Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

New scenario: Bosphorus Blues

 
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 >> New scenario: Bosphorus Blues Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/18/2016 8:29:32 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline
Another TWTNW scenario, this time in the Black Sea/Turkey area.

The Soviets are tasked with opening the Bosphorus so they can resupply/recover their naval forces in the Aegean and Mediterranean.

This is a complex scenario with air, surface, and subsurface forces. There are airborne and marine landings. You need to use your qualitatively superior forces to overcome a quantitatively superior force. (That's a bit of a flip when playing as Warsaw Pact against NATO!)

I haven't finished my own playthrough yet, as this is a long scenario, but I have tested all the complex scripts. I am hoping there are no bugs with the events.

I am interested especially in feedback on the difficulty of the scenario. I think it is a bit difficult.

Yokes

Edit 1: turns out Blinders and Badgers are terrible SEAD aircraft. I added a bunch of Fitters to do the SEAD work.
Edit 2: removed the HAWK batteries and added Nike-Hercules SAMs. I added back some Blinders.
Edit 3: reduced the number of Soviet fighters and fixed some of the triggers and missions.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Yokes -- 2/5/2016 11:08:23 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/18/2016 11:31:07 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Oh Man!  Yokes your casing me stress! Only one night of gaming this week and in a quandary!  Test my own? Finish Rubicon or play this one?  Errrghhhh! Decisions decisions... where's the scotch!

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 2
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/22/2016 2:32:55 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline
Any feedback?

I have been having a terrible time trying to do SEAD as the Russians. Any tips?

Yokes

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 3
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/22/2016 2:50:48 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Will have a look this weekend. Took a quick run the other day and had some thought that some of the older bombers (Su-17s I think in the scenario) coming in low and fast in numbers could do it. A bit pyric but maybe that's the way. In the East I had some luck with the Su-24 using AS-12's I think, cannot recall, but that was against the known radars.

I did not have a chance to give the scenario a good go but will do this weekend I hope.

B

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 4
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/24/2016 2:00:27 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK Giving this a go.

Main plan for SEAD so far is:

1)Air superiority, assigned about 72 Ftrs, mix of MiG-29 & Su-27 on three large AAW patrols covering the north 1/2 of Turkey. Added some Mig-31's in for sport
2)Poke out the radars, all radars in the east and most in the north 1/2 of Turkey have an Su-24 with an AS-13 escorted by a couple Ftrs coming their way
3)EW, have a mix of AEW, ELINT & Jammers up over the Black sea
4)As I find Mobile radars they will be getting a package of an Su-24 with a TV/EO load and a couple of escorts

Have not found any SAMs yet. When I do, very tempting to try some AS-4 Kitchens but suspect they will be swatted away. Need to think that one through based on what I find.

Very interesting so far. 20 min in and:

SIDE: Warsaw Pact
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x MiG-29 Fulcrum C

SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x F-104S Starfighter
8x F-16CG Blk 40 Falcon [Peace Onyx I]
2x F-4E Phantom II
1x Radar (HR-3000 RSRP)
1x Radar (S-269)


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 5
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/24/2016 2:55:51 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK 45min in and what a difference 25 min makes. Its been very busy and quiet interesting. Within a minute 4 Mig-31 & 4 Su-27 strayed across 2 HAWK sites: they lost!

Initial thoughts:
-Some Bison Tankers would be nice to keep the Flankers & Foxbats in the fight - mind you they have been going Winchester before even thinking about bingo fuel so far
-Some AS-12 ARMs for the Su-24s. Currently they have a lot of dumb bombs loaded out. For the break-in battle I think they would be using more AS-12 & AS-13
-Thought there was an ARM version of the AS-4 as well, but the Bears in the scenario can't use it.


