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 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest Battle

 
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 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest Battle Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest Battle - 5/22/2016 3:32:42 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		OK
Here is an experiment in long scenarios – and unfortunately Scenario creep got the better of me. In a nutshell, you are in charge of convoy operations in the North and to a much lesser extent South Atlantic. You have significant forces at your disposal but also some rather unique challenges. A few points:
• I was not intending to build this scenario, simply use the story as background for the rest of the campaign. Now that I have, I think it works
• The scenario 38 days long and probably the closest to WITP-AE that I’ve seen. Its not for the faint of heart
• The game seems to run smoothly with it, AU count is about 2800, at one point the Pathfinder que had 27 paths being worked, and I was getting between 2-600ms on 30x time compression – not bad!
• There are two pre-amble Caribbean Fury scenarios that are only in outline form. When I saw Feltan’s Havana Daydreaming, I put them aside. Couldn’t compete. But I’ll have to build them now to complete the story.
• There are a lot of unique units and moving parts, some might say – ‘but that unit disbanded in 91 and this is 94!’ Remember that this is an alternate history and it started diverging from reality in 89 and to a greater extent in 91. Sit back and enjoy trying to merge F-18s, F-4s and A-4s into a coordinated attack :-0
• The scenario is not finished. Things that will be improved:
o Changeable weather
o Currently the game checks for random spawning every hour, have requested a change to the trigger that would extend that. So many of the spawns have only a 2-4% chance of actually triggering.
o Ammo fixed at the piers, it’s a bit hit & miss at the moment
o Argentina will be more of a problem
o Nigeria is going to be a PITA
o More direction and challenge with Cuba
o There will be a few more surprises for Gt’moe and the Panama Canal zone
o Daily sitreps
o The AO/AOR fleet passing through from time to time to lend a hand and need protection
o Damaged ships from the fight around Iceland and Norway coming through needing protection and docking space
o Spawning Soviet subs: there are almost 50 of them out there but I suspect that they will be attrited quite quickly so will need to re-spawn some of them.

I look forward to your comments and critiques. Enjoy.

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

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



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 11/27/2016 10:12:37 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 4:35:28 AM   
michaelm75au


Posts: 13500
Joined: 5/5/2001
From: Melbourne, Australia
Status: offline 		You had a note that the player needed to keep track of who was loaded or unloaded ...
For the un/loaded merchantmen, could you use LUA script to append 'Loaded' to the name when the loaded trigger fires, and remove the 'Loaded' when the unloaded trigger fires?

Attached is sample LUA

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by michaelm -- 5/22/2016 6:36:29 AM >

_____________________________

Michael

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 2
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 4:41:51 AM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 436
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline 		Just wondering - Why 12.6? Are the scenarios you are working on other than this going to fill the gap between 11.1 and 12.6? Or are you moving on to the next "Fury" series?

(in reply to michaelm75au)
Post #: 3
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 5:51:52 AM   
magi

 

Posts: 1529
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline 		interesting....

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 4
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 10:24:55 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

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


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

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

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

B

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 5
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 10:28:04 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelm

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

Attached is sample LUA



Thanks michaelm - I'll give that a try.

B

(in reply to michaelm75au)
Post #: 6
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 4:18:55 PM   
B52H

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 6/28/2015
Status: offline 		If you add more challenges with Cuba, I'd suggest adding some RF-4Cs based out of Birmingham for photo recon, a few F-16s out of MacDill, USNR aircraft based out of NAS Cecil Field, and some SAC B-52s out of Barksdale and NAS Dallas (if it hadn't closed in the alternative timeline) to deal with Nigeria and Cuba. Also, regarding Northern Fury in general, were any of the post-1989 BRAC legislatures ever passed due to the reemerging Soviet threat?

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 7
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 4:32:06 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 436
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98


quote:

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

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


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

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

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

B


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

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

< Message edited by Excroat3 -- 5/22/2016 4:49:50 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 8
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 4:44:27 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: B52H

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


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

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

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

I can PM you the detailed breakdown if you wish.

