Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers

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 >> Command: DLCs >> Command: Northern Inferno >> Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers - 10/28/2015 1:17:13 AM

strykerpsg

Posts: 277
Joined: 11/13/2010
Status: offline

Wow! I thought the first 3 were sorta tough, but this one is brutal! I thought sub'ing wouldn't be too tough in this engine, but it is indeed a challenge. I have tried this 4 separate times and have failed 4 separate times. I have tried zigging, changing depth, speed and all combinations of my micro knowledge of sub'ing.

So, more a statement of excellent design and has certainly schooled me.

Anyone made it past here and care to offer a noob submariner some pointers without giving it away for others?

Great jobs on this package team. I can honestly say the only scenario I won 1st time is the 1st scenario. After that, it was rinse, lather, repeat.

Post #: 1

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 10/28/2015 3:31:44 AM

strykerpsg

Posts: 277
Joined: 11/13/2010
Status: offline

Another question, I noticed there are no towed arrays on the Sturgeons, is that accurate? FAS references show the TB16 and TB23 mounted on the Sturgeons. This would dramatically help detection in the outer convergence zones, yes?

Edit:

Okay, perhaps the selected boats don't have them installed, but seeing them installed, never mind, database shows 1978 as earliest available.... this one is just really a tough flipping scenario to detect in time. Heck, just got killed again and traversed about 30 km at 5knots, with course changes.

< Message edited by strykerpsg -- 10/28/2015 5:04:51 AM >

(in reply to strykerpsg)

Post #: 2

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 10/28/2015 6:45:33 AM

Amnectrus

Posts: 80
Joined: 10/22/2015
Status: offline

I've played it twice, failed the first time and partially succeeded the second. The Sturgeons in 1975 don't have a towed array, but they do have an exceptionally long ranged hull sonar (40nm). I noticed there's one CZ ring showing, near the outer limits of the range, and I had thought that only towed arrays could see CZs (I'm too new to post links, but see the Mega-FAQ on the Warfare Sims site), so that confused me for a while.

I found that losing stealth on the subs pretty much means death. If they pick you up, they can launch the Soviet anti-sub rockets that drop a torpedo on you from about 30nm, and I believe they must also have helicopters and/or maritime patrol aircraft, as I'm pretty sure I've been tracked while being outside all visible enemy sonar ranges. If you stay carefully hidden though, the Sturgeons have a lot better equipment than the Soviet stuff.

I blundered into an ASW patrol on my first one and USS Whale died quickly. Decided to restart and seemed like I got luckier in the beginning and missed the patrol altogether. I put my two subs in line-abreast formation, just within mutual supporting sonar range, creeping from the southern datum to the northern, and used one sub to take out targets for the second with those nuclear SUBROCs (which are amazing, but don't drop them too close). I know there have been discussions here about the handling of sub communication in the game, and this felt kinda bad since my subs wouldn't have been able to communicate detailed targeting information to each other (AFAIK). But I killed one boomer and an attack sub by the southern datum using that method without drawing any return fire, so I went up toward the northern datum waypoint. Tunny found the other boomer, but got too close to the escorting subs and ships, and was localized and killed. Whale got picked up as well, and I thought I'd broken all contact, but then there was a string of torpedoes out of nowhere. Dodged two but the third bored right in and Tunny was gone. I'm attributing that one to maritime patrol aircraft.

Still, killing one boomer, even at the cost of both subs, gives you enough points to pass, so I'm on to try out the next mission.

Two questions I've had on my mind:

* As mentioned above, the Sturgeon-class available in 1975 does not have a towed array, but does show one CZ ring. The Mega-FAQ suggests that CZ rings are an indicator that the towed array is working, so which is correct, and/or how do we tell if a towed array is deployed or not?

* I've been able to track surface ships while they are clearly in my 'baffles', the wedge of dead-space behind the Sturgeon where the hull sonar can't hear. Is that because they are above me (on the surface), and so they're outside the 'baffles' as modeled in 3D?

(in reply to strykerpsg)

Post #: 3

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 11/1/2015 11:20:02 AM

Rory Noonan

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline

With the second question it could have been the active intercept set picking up active sonar emissions from the surface ships in your baffles.

(in reply to Amnectrus)

Post #: 4

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 11/1/2015 2:01:41 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

The CZ issue is that Tunny is in waters that have conditions to support CZ and Whale is. When you're in waters that don't support a CZ you'll see it in the mouse datablock as No CZ and the CZ rings will disappear.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Rory Noonan)

Post #: 5

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 12/2/2015 3:48:23 AM

Lawdog1700

Posts: 54
Joined: 6/6/2014
Status: offline

So I have played this scenario twice from start to finish. Both times I haven't seen any evidence of the Soviets. No subs, no surface ships, nothing. Any advice so I can get this one behind me?