SIDE: Warsaw Pact
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
4x MiG-29 Fulcrum C
4x MiG-31 Foxhound
1x Su-24M Fencer D
8x Su-27S Flanker B

SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
11x F-104S Starfighter
29x F-16CG Blk 40 Falcon [Peace Onyx I]
8x F-4E Phantom II
1x Radar (AN/FPS-88)
1x Radar (AN/TPS-77)
1x Radar (Coastal ACSR)
2x Radar (HR-3000 RSRP)
2x Radar (S-269)

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 6
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/25/2016 3:27:18 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Initial thoughts:
-Some Bison Tankers would be nice to keep the Flankers & Foxbats in the fight - mind you they have been going Winchester before even thinking about bingo fuel so far


Good idea.

quote:


-Some AS-12 ARMs for the Su-24s. Currently they have a lot of dumb bombs loaded out. For the break-in battle I think they would be using more AS-12 & AS-13


Agreed. My latest version I dropped the SEAD Fitters and re-tasked half the Su-24s for SEAD using AS-12s. I like that better, but it's still a frustrating experience going after those HAWKs.

quote:


-Thought there was an ARM version of the AS-4 as well, but the Bears in the scenario can't use it.


My original setup had a bunch of TU-22 Blinders loaded with ARM AS-4s. The results were... disappointing. The radars on the HAWK have such a short range that the Blinders have to get REALLY close to detect them before firing. I like using the tactical strike aircraft better.

quote:


SIDE: Warsaw Pact
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
4x MiG-29 Fulcrum C
4x MiG-31 Foxhound
1x Su-24M Fencer D
8x Su-27S Flanker B

SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
11x F-104S Starfighter
29x F-16CG Blk 40 Falcon [Peace Onyx I]
8x F-4E Phantom II
1x Radar (AN/FPS-88)
1x Radar (AN/TPS-77)
1x Radar (Coastal ACSR)
2x Radar (HR-3000 RSRP)
2x Radar (S-269)



No HAWKs yet?

One last point on the HAWKs: does anyone know when Turkey started employing HAWKs? The database shows them being post-2000 or something like that. What SAMs would Turkey be employing in 1989?

Yokes

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 7
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/25/2016 9:54:18 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2318
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Are the aircraft allocated for transfer to Izmit supposed to be available for use prior to the transfer, or had you intended them to stay grounded until then?

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 8
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/26/2016 12:00:44 AM   
Coiler12

 

Posts: 1203
Joined: 10/13/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yokes
One last point on the HAWKs: does anyone know when Turkey started employing HAWKs? The database shows them being post-2000 or something like that. What SAMs would Turkey be employing in 1989?

Yokes


A link from 2000 showing they got the HAWKs then

As for heavy SAMs, Nike Hercules.

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 9
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/26/2016 3:27:51 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2318
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Well, I'm partway into the version with the SEAD Fitters. So far the air war is going well, since (with the exception of the small number of F-4s) I completely outrange the Turks. Still, there's swarms of them, and they just don't stop coming! My Mig-31s have made a couple of high-Mach dashes into central Turkey to down a pair of AWACs, and they're about to get another one soon.

My ground attackers have been concentrating on knocking out surveillance radars, which the Su-24s with iron bombs are actually very good at, sneaking down mountain valleys to try and stay out of sight until its too late. A concentrated Bear strike took out both runways on the central airfield, but unfortunately I mistimed my ARM run, so I wasn't able to engage the Hawks there while the ASMs were coming in. Firing a few missiles in afterwards was useless. But, since the runways are down for now, I can probably let those 2 HAWKs alone for a while. The performance of the AS-12s was not reassuring. Short ranged, with no BOL capability, I can't lob them pre-emptively over hills, I have to go into SAM range to use them, and their OODA loop is too slow to respond effectively to targets of opportunity! Not a fun job for the pilots.

I sent a pair of my drones towards my airborne objectives, and lost one to F-16s and another to a HAWK near the coast. I found two more HAWKs along the coast beside it, so I'm going to deal with those before the air-drop arrives. That's going to be costly. I've got 8 Fitters coming in on the deck at the moment, and I'm going to try and prompt one of the HAWKs to light up by tempting them with a tasty Mig-31. If they bite I'll salvo all the AS-12s, and we'll see if that works. If not, it's going to be a very expensive job to get rid of them... I'd also like to send the Su-24s in to deal with the airfields, but if they all turn out to have a pair of HAWKs I suspect the results will be poor.

