New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981

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 for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981

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 for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 - 8/23/2016 12:56:10 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

1981- Iceland

Nearly six months into the Third World War NATO and its members have taken serious losses on all fronts. Iceland and most of Northern Norway have fallen. The frontline situation in Europe has stabilized with little movement on either side.

With the high maintenance and losses of many of the frontline units NATO was forced to activate many older ships from the Naval Reserve Fleet and the US Navy had to bring the WW2 era USS Lexington back into active combat after pulling her from training duties in the Gulf. Her Task Group is made up of older ships from the Reserve Fleet or ships that had been used as various trials ships and even a museum ship....her composition is at best �unorthodox�.

Aviation assets have been scrounged from Reserve and Guard units and even so far as pulling aircraft from Davis-Monthan Air Base.

----

I'm sure it has issues.....let me know what you think. Built using CWDB and fudged the dates just a little..

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Overlord -- 8/23/2016 11:53:13 AM >

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

Post #: 1

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/23/2016 3:44:57 AM

Excroat3

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

I'm going to play this tomorrow, but you might want to change the title to Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 so people know the date the scenario is set in as well.

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 2

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/23/2016 11:53:04 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

I'm going to play this tomorrow, but you might want to change the title to Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 so people know the date the scenario is set in as well.

Done!

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 3

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/23/2016 3:41:11 PM

Coiler12

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

Fun scenario concept.

I'd separate the ships into two groups and name them (select, press R, rename). Hull, Cassin Young, and Newport News should be in the "Bombardment Group" and the rest in the "carrier screen group". You can pick the names, it just seems less clunky.

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 4

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/23/2016 4:25:37 PM

Randomizer

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

I echo Coiler12 and would also suggest changing the side names to something other than colours, which makes the situation that you have created sound like an exercise. Also lowering the proficiency of the older reserve units (particularly the Guppy and the cruisers) to reflect their age and the probability that the expertise in running them is likely spread thin coupled with short work-up times. Also Lexington has virtually 100% of her airgroup operational, something very improbable in this situation situation. Even if the planes came out of refurbishment in pristine condition (doubtful), spare parts would be scarce and the institutional memories of the maintainers significantly degraded. This is particularly true for the techs responsible for the big piston engines in the Skyraiders, Trackers and Tracers.

The devil is in the details but it's a good first scenario.

-C

(in reply to Coiler12)

Post #: 5

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/24/2016 10:19:20 PM

Excroat3

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

I am about done with this scenario I think, and I really liked it! Here are a few things that I noticed:

With about 2 days left in the scenario, 2 Soviet subs surfaced seemingly on top of each other (I detected them with radar). Not sure what caused it and not sure if you could reproduce it.
The Backfire (I'm assuming they were Backfires) raid got about halfway down Iceland and then they RTBed without launching missiles. Might be at their fuel limit.
During one of my strikes I saw a ton of ASF aircraft parked on the airfields (certainly more than had come up to challenge me) and I was wondering why they didn't take off. They might be just readying, but I suspect that they aren't assigned to a mission.
The supply ship that you assigned to the group can't supply any ship in the group, I get an error message when attempting to UNREP.
No scoring?

I didn't really use the strike aircraft from Greenland, but it was fun sending the ASF jets there on long air-refueled flights to try to thin out the hoard of Soviet fighters. I also took the 4 british phantoms and the 4 Avenger ASW aircraft and landed them on the Lexington. Not sure if I was supposed to do that, but they did help a ton when dealing with the huge enemy strike. I was caught short of CAP during that strike and definitely paid the price for it. Lost many ships and more aircraft, but 2 of my heavies survived so they are now inbound to the coast to pound the beach. I really liked the ASW element of the scenario, but you might want to give the ASW aircraft more than 1 or 2 loads. Many of my planes were defaulting to reserve loadout setting and I was running out of torpedoes. Air combat got desperate during the strike, the enemy planes tore through my CAP like butter and shot down any ASW aircraft in sight.

Overall, might just be me, but I don't like the refueling aspect of this game (just my luck that my planes always go to refuel at the absolute worst times, so I just turn off the feature altogether), but I didn't use the strike aircraft from Greenland, the enemy ships were not even a slight problem, and no subs got close enough to target me. Only real threat was the massive air attack. I still loved the scenario though! I will update this post with losses and expenditures and any surprises I encountered tonight.

EDIT: just jumped back into the scenario, and there was a long error message about how a bunch of red air strikes cant take off because there isnt enough aircraft for the flight size. To fix this, I recommend you go into the missions and deselect "Aircraft below flight size do not take off"