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 6

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 12/2/2015 9:27:39 AM

AlGrant

Posts: 912
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lawdog1700
So I have played this scenario twice from start to finish. Both times I haven't seen any evidence of the Soviets. No subs, no surface ships, nothing. Any advice so I can get this one behind me?

The first time I tried this scenario I had the same problem and couldn't find any subs, although I did detect a couple of surface contacts early on in the game.

The second time I tried it was like playing a totally different scenario!
Although I only killed one of the SSBN's I got into some close quarters fights with other subs and surf units and actually ended up with a 'Triumph' score. I was tempted to look for the other SSBN but decided not to push me luck.

I spent most of the time around the layer, often sitting inside, with regular trips up to Periscope Depth to see if I could pick anything up. Made one really big mistake in automatically marking an 'Unknown' SSN as hostile, this could easily have been one of the 2 R.N SSN's in the area ..... anything other than SSN or any surf contact and I just assumed it was a threat/target.

(I posted the results in the AAR section or one with a few pics HERE)

(in reply to Lawdog1700)

Post #: 7

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 12/2/2015 3:58:51 PM

Lawdog1700

Posts: 54
Joined: 6/6/2014
Status: offline

Well, right after I posted I actually saw 2 surface ships cruise right above the USS Tunney. Both Soviet destroyers drove right by. I fired a torpedo at one of them, but I missed. I will just keep at it. Thanks for the link to the AAR.

(in reply to AlGrant)

Post #: 8

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 12/2/2015 5:09:08 PM

AlGrant

Posts: 912
Joined: 8/18/2015
Status: offline

quote:

I fired a torpedo at one of them

If they don't know you're there is might be better to let them pass.
Whilst killing them is good (and gets you points) they are not mission critical and hitting one will certainly alert any other ships, subs and aircraft that you are in the area. Better to stay undetected until you find the SSBN's .... killing one of those should get you all the attention you need

Always better to be the hunter than the hunted!

(in reply to Lawdog1700)

Post #: 9

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 12/2/2015 5:32:18 PM

Nightwatch

Posts: 127
Joined: 9/6/2015
Status: offline

I didnt have any problems with the Scenario. I thought it was one of the easier once actually.

The key to anything in submarine combat IMO: Dont do anything. Dont fight, dont run, dont hide. Just be invisible.
Hide within or just under the layer and move very slowly. If the layer is not deep enough go in as deep as possible.
Dont exceed 10 knots under any circumstances and dont go above the layer. Avoid the escorts, just sneak in.
Boomers were located between the two reference points in my playthrough.

(in reply to AlGrant)

Post #: 10

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 12/2/2015 5:53:52 PM

Lawdog1700

Posts: 54
Joined: 6/6/2014
Status: offline

Very sound advice from both AlGrant and Nightwatch. Of course, not being a submariner my patience sometimes wears thin. I knew it was a bad idea to shoot at that destroyer, but...I wanted to shoot something before the end of the scenario. Of course, I missed...

My problem is, performance wise, I'm rarely able to get the game to run at more than a 1:15 time compression. So each playthough takes several nights...and a lot of that is me just sitting there watching TV while my subs sail at 4 - 8 kts. to position and search.

Never had a problem with hiding with my subs. I'm an old SubSim guy from way back. But, I do want to attack! I'm probably too aggressive to get my dolphins.

(in reply to Nightwatch)

Post #: 11

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 5/8/2016 9:01:10 PM

Chicharito19

Posts: 271
Joined: 11/16/2013
Status: offline

I am ashamed to say how many times I have tried this mission. Actually in my first couple of walkthroughs I sank an SSBM but destroyed the Tunney by being too close to the SubRoc. Since that time I have played numerous times and can't fin it. AND I am always getting detected.

I have read the threads on the scenario and the ASW tips to no avail. No matter what I do I vet detected and sunk. I have tried various depths an creeping...nope....

Can't find the subs, but they did me. I have found SaNs and surface stuff....or I guess they find me actually. Any ideas?

Michael

(in reply to Lawdog1700)

Post #: 12

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/8/2016 4:05:13 PM

Rongor

Posts: 451
Joined: 3/25/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chicharito19

I am ashamed to say how many times I have tried this mission. Actually in my first couple of walkthroughs I sank an SSBM but destroyed the Tunney by being too close to the SubRoc. Since that time I have played numerous times and can't fin it. AND I am always getting detected.