We shall see!

(in reply to Coiler12)
Post #: 10
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/26/2016 8:13:49 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
According to the OOB on Baloogan's site: http://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/NATO_OOB_1989

In 89 Turkey had:

8 Air Defense Squadrons: 9 Nike-Hercules each

2 Air Defense Squadrons: 18 Rapiers each


According to another OOB I have for 88. They had

8 Air Defense Squadrons: 16 Nike-Hercules each

2 Air Defense Squadrons: 12 Rapiers each

The article that Coiler12 posts and the DB would indicate that the Hawk would be available ~2000. Probably refurbished USAF.

What I can't seem to find are USAF SAM deployments, fairly likely I think that Incerlic would have USAF I-HAWK if not Patriot by 89, cannot find a ref for that though.

B


(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 11
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/26/2016 2:44:49 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewJ

Are the aircraft allocated for transfer to Izmit supposed to be available for use prior to the transfer, or had you intended them to stay grounded until then?


They are "supposed" to be reserved for the transfer, but you are the on-site commander, so feel free to interpret your orders as you see fit.

There may be consequences to not following your orders, however...

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 12
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/26/2016 2:47:58 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

According to the OOB on Baloogan's site: http://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/NATO_OOB_1989

<snip>

The article that Coiler12 posts and the DB would indicate that the Hawk would be available ~2000. Probably refurbished USAF.

What I can't seem to find are USAF SAM deployments, fairly likely I think that Incerlic would have USAF I-HAWK if not Patriot by 89, cannot find a ref for that though.

B




Excellent stuff!

I will re-do the SAMs tonight. I will replace the HAWKs with Nike-Herkules, with some US Air Force equipment at Incerlink.

Thanks everyone for the comments!

Yokes

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 13
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/26/2016 11:53:40 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline
New version uploaded in the original post.

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 14
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 1/30/2016 3:51:49 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2318
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Still playing the SEAD Fitters version, and darn, those are nice little planes! At min altitude they can fly low enough to stay below HAWK radar (24m over water), until they're close enough to pop up and engage. This is essential, because their AS-12s' seeker heads seem to have trouble detecting the radar emissions until they're well within HAWK range. But if you time it right, so the HAWKs are actively shooting at something else (I was using Mig-31s to draw fire), then you can usually get a salvo of ARMs off before the SAMs get to you. Then its a matter of ducking down, turning tail, and running away, hoping you don't have to cross high ground that will bring you into radar view. A four plane strike (8 missiles) usually knocks down the radar, and then you can get the remainder of the SAM site with a follow up from a bomb-laden Su-24.

So far my pilots have managed to destroy five of the HAWK sites this way, clearing the area around the airborne landing zone, and then working west towards the straits. My recce planes (particularly the Fencers, but even the Blinders) have been working the landing zone, looking for any other defences in the area, but so far haven't found anything. Hopefully there's nothing under camouflage nets waiting to spring a surprise on me when the An-12s arrive. The recce planes have found infantry and artillery further west, so they're starting to work on those in concert with the Su-24s. Those iron bombs can be cheap and handy! They were even useful for sinking the pair of patrol craft. The FF and DD SAG hiding under the HAWK umbrella deserved more respect, so they received a shower of Kingbolts, which has gotten rid of about half of them so far, including the two Mekos. I may let the Nanuchkas deal with the rest of them.

The endless stream of F-16s, F-104s, and F-4s has finally ended (for the moment), but it wouldn't surprise me if there's another pack of them waiting in reserve, ready to spring up and tear into my paratroopers. I'll need to bring a strong CAP when the time comes. In the meantime, the momentarily clear skies have allowed my Su-24s to continue their policy of radar plinking, steadily pushing back the limits of the Turkish radar cover. Except they've still got that damned central radar snuggled between three HAWK sites, which is letting them see everything in central Turkey clear as day! It may just pick up the edges of my paratrooper stream, and I don't think I'll be able to shut that down before the paratroopers arrive, but I've got long-range AS-11 ARMs loading up, so I'll hopefully be able to get it in the afternoon.

