Then a flotilla of Boghammers flies in at a group of PCs I have screening my main group and orbit one of them at a few hundred meters. Nope, not fun at all.

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 19
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 2:40:28 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
I tend to agree with all - the ROE are a royal PITA and quite restrictive - but as Feltan states - they aren't unrealistic. I'm giving it another go with a helluva lot more respect . I'll have tankers handy to keep my Hornets in the air, P-3s nearby to help out in the harpooning department. Also last time I took the Hellfire's two of the SH-60s and set them to ASW - which was good as I found a couple subs - but those Hellfire's are far to handy and I'll use the P-3s to flush the subs. With the Hornets handy I'm not too worried about the F-4's and Mirage's - so far that's all I've seen.

There are plenty of viable targets, you need to get low and slow with your UAVs to get good target definition on them though. I'm going to try to have some Super Hornets with JSTOW's on board at war-start to sort out the SSM Btys - not convinced it will work considering all the bloody AD around the place - but I'll have my B-2's drop a JDAM on up to 160 of the little buggers - if I find that many

This is not a scenario for the faint of heart, and should carry a health warning

B

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 20
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 2:44:18 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Can't seem to edit any more, must have changed a security setting or something - I should add that the problem with the B-2 and the JSTOW toting 18's is the timing of it all. The B-2 will not be ready at war-start and the ASuW F-18s will have to be juggled a bit to be in the air at the right time.

B

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 21
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 12:41:56 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

I tend to agree with all - the ROE are a royal PITA and quite restrictive - but as Feltan states - they aren't unrealistic....

This is not a scenario for the faint of heart, and should carry a health warning

B


It seems unrealistic to me that the ROE following a nuclear strike on Iran and the ensuing declaration of hostility by Iran on the US, in particular a group of USN vessels transiting the PG, would allow Iranian IRG boats to close within RPG/suicide bomb range of those ships without challenge.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 22
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 1:46:33 PM   
Flankerk

 

Posts: 417
Joined: 6/21/2006
Status: offline

I do think the wording of the ROE just on Southern Iran (can't recall how it is worded) and perhaps the message as the boats formate with you might need adjustment? Otherwise it makes sense I think.
I didn't plot to fire when the message first came up, if the boats fire first shot, yes you can retaliate, but you are already well behind I reckon.

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 23
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 2:32:51 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
I can understand the need for restraint, but in the context of the scenario I don't think the USN would allow IRG Boghammars to get in firing range unchallenged. An ROE amendment stating that Iranian military elements approaching within 1nm may be fired upon would make more sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flankerk


I do think the wording of the ROE just on Southern Iran (can't recall how it is worded) and perhaps the message as the boats formate with you might need adjustment? Otherwise it makes sense I think.
I didn't plot to fire when the message first came up, if the boats fire first shot, yes you can retaliate, but you are already well behind I reckon.


(in reply to Flankerk)
Post #: 24
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 3:02:33 PM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
Good Comments. Thanks to all.

I would like to offer an alternate explanation.

ROE are not (usually) developed based on logical military expedience -- if so, the military would not need "guidance" from their political overseers. What Primarchx is suggesting makes perfect military/operational sense; however, I created the scenario with the intent of political realities taking priority during the early stages.

In this specific scenario, the intent of the National Command Authority is to avoid conflict in the wake of the first nuclear attack in 70 years. I judged that this would be an overwhelming political imperative that would take precedence over conventional military prudence. I acknowledge that it is an arguable point. It is most definitely an arguable point from the commander in the field; however, judge this part of the ROE from the White House. How badly would you want to avoid being forced into a "shotgun" alliance with Israel in the wake of scripted events, especially during a domestic economic crisis and during the last few months of a Presidential Administration's time in office -- with a National Election within a few weeks? I believe if you take a broader view of the context in which this scenario takes place, the restriction are neither unreasonable nor unexpected.

Additionally, as a learning point for this scenario, you would not be the first US commander to cry foul over ROE that "ties your hand" and doesn't allow you to exercise the full extent of military capabilities. That feeling is an intentional part of this scenario. I am glad it is being discussed and causing some consternation. I would ask you to consider that historically commanders in the field do not always get the permissions they want, and that there are consequences when political authorities are too timid in the face of an obvious and manifest threat.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 25
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/23/2014 4:56:41 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
Good point, Feltan. Given the AI behavior of Command I detached the PC being swarmed from the group and sent it south at high speed.