I have read the threads on the scenario and the ASW tips to no avail. No matter what I do I vet detected and sunk. I have tried various depths an creeping...nope....

Can't find the subs, but they did me. I have found SaNs and surface stuff....or I guess they find me actually. Any ideas?

Michael

we are in the same boat.

1. It seems impossible to penetrate their line of sonobuoys and MAD-patrols
2. There are no SSBNs...

Feels like pure luck to get your sub through their barrier. So far my subs always got killed by sudden torpedo air drops, coming out of the nothing, with no preceding sensor emission hitting you.

(in reply to Chicharito19)

Post #: 13

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/8/2016 6:52:59 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

People have finished the DLC though so doesn't seem to be an impossible task. Could it be the game is just presenting a difficult challenge?

I remember spending days trying to get through a Zelda dungeon when I was a kid. Felt good when I accomplished it and my suspicion is that's a good part of the gratification in gaming. Not sure current theory is still with this one as people's attention spans are busy with many more things. My suggestion is to enjoy the challenge.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 14

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/8/2016 7:57:01 PM

Randomizer

Posts: 1473
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

The scenario can be a challenge but is quite winnable. Those suffering from Barents Sea Boomer Blues might consider:

- Learning about real-world Cold War submarine ops and apply these techniques to CMANO. The simulator is accurate enough so that what works in the real world should reliably work in the game. This also applies to sloppy and dangerous tactics presenting real problems for the player. These include exposing masts unnecessarily and shooting at patrolling ASW ships that are not part of your orders.

- Go slow and stay deep, if you're gunning for escorts and surface vessels (except in self defence) you're not following orders and you're placing your boats at risk.

- Be patient since you have three-full days. Operating above the layer maximizes your vulnerability without necessary increasing your probability of detecting a boomer. The latter are generally creatures of the deep and using CZ abilities of your sonar can be a big advantage.

- Your sonar is better than Soviet sonar at this time. Exploit this advantage by remaining slow and deep. Zero speed in a submarine is a cheat, few combat submarines are capable of hovering (some SSBN's can by using special thrusters) but most require water flow over the control surfaces. Am pretty sure that CMANO offers no detection advantages for those choosing zero knots for submerged speed.

- Change course frequently to check your baffles and ruin any passive plot that undetected enemies might have on you.

There's nothing wrong with the scenario.

-C

(in reply to mikmykWS)

Post #: 15

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/9/2016 12:58:51 PM

Rongor

Posts: 451
Joined: 3/25/2014
Status: offline

I think it is entirely unnecessary to suspect us of deeming that scenario "too hard". There is in fact nothing wrong with it, also I don't see any lack of spirit or of available attention span.
Some of us venting off some steam about having a hard time with this scenario means certainly nothing else but the scenario creator did succeed in creating a challenge worth creating forum threads about. In my opinion these kind of challenges bring CMANO to full quality, since they require some learning of real warfare procedures, which we then can try out in the simulation environment that CMANO delivers.

So instead of misinterpreting my "impossible" statements as an improper judgement based on my impatience, simply take it as a compliment, telling you that CMANO has achieved a grade of simulation quality that requires me to study how Modern Air/Naval Operations are conducted.

That is why I like threads where players get to interchange their knowledge and experiences, since that is a perfect way to learn about all this.

(in reply to Randomizer)

Post #: 16

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/9/2016 1:00:49 PM

Rongor

Posts: 451
Joined: 3/25/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

Zero speed in a submarine is a cheat, few combat submarines are capable of hovering (some SSBN's can by using special thrusters) but most require water flow over the control surfaces

Thank you, I didn't know this. Now that I think of it, it makes absolute sense. So I will keep them moving from now on.

(in reply to Randomizer)

Post #: 17

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/9/2016 3:12:27 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rongor

I think it is entirely unnecessary to suspect us of deeming that scenario "too hard". There is in fact nothing wrong with it, also I don't see any lack of spirit or of available attention span.
Some of us venting off some steam about having a hard time with this scenario means certainly nothing else but the scenario creator did succeed in creating a challenge worth creating forum threads about. In my opinion these kind of challenges bring CMANO to full quality, since they require some learning of real warfare procedures, which we then can try out in the simulation environment that CMANO delivers.