My Fitters are all zipping back to base to reload now, and in half an hour the An-12s should be lifting off. This should be interesting!

< Message edited by AndrewJ -- 1/30/2016 4:55:49 AM >

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 15
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/1/2016 2:54:39 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2318
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Well, the Turkish air force never launched another plane, so it was just a matter of letting the paratroopers land, and then bombing things into oblivion as my own planes became available. By the time the Soviet troops had reached their objectives all the HAWK sites were down and all the runways were bombed out (with the exception of the SAMs and runways at Incirlik, which I did not attack), and all Turkish ground forces were gone.

Here's a few thoughts based on the Edit 1 version. (I realise this may not apply in Edit 2.) I hope you won't mind if I mumble on for a bit.

The Turks are so badly outclassed in the air that they really don't have a hope. There's a lot of them, but they just keep coming up two by two and getting eaten alive. They desperately need either a range advantage, or momentary local superiority.

Range: Switching the Phantoms over to an air to air role could help with the range problem, by bringing more Sparrows into the fight. The early Sparrows are still woefully outclassed by even the AA-10-As, but at least they're a step up from Sidewinders. Making the F-4s into fighters would mean switching the F-16s or F-104s over to the bombing role. The F-16s tote the same payload of iron bombs, so there would be no loss in iron bomb-load if they took on that role. However, they are much better dogfighters than the F-104s, which have terrible missiles, so it might be worth the loss of bomb-load to go with F-104s as bombers.

Local Superiority: The constant stream of fighters is alarming at first, but it's not enough to cause real problems for the Russians who can (and should) arrive with greater numbers in their area of interest. It might help to increase the minimum and maximum numbers allowed to fly each mission, so instead of coming up in twos to a maximum of four planes, they came up in something like fours or sixes, to a max of 8 or 12. I realise this will use up the ready fighters quickly, but as it was I had shot down the entire active air force before the paratroopers arrived, for minimal loss, so this couldn't make things much worse, and it might take a few Russians down along with them. Besides, the sooner they attack the more they can take advantage of their 30 minute Quick Turnaround, which is a powerful force multiplier. It might also help to reduce the patrol or intercept areas to specific defensible locations, and possibly to create a reserve of some fighters for very close-in defense of the airfields. A pack of four fighters erupting into my encroaching Su-24s could have been very messy indeed. However, the main thing would simply be to reduce the number of Russian fighters. They have such a technological advantage that I think you could easily take away a quarter and possibly a third of their fighter strength without making it too difficult. (Although bear in mind I'm a micro-manager, flying my planes individually, and if you trust to missions only then your AA exchange ratio may not be as good.)


Miscellaneous other thoughts:

The Turkish ground forces could really use some air defence. The Rapiers that are there in Edit 2 should definitely be helpful, but some AAA or Manpads around the artillery wouldn't be out of line, assuming the Turks actually have some.

When the paratroopers arrive it seemed like there was only feedback on one drop (Kandira), while the other two felt ornamental. A sitrep from each drop zone might add a lot of immersion. Similarly, a message when you arrive at Izmit, saying something like "You've arrived, now hold!" would let you know you're in the right spot. The message for capturing Izmit also says you've captured Kandira.

There are points for sinking the NATO warships, but not the subs.

For some reason the Incirlik attack never launched, despite the airfield being in perfect working order, and the aircraft were still on status "parked" at the end of the scenario. (Eskisehir and Merzifon never launched either, but that was because the runways were cratered. You could see they were trying to taxi out to take off, so those events worked.)

The final scoring gave a number, but no indication of whether the number was good or bad. You also only seem to get points for ships and artillery, rather than for taking and holding objectives, or destroying airfields or the enemy airforce, which was a bit puzzling.


Phew, what a lot of chatter! Thanks very much for writing the scenario for us, and I hope you don't mind discussing the bits and pieces that go into it.