B

(in reply to B52H)
Post #: 9
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 4:48:25 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

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


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

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

Tx

B

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 10
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 5:42:49 PM   
mikmykWS

 

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline 		Just to chime in. Great work!

This is an example of exactly what we need.

Mike

_____________________________


(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 11
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 7:55:58 PM   
wild_Willie2


Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline 		Wow Gunner, you outdid yourself once more with this one. Although running this scenario through 30 days will be though, as I only get 150-300ms pings on 30x time compression.

Thanks for the excellent effort.

W.

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to mikmykWS)
Post #: 12
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 8:14:32 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

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


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

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

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 5/22/2016 8:19:11 PM >

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 13
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 8:51:54 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 436
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline 		I actually meant that I deleted one of my questions I had asked you in my post (the comment about the Argentinians going hostile immediately) Just when I deleted that, you quoted my post with everything still in it. My comment didn't mean that I was going to delete stuff in the scenario, just was going to delete stuff in my post. However, at 1x compression I get 150ms, so I'm going to have to delete the biologics as you said in order to play the scenario.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 14
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/22/2016 11:15:47 PM   
magi

 

Posts: 1529
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline 		Two immediate impressions… I'm not sure where to start.... and I definitely need a way bigger monitor.. Like a drive-in movie theater screen would be really nice......

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 15
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 5:41:29 PM   
ojms


Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline 		Really excited by this but it looks like a lot of work just to get setup.

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

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4086909&mpage=1&key=�

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

Keep up the good work!

(in reply to magi)
Post #: 16
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 5:57:42 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
ojms

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

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

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

(in reply to ojms)
Post #: 17
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 8:31:31 PM   
ojms


Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline 		Spain had this ship (only one of) during that period:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marqu%C3%A9s_de_la_Ensenada_(A-11)

although it's not in the DB!

France had five of these:

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

during that period, they are in the DB.

The Italians had two of these:

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

they are in the DB.

The Royal Navy had a lot during this period:

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

Most of these appear to be in the DB.

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

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 18
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 8:34:40 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		Was just forming a reply. There is some room to add a couple:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The locations at War Start were:

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

Refit & Drydock: 1x Wichita, 1x Kaiser

(in reply to ojms)
Post #: 19
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 8:46:46 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		I like that Italian ship for the scenario. She only carries enough fuel for 3 of the thirstier escorts, so will be popping back to port regularly.

Thanks

B

(in reply to ojms)
Post #: 20
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 9:45:34 PM   
ojms


Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline 		Wow.... incredible detail, love it. Keep up the good work.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 21
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 10:28:53 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		Well, considering I'm a long way from doing Pacific Fury, I'll move the one Kaiser around the horn to join in this scenario instead of sending it to Oz.

So here are the tankers that will be available in the next release:

• The Italian Stromboli coming out of the Med;
• The RN Grey Rover down in the Falklands;
• The HNLMS Zuiderkruis coming out of the English Channel;
• The Canadian Protecteur out of Halifax
• T-AO 198 Big Horn coming around the horn

Thanks for your help. I like the little Italian fella.

Not sure what to do about the Spanish but that Dutch ship is pretty capable. Perhaps I'll put the A 14 Patino into service for Spain 18 months early, its a nice ship and will give the player a problem of which to protect the AOR or the Carrier??


(in reply to ojms)
Post #: 22
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 11:13:21 PM   
magi

 

Posts: 1529
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline 		I noticed the AO/AOR absence also...... It has been taking me hours to digest/organize and have a management plan with this scenario... and it seems like I Am just starting… I haven't even push the go button yet… I know I am a slow player.... However.. if you decided to make asset/platform/material changes to blue side... I would wish to appeal to you to list them so I might add them via the editor.... I dread having to start over.... Though at some point it will be necessary I'm certain.... but I'm hoping not for the above type of refinements.....

I am assuming that all the parked commercial vessels with portal to portal tags.. are loaded and waiting for convoy to their destinations.... Is this correct..?
Also it does seem to me that bases that are under potential threat would have some air defense system in place…
Again I would eventually like mission list/synopsis at the end of the briefing.....