So instead of misinterpreting my "impossible" statements as an improper judgement based on my impatience, simply take it as a compliment, telling you that CMANO has achieved a grade of simulation quality that requires me to study how Modern Air/Naval Operations are conducted.

That is why I like threads where players get to interchange their knowledge and experiences, since that is a perfect way to learn about all this.

Being disingenuous might be a good idea in a forum back and forth but not so swift if you ever want anything from us. Don't reword anything a dev says to fit your angry narrative. This is a warning.

You're mad you got kicked out a Command chatroom for being a jerk and are just in here to give us a hard time because of it.

Many know this and playing around on our forum will likely have the same result. Keep it up though. I want others to see how little you matter and why.

Mike

< Message edited by mikmyk -- 8/9/2016 3:32:27 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 18

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/9/2016 6:19:34 PM

Rongor

Posts: 451
Joined: 3/25/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rongor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

Zero speed in a submarine is a cheat, few combat submarines are capable of hovering (some SSBN's can by using special thrusters) but most require water flow over the control surfaces

Thank you, I didn't know this. Now that I think of it, it makes absolute sense. So I will keep them moving from now on.

I thought that one through again. Wouldn't it technically be possible to remain floating in a specific pressure depth, by regulating a balanced buoyancy in the ballast tanks for the desired depth, even with cut propulsion?

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 19

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/9/2016 6:59:26 PM

Randomizer

Posts: 1473
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

To what end? Probably possible; German U-Boat skippers would show off the skill of their chief engineers (responsible for trimming the boat) by "hanging on the periscope" at zero speed in calm conditions but it had absolutely no combat function and left the boat extremely vulnerable to attack and loss of trim. So sure, absolute neutral bouyancy, absolutely no crew movement, perfect sea conditions, perfect trim and floating at zero speed might be possible. I can think of several reasons why doing so in the presence of hostile forces would be criminally irresponsible. But go for it, no penalties for doing so in CMANO.

Just having the ability to do something is almost never a good reason for actually doing it.

-C

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 20

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/9/2016 7:00:21 PM

Rongor

Posts: 451
Joined: 3/25/2014
Status: offline

Yeah, ok I see. Thanks again!

(in reply to Randomizer)

Post #: 21

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/10/2016 6:34:13 PM

KungPao

Posts: 333
Joined: 4/25/2016
From: Red China
Status: offline

Here is a funny story

Royal Navy stole the show

quote:

18:38:12 - Contact GOBLIN #9 has been lost.
18:38:12 -
FM COMSUBLANT

TO ALL UNITS

//SOVIET SUBMARINE ASSESSED AS CAT 4 SUNK//

BT

18:38:12 - 50% penetration achieved
18:38:12 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4458 has impacted K-279.
18:38:12 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4458 is attacking K-279 with a base PH of 55%. Final PH: 55%. Result: 45 - HIT
18:38:12 - Decoy (Generic Acoustic Decoy; Tech: Early 1970s) from K-279 is attempting to seduce sensor: Torpedo Seeker (Tech: Early 1970s)(Guiding weapon: Mk23 Grog #4458). Final probability: 15%. Result: 40 - FAILURE
18:38:02 - 45.5% penetration achieved
18:38:02 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4457 has impacted K-279.
18:38:02 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4457 is attacking K-279 with a base PH of 55%. Final PH: 55%. Result: 2 - HIT
18:38:02 - Decoy (Generic Acoustic Decoy; Tech: Early 1970s) from K-279 is attempting to seduce sensor: Torpedo Seeker (Tech: Early 1970s)(Guiding weapon: Mk23 Grog #4457). Final probability: 15%. Result: 98 - FAILURE
18:28:26 - Contact TORPEDO #12 has been lost.
18:28:26 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4456 has run out of energy... self-destructing
18:28:21 - Contact TORPEDO #11 has been lost.
18:28:21 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4455 has run out of energy... self-destructing
18:24:14 - New contact! Designated TORPEDO #12 - Detected by USS Whale [Sensors: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at 83deg - Estimated 16nm
18:18:44 - New contact! Designated TORPEDO #11 - Detected by USS Whale [Sensors: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at 82deg - Estimated 16nm
18:18:09 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4454 has run out of energy... self-destructing
18:18:04 - Contact Mk23 Grog #10 has been lost.
18:18:04 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4453 has run out of energy... self-destructing
18:14:29 - Contact: TORPEDO #10 has been classified as: Mk23 Grog - Determined as: Neutral (Classification by: USS Whale [Sensor: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at Estimated 20 nm)
18:13:59 - New contact! Designated TORPEDO #10 - Detected by USS Whale [Sensors: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at 90deg - Estimated 16nm
18:08:14 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4449 has run out of energy... self-destructing
18:08:09 - Weapon: Mk23 Grog #4448 has run out of energy... self-destructing
18:01:29 - New contact! Designated GOBLIN #9 - Detected by USS Whale [Sensors: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at 97deg - Estimated 16nm
16:53:14 - Contact: GOBLIN #8 has been type-classified as: SSN (Classification by: USS Whale [Sensor: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at Estimated 8 nm)
16:52:29 - New contact! Designated GOBLIN #8 - Detected by USS Whale [Sensors: AN/BQQ-5A(V)2 [BQS-12]] at 66deg - Estimated 16nm