ETA - my take on not letting fast Iranian speedboats get close is linked to probable standing orders to USN warships following the USS Cole incident. The US doesn't want to start a conflict but the political ramifications of ignoring prudent force protection in a circumstance where such attacks have happened in devastating fashion should be taken into account.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 7/23/2014 6:00:50 PM >

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 26
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/24/2014 3:08:36 AM   
Feltan


Posts: 1160
Joined: 12/5/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Primarchx

Good point, Feltan. Given the AI behavior of Command I detached the PC being swarmed from the group and sent it south at high speed.

ETA - my take on not letting fast Iranian speedboats get close is linked to probable standing orders to USN warships following the USS Cole incident. The US doesn't want to start a conflict but the political ramifications of ignoring prudent force protection in a circumstance where such attacks have happened in devastating fashion should be taken into account.


Primarchx,

You make a good and fair point. The USS Cole incident, I am sure, must be reflected in current ROE for that area.

I was unable to make the Boghammers a threat, but not too much of a threat. There is no option (of which I am aware) that would make them follow at a "safe" distance. When they "investigate" contacts outside of their patrol area, they really investigate!

Perhaps it is a limitation with CMANO scenario creation, or I am simply not being clever enough.

In either case, I take your point, and if possible I will look for a mechanism to increase stand-off distance of the Boghammers.

Regards,
Feltan

(in reply to Primarchx)
Post #: 27
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/24/2014 1:45:38 PM   
Galahad78

 

Posts: 386
Joined: 9/28/2009
Status: offline
I love scenarios with lots of events and a good story, definitely I'll give it a try this evening!

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 28
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/25/2014 12:25:49 PM   
Primarchx


Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline
I do have to say this scenario has grown on me. Still haven't finished it but am intrigued about where it's going!

ETA - damn it! I just started a war by having a Sea Hawk on ASW patrol drop a torp on an UNIDENTIFIED (though obviously Iranian) sub. This was a mission action, not my order.

ETA - Engage Unidentified Targets in the ASW mission was set to YES...

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 7/25/2014 2:53:45 PM >

(in reply to Galahad78)
Post #: 29
RE: Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! - 7/28/2014 12:39:27 AM   
ghynson

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 8/17/2013
Status: offline
Epic win with ZERO losses,..

Not sure why I got a minor victory with 165 points, even though there was no red left on the map afterwards.
I guess they didn't like me dropping those 20, 2000lbs JDAMS on that orphanage.