The scope of this thing is stunning.... Certainly a great deal of work on your part…… Very impressive indeed.....

< Message edited by magi -- 5/23/2016 11:17:42 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 23
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 11:18:54 PM   
magi

 

Posts: 1529
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Well, considering I'm a long way from doing Pacific Fury, I'll move the one Kaiser around the horn to join in this scenario instead of sending it to Oz.

So here are the tankers that will be available in the next release:

• The Italian Stromboli coming out of the Med;
• The RN Grey Rover down in the Falklands;
• The HNLMS Zuiderkruis coming out of the English Channel;
• The Canadian Protecteur out of Halifax
• T-AO 198 Big Horn coming around the horn

Thanks for your help. I like the little Italian fella.

Not sure what to do about the Spanish but that Dutch ship is pretty capable. Perhaps I'll put the A 14 Patino into service for Spain 18 months early, its a nice ship and will give the player a problem of which to protect the AOR or the Carrier??



Just saw this..... Thank you....

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 24
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/23/2016 11:20:04 PM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline 		I am totally in awe of your researching skills Gunner. PM sent.

(in reply to magi)
Post #: 25
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/24/2016 12:43:15 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

I dread having to start over....


Understood. I'll try and itemize the changes. Actually, for the AO/AOR's once I get the ammo loads sorted out I'll upload them in an import file. Will do the same for the magazines once sorted out. The script changes michaelm suggested and some of the other changes will likely require a restart however, such as ramping up the aggressiveness of a couple of the neutrals. That will be a while to finish anyway and will highlight when that is done.

B

(in reply to magi)
Post #: 26
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/24/2016 1:41:16 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Well, considering I'm a long way from doing Pacific Fury, I'll move the one Kaiser around the horn to join in this scenario instead of sending it to Oz.

So here are the tankers that will be available in the next release:

• The Italian Stromboli coming out of the Med;
• The RN Grey Rover down in the Falklands;
• The HNLMS Zuiderkruis coming out of the English Channel;
• The Canadian Protecteur out of Halifax
• T-AO 198 Big Horn coming around the horn

Thanks for your help. I like the little Italian fella.

Not sure what to do about the Spanish but that Dutch ship is pretty capable. Perhaps I'll put the A 14 Patino into service for Spain 18 months early, its a nice ship and will give the player a problem of which to protect the AOR or the Carrier??




OK here is an import file with the tankers listed above. The Patino is there and is with the Spanish CV, total 6. Some notes:

-The Grey Rover and the Big Horn are Fuel, Dry goods & refrigerated product only - no ammo
-The other 3 small ones have generally national stock ammo (but there is some standard stuff as well) enough for 2 FF reloads from empty stocks, these are small AORs
-The Patino is the exception, its got a complete reload for the Spanish CV.
-The Zuiderkruis is capable of using ASW helos but the Dutch did not assign any, the ship had a utility model of the Lynx (14A)I put a B model on board which is available in the DB but takes an older torpedo so is not very useful as ASW

You should just go into the editor and import them, they are in the right locations.

Enjoy.

Edit: No missile reloads, I don't thing any of them had the capacity to reload missiles at sea.

B

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 5/24/2016 1:44:23 AM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 27
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/24/2016 11:24:50 AM   
ojms


Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline 		One minor issue is that USS Sea Devil is in the scenario twice, once already deployed off the east coast and second as an event driven reinforcement.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 28
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/24/2016 11:30:49 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline 		Bugger. The 2nd one should be SSN 676 Billfish.

Sorry about that & thanks for catching it.

B

(in reply to ojms)
Post #: 29
RE: New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest... - 5/24/2016 11:51:33 AM   
ojms


Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline 		FFG 10 Duncan (just north of Cape Verde) doesn't have any torpedoes for the helicopters, is this intentional?

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New 'Long Scenario' for testing NF 12.6 The Longest Battle Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

1.844