HMS Warspite nailed the sucker

< Message edited by KungPao -- 8/10/2016 8:12:00 PM >

_____________________________

Sir? Do you want to order a Kung Pao Chicken or a Kung Fu Chicken?

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 22

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/10/2016 9:26:53 PM

.Sirius

Posts: 1404
Joined: 1/18/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rongor

I think it is entirely unnecessary to suspect us of deeming that scenario "too hard". There is in fact nothing wrong with it, also I don't see any lack of spirit or of available attention span.
Some of us venting off some steam about having a hard time with this scenario means certainly nothing else but the scenario creator did succeed in creating a challenge worth creating forum threads about. In my opinion these kind of challenges bring CMANO to full quality, since they require some learning of real warfare procedures, which we then can try out in the simulation environment that CMANO delivers.

So instead of misinterpreting my "impossible" statements as an improper judgement based on my impatience, simply take it as a compliment, telling you that CMANO has achieved a grade of simulation quality that requires me to study how Modern Air/Naval Operations are conducted.

That is why I like threads where players get to interchange their knowledge and experiences, since that is a perfect way to learn about all this.

Hi guys, the scenario is winnable considering I made it, it is a very hard scenario so be patient you will win in the end :)

_____________________________

Paul aka Sirius
Command Developer
Warfaresims
Cold War Data Base 1946-1979 Author

Old radar men never die - Their echoes fade away in accordance with the inverse fourth power law

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 23

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 8/12/2016 2:42:25 PM

Rongor

Posts: 451
Joined: 3/25/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: .Sirius

Hi guys, the scenario is winnable considering I made it, it is a very hard scenario so be patient you will win in the end :)

I certainly won't give up. Luckily I had a row of boring day shifts in the office, so I could run the scenario repeatedly, which took some hours each try. I am down to allowing a max speed of 5 knots for my subs. Yet those Il-38 manage to pick them up all the time even beyond 1000 ft depth. Also I often run into a bunch of red surface vessels. It is not easy to resist the urge to let them eat my Mk48s...

There seems no way to keep your subs hidden 100 %. That is a valuable lesson your scenario tought me.

< Message edited by Rongor -- 8/12/2016 2:43:54 PM >

(in reply to .Sirius)

Post #: 24

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 3/3/2017 4:01:28 PM

Lunex

Posts: 49
Joined: 8/5/2014
From: Bavaria, Germany
Status: offline

i needed 3 restarts, too.
seems a lot depends on the (random?) courses of the hunter-killer groups.

(in reply to Rongor)

Post #: 25

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 4/29/2017 9:46:47 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

The scenario briefing says the RN is unplayable but oddly enough I have control of the RN and not the USN.

How does one do a restart of a scenario?

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to Lunex)

Post #: 26

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 4/29/2017 10:25:19 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

Ok, Found the right save to load to restart and it loaded the USN. Off I go get sunk. ;)

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 27

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 7/17/2017 12:57:32 AM

ultradave

Posts: 1355
Joined: 8/20/2013
Status: offline

Sneaking along trying to find the boomers, and I get a message of a sonobuoy, and then the USSR attacks and kills (100% penetration) a large school of tuna. HA! Better that than one of my SSNs, eh?

_____________________________

----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 28

RE: Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers, missing sensors? - 7/21/2017 9:09:04 PM

ultradave

Posts: 1355
Joined: 8/20/2013
Status: offline

Finally got through this one. Sunk one boomer, no losses. Still hunting for another boomer for "fun". The Russians killed a whale and a school of Tuna, and they got the Swiftsure early on in the scenario.

_____________________________

----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"

(in reply to ultradave)

Post #: 29

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Command: DLCs >> Command: Northern Inferno >> Scenario 4 Barents Sea Boomers

Page: [1]