(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 16
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/1/2016 5:54:27 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewJ

Here's a few thoughts based on the Edit 1 version. (I realise this may not apply in Edit 2.) I hope you won't mind if I mumble on for a bit.

The Turks are so badly outclassed in the air that they really don't have a hope. There's a lot of them, but they just keep coming up two by two and getting eaten alive. They desperately need either a range advantage, or momentary local superiority.

Range: Switching the Phantoms over to an air to air role could help with the range problem, by bringing more Sparrows into the fight. The early Sparrows are still woefully outclassed by even the AA-10-As, but at least they're a step up from Sidewinders. Making the F-4s into fighters would mean switching the F-16s or F-104s over to the bombing role. The F-16s tote the same payload of iron bombs, so there would be no loss in iron bomb-load if they took on that role. However, they are much better dogfighters than the F-104s, which have terrible missiles, so it might be worth the loss of bomb-load to go with F-104s as bombers.


Yeah, those Starfighters are just meat for the grinder. They would be better served as bombers. I'll look into this.

quote:



Local Superiority: The constant stream of fighters is alarming at first, but it's not enough to cause real problems for the Russians who can (and should) arrive with greater numbers in their area of interest. It might help to increase the minimum and maximum numbers allowed to fly each mission, so instead of coming up in twos to a maximum of four planes, they came up in something like fours or sixes, to a max of 8 or 12. I realise this will use up the ready fighters quickly, but as it was I had shot down the entire active air force before the paratroopers arrived, for minimal loss, so this couldn't make things much worse, and it might take a few Russians down along with them. Besides, the sooner they attack the more they can take advantage of their 30 minute Quick Turnaround, which is a powerful force multiplier. It might also help to reduce the patrol or intercept areas to specific defensible locations, and possibly to create a reserve of some fighters for very close-in defense of the airfields. A pack of four fighters erupting into my encroaching Su-24s could have been very messy indeed. However, the main thing would simply be to reduce the number of Russian fighters. They have such a technological advantage that I think you could easily take away a quarter and possibly a third of their fighter strength without making it too difficult. (Although bear in mind I'm a micro-manager, flying my planes individually, and if you trust to missions only then your AA exchange ratio may not be as good.)



My goal was to have enough Turkish fighters that the player still had to deal with them when the airborne arrived, hence the small numbers in each engagement. In my own testing I came to the same conclusion as you: the Soviets have enough firepower to win air superiority prior to the airborne arriving.

I will reduce the number of Soviet fighters, especially the Flankers. Maybe use the MiG-29s as the expedition fighters instead of the MiG-21s? They don't really have the legs for sustained CAP from the Crimea.

quote:



Miscellaneous other thoughts:

The Turkish ground forces could really use some air defence. The Rapiers that are there in Edit 2 should definitely be helpful, but some AAA or Manpads around the artillery wouldn't be out of line, assuming the Turks actually have some.



Fixed in V2. I now HATE Rapiers...

quote:



When the paratroopers arrive it seemed like there was only feedback on one drop (Kandira), while the other two felt ornamental. A sitrep from each drop zone might add a lot of immersion. Similarly, a message when you arrive at Izmit, saying something like "You've arrived, now hold!" would let you know you're in the right spot. The message for capturing Izmit also says you've captured Kandira.



Good input. I will try to expand the info better. I'm not the best creative writer...

quote:



There are points for sinking the NATO warships, but not the subs.



By design. More on this below.

quote:



For some reason the Incirlik attack never launched, despite the airfield being in perfect working order, and the aircraft were still on status "parked" at the end of the scenario. (Eskisehir and Merzifon never launched either, but that was because the runways were cratered. You could see they were trying to taxi out to take off, so those events worked.)



I had the same problem in my playthrough. I think I know the problem, but I don't have a really good solution. By the way, the Merzifon strike was screwed up anyways, so you didn't miss anything there.

quote:



The final scoring gave a number, but no indication of whether the number was good or bad. You also only seem to get points for ships and artillery, rather than for taking and holding objectives, or destroying airfields or the enemy airforce, which was a bit puzzling.