SIDE: Iran
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
24x 100mm KS-19 Auto [Sair]
7x 12.7mm/50 MG
18x 122mm/38 D-30 2A18 Towed Howitzer
11x 23mm Twin
182x 23mm ZU-23-2
2x 23mm/87 Twin
4x 35mm Twin Oerlikon [UAR-1021 Skyguard FCR]
1x 901 Tareq [PL-877EKM Kilo]
5x 942 Ghadir [IS-120]
1x A/C Hangar (1x Very Large Aircraft)
1x A/C Hangar (2x Large Aircraft)
1x A/C Tarmac Space (2x Large Aircraft)
1x Ammo Bunker (Surface)
1x Ammo Pad
1x Building (Airport Terminal)
1x Building (Bar Lock C [P-37])
4x Building (Barracks)
3x Building (Generic Coastal Surveilance Radar)
1x Building (Guard post)
1x Building (Medium)
1x Building (Small)
1x Building (Square Pair [5N62])
1x Bunker (Comm Center)
1x Bunker (Sector Control Station)
4x BZK-005 Sea Eagle UAV
4x C-801A Twin
3x C-802 Quad
16x C-802 Triple
3x C-803 Quad
3x Civilian Dhow [15m]
1x Civilian Motor Yacht [13m]
4x Commercial Fishing Boat [23m]
2x F 71 Alvand [Saam, Vosper Mk5]
2x F 76 Jamaran [Moudge Class]
2x F-14A Tomcat [F-14AM]
3x F-4D Phantom II
136x HN-5A MANPADS
6x HQ-2b Guideline Single Rail
13x IPS-16 Peykaap III [Zolfaghar, C-704]
12x M192 I-HAWK
1x Marker (City)
17x MIG-G-1800-TRB
18x MIG-S-2600-PB Zafar [Chaho Mod]
2x Mirage F.1EQ-6
5x P 224 Sina [Kaman Mod, La Combattante II]
7x P 313-1 Shahid Mehdavi [Thondor Type 021 Houdong]
3x Raad [HY-4 Mod]
5x Radar (AN/TPS-70)
4x Radar (China Type 352 Square Tie)
2x Rapier Mk1 Fire Unit
1x Runway (2600m)
3x Runway (4000m)
6x SA-12a Gladiator [9A83] TELAR
3x SA-12a Gladiator [9A84] LLV
14x SA-15d Gauntlet [9A331MK/9A332] TELAR
2x SA-5c Gammon Single Rail
4x SA-6a Gainful [2P25] TEL
2x SA-7a Grail [9K32 Strela-2] MANPADS
3x SA-7b Grail [SPW-60PB] MANPADS
4x SA-7b Grail [SPW-70] MANPADS
3x SH-3D Sea King [ASH-3D]
1x Structure (Pier [Extra Large, 200-500m])
1x Structure (Pier [Medium, 17.1-25m])
3x Su-24MK Fencer D
12x Toragh [Boghammar Mod]
1x US Peterson PBI [50-foot Class]
4x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-46 HPI)
2x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-48 CWAR)
2x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-50 PAR)
2x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-51 ROR)
4x Vehicle (China Type 352 Square Tie)
1x Vehicle (Chop Rest)
2x Vehicle (DN 181 Blindfire)
6x Vehicle (Generic Gun Director [Radar/LLTV])
1x Vehicle (Gin Sling)
1x Vehicle (Grill Pan [9S32-1])
1x Vehicle (Straight Flush [1S91])
12x Vehicle (Truck, Unarmed)
2x Vehicle (UAR-1021 Skyguard)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
558x 23mm ZU-23-2 Burst [20 rnds]
30x 35mm Twin Oerlikon Burst [20 rnds, UAR-1021 Skyguard]
7x 40mm/70 Single Bofors Burst [4 rnds]
59x 40mm/70 Twin Bofors DP Burst [8 rnds]
1x 76mm/62 Compact HE Burst [4 rnds]
6x AS-11 Kilter [Kh-58, ARM]
9x C-802 [YJ-82, CSS-N-8 Saccade]
2x Corvus Chaff [Distraction]
4x Generic Acoustic Decoy
5x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
8x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
72x HN-5A [SA-7b Copy]
56x MIM-23B I-HAWK
2x Rapier Mk1
4x RIM-66A SM-1MR Blk IV
36x SA-12a Gladiator [9M83]
83x SA-15b Gauntlet [9M331]
6x SA-5c Gammon [5V28M5]
20x SA-6a Gainful [9M336]
16x YT534-W1 [PT-97W]



SIDE: United States
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
4x 127mm/54 HECVT
6x 20mm/100 Mk15 Phalanx Blk 1B Burst [300 rnds]
23x 20mm/85 M61A1 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
38x 20mm/85 M61A2 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
35x 25mm GAU-12/U Burst [60 rnds]
2x 406mm/50 Triple HiCap Salvo [3 rnds]
10x 57mm/70 Mk295 Mod 0 3P CIGS Burst [4 rnds]
12x AGM-114K Hellfire II
41x AGM-154A JSOW [145 x BLU-97/B Dual Purpose]
48x AGM-154C JSOW [BROACH]
4x AGM-84D Harpoon IC
33x AGM-84G Harpoon ICR
7x AGM-84H SLAMER
24x AGM-84K SLAMER-ATA
18x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM P3I.3
2x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4
30x AN/SSQ-53F DIFAR
16x AN/SSQ-62E DICASS
88x GBU-32(V)2/B JDAM [Mk83]
57x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Dual Spectral]
5x Mk46 NEARTIP Mod 5A(SW)
1x Mk50 Barracuda Mod 0 ALWT
5x Mk54 LHT Mod 0
84x RGM-109C Tomahawk Blk III TLAM
164x RGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
26x RGM-84G Harpoon ICR
3x RIM-162A ESSM
60x RIM-174A ERAM SM-6MR Blk I
5x RUM-139C VLA [Mk54]
4x UGM-109C Tomahawk Blk III TLAM
3x UGM-109C Tomahawk Blk III TLAM
4x UGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
159x UGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM



SIDE: Neutrals
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------



SIDE: Pirates
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
9x Civilian Dhow [22m, Armed]
10x Civilian RHIB [11m, Armed]
4x Commercial Fishing Boat [35m, Armed]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
20x 12.7mm/50 MG Burst [10 rnds]
15x 23mm Twin Burst [20 rnds]
240x 7.62mm MG Burst [20 rnds]
150x Generic RPG
5x SA-7b Grail [9M32M]





< Message edited by ghynson -- 7/28/2014 1:43:48 AM >

(in reply to Feltan)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> Goodnight Irene (2016) v1.9 -- testing now! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.625