I am trying to move away from "kill things get points" scoring, and more towards objective-based scoring. In this scenario, the overall objective is to control the strait, so you get points for killing the ships and artillery, since they contest your control. The subs are trying to sink your invasion force, so killing them is optional so long as you protect the transports.

The thing that didn't work was my scoring for not destroying the Turkish infantry. Once the Marines are spawned, I have a script that moves the "front line" along with the Marines. I have it scripted that if any Turkish infantry are inside the "front line" then you are supposed to lose a point. However, that didn't work. I need to do some more testing to see if this is a problem with the trigger ('unit enters area') or if something else is broken. My guess is I can make it work by using a 'unit remains in area' trigger instead. (Now I just need to re-create about 30 triggers... )

Anyways, that's my reasoning behind only giving points for certain things.

quote:



Phew, what a lot of chatter! Thanks very much for writing the scenario for us, and I hope you don't mind discussing the bits and pieces that go into it.




Thank you for providing such great feedback! The quality of the end product is very much improved with many inputs.

Yokes

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 17
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/5/2016 9:33:15 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline
Version 3 uploaded to the original post.

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 18
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/7/2016 2:39:25 AM   
magi

 

Posts: 1529
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline
ok.... this sounds like fun....

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 19
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/12/2016 6:47:07 PM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
Well if I change RoE to Land targets - FREE, the whatever backup/replacement unit shadows my motorized infantry is, it becomes problematic. I figured it would be difficult to provide replacement units in any other way? Or perhaps they may be teleported in from somewhere? For now I have just changed the RoE back to TIGHT and resorted to manually marking targets hostile.

(in reply to magi)
Post #: 20
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/12/2016 7:20:51 PM   
Yokes

 

Posts: 298
Joined: 3/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlexGGGG

Well if I change RoE to Land targets - FREE, the whatever backup/replacement unit shadows my motorized infantry is, it becomes problematic.


You had that too? Dang, I was hoping that was just on my end. It must be some sort of bug.

quote:


I figured it would be difficult to provide replacement units in any other way? Or perhaps they may be teleported in from somewhere?


Teleporting wouldn't allow me to re-create a new one when the current one is killed. I would have to have a whole pool of units hiding in Antarctica or something and teleport them in one at a time. I don't like that. Call me picky (or worse) but I hate having those "hidden" units show up on the order of battle. Plus, we asked for all these fancy lua tools, so let's put them to use!

quote:


For now I have just changed the RoE back to TIGHT and resorted to manually marking targets hostile.


Sorry. I did the same. There are only about 40 infantry units...

Yokes

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 21
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/12/2016 8:28:28 PM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
If you can maybe have the hidden pool of units belong to some neutral/backup side and have lua change side for them and at the same time teleport? This way, hidden units will be on the order of battle for that backup side.

(in reply to Yokes)
Post #: 22
RE: New scenario: Bosphorus Blues - 2/13/2016 7:15:30 PM   
AlexGGGG

 

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline
This ended up rather epic, score 25

my notable losses were

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
10x J-22 Orao II [IAR-93B Vultur]
5x Mi-24D Hind D
9x MiG-29 Fulcrum C
18x MiG-31 Foxhound
14x Su-24M Fencer D

and enemy notable losses were

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
48x F-104S Starfighter
72x F-16CG Blk 40 Falcon [Peace Onyx I]
88x F-4E Phantom II
24x A-7D Corsair II

102x 155mm/52 T-155 Firtina Howitzer
168x 7.62mm MG/Unguided Infantry Anti Tank Weapon

15x Nike Hercules 3-Missile Lnchr Complex
16x Rapier Mk1 Fire Unit
16x Vehicle (DN 181 Blindfire)
20x 35mm Twin Oerlikon [UAR-1021 Skyguard FCR]
10x Vehicle (UAR-1021 Skyguard)

did I say EPIC? yes, very very nice.

< Message edited by AlexGGGG -- 2/13/2016 8:16:56 PM >

(in reply to AlexGGGG)
Post #: 23
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New scenario: Bosphorus Blues Page: [1]
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

2.141