SIDE: Red
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
12x 100mm KS-19
42x 130mm/52 M-46 M1954 Towed Howitzer
4x 14.5mm/73 Twin ZPU-2
6x 203mm/44 2A44 2S7 Pion Mobile Howitzer
2x 23mm ZU-23-2
4x 37mm T65 Twin
4x 57mm S60
132x 7.62mm MG/Unguided Infantry Anti Tank Weapon
4x 85mm M1939
1x A/C Hangar (2x Large Aircraft)
2x AK Komar [Pr.183R]
2x Be-12PL Mail
10x Binoculars (Visual)
6x BM-21 Grad MLRS
1x Building (Control Tower)
4x FROG-3 [Conventional] TEL
12x La-9 Fritz
3x Mi-14PL Haze A
16x MiG-17PM/PFU Fresco E
4x MiG-19PM Farmer D
18x MiG-19S Farmer C
14x MiG-21SM Fishbed J
8x MiG-23M Flogger B
4x MiG-25P Foxbat A
9x MiG-27 Flogger D
1x MT Natya I [Pr.266M]
1x MT Yurka [Pr.266 Rubin]
8x Pe-2M Buck
1x PL-611 Zulu IV
1x PL-613V Whiskey V
2x PL-633RV Romeo
4x PL-641 Foxtrot
1x PL-641 Foxtrot
1x PL-641B Tango [Som]
1x PL-665 Whiskey Long Bin
2x PLA-627A November [Kit]
1x PLA-671 Victor I [Yorsh]
1x PLA-671 Victor I [Yorsh]
1x PLA-671RTM Victor III [Shchuka]
1x PLARK-661 Papa [Anchar]
1x PLARK-675 Echo II
1x Radar (Bar Lock A [P-37])
3x Radar (Cross Slot)
1x Radar (Tall King A [P-14])
3x RK Osa I [Pr.205]
6x SA-2f Guideline Mod 1/2 Single Rail
4x SA-3c Goa Quad Rail
1x SA-4a Ganef [2P24] TEL
2x SA-4b Ganef [2P24] TEL
4x SA-6a Gainful [2P25] TEL
6x SA-7a Grail [9K32 Strela-2] MANPADS
4x SSC-2B Mobile Launcher
2x SSC-3 Styx TELAR [3P51]
12x Su-15MF Flagon D
4x T-34/85 Main Battle Tank
8x T-55 Main Battle Tank
8x T-62 Main Battle Tank
2x Tu-123 UAV [DBR-1 Yastreb]
2x Tu-22M-2 Backfire B
2x Tu-95RT Bear D
1x Vehicle (Fan Song F [RSNA-75M])
6x Vehicle (Fire Can [SON-9])
1x Vehicle (Flat Face B [P-19])
1x Vehicle (HQ Unit)
1x Vehicle (Low Blow [SNR-125])
1x Vehicle (Pat Hand [1S32])
1x Vehicle (Sheet Bend)
1x Vehicle (Spoon Rest C [P-12])
1x Vehicle (Straight Flush [1S91])
7x Yak-28P Firebar
1x ZM Alesha [Pr.317]

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
346x 100mm KS-19 Frag
24x 14.5mm/73 Twin Burst [20 rnds]
30x 20mm B20 x 1 Burst [25 rnds]
1x 23mm Gsh-23L Burst [40 rnds]
12x 23mm NR-23 x 2 Burst [40 rnds]
100x 23mm ZU-23-2 Burst [20 rnds]
1x 30mm NR-30 x 2 Burst [20 rnds]
120x 37mm/63 Twin Burst [20 rnds]
204x 57mm S60 HE
32x 85mm M1939
17x AA-1a Alkali Mod 1 [PC-2V]
2x AA-2a Atoll [R-3S]
33x AA-3 Advanced Anab E [R-98MR, SARH]
13x AA-3 Advanced Anab F [R-98MT, IR]
6x AA-3 Anab C [R-98R, SARH]
2x AA-3 Anab D [R-98T, IR]
8x AA-7 Apex A [R-23R, SARH]
4x AA-8 Aphid [R-60T]
8x AS-10 Karen [Kh-25L]
16x AS-12 Kegler [Kh-25MP, ARM]
80x FAB-250M-54 GPB
33x Generic Acoustic Decoy
7x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
2x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
18x OFAB-100-120 Frag
60x RGB-NM-1 [Passive Omni]
320x RS-82 (TRS-82) Rocket
30x S-21 (ARS-212) Rocket
8x S-24B 240mm Rocket
236x S-5K 57mm Rocket
26x SA-1b Guild [S-25M Berkut / V-300]
18x SA-2f Guideline Mod 1 [S-75M2 Volkhov, 5YA23 / V-759]
18x SA-3c Goa [5V27D, V-601PD]
4x SA-4a Ganef [3M8M1]
6x SA-4b Ganef [3M8M2]
8x SA-6a Gainful [9M336]

SIDE: Blue
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
4x A-4M Skyhawk
2x A-7C Corsair II
2x AD-7 Skyraider
1x Avenger AS.4
1x Canberra Mk.8
1x CLG 5 Oklahoma City
1x DD 890 Gearing FRAM 1 (AGM-45 Shrike)
1x DD 931 Forrest Sherman [Gun]
1x DDG 31 Decatur [Mod Forrest Sherman]
4x F-106A Delta Dart
4x F-4D Phantom II
8x F-8J Crusader
1x FF 1052 Knox
2x Lightning F.6
4x Phantom II FG.1
1x QH-50D DASH
2x RF-8G Crusader
2x S-2G Tracker
2x SH-2D Seasprite
1x SH-2F Seasprite
1x SH-3A Sea King
1x SH-3D Sea King
1x Valiant B.(K).1

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
2x 12.7mm/50 MG x 2 Burst [100 rnds]
4x 127mm/38 AA-VT [AntiAircraft Common]
10x 127mm/38 HE-PD [HiCap]
660x 127mm/38 Twin AA-VT Burst [AntiAircraft Common, 2 rnds]
909x 127mm/38 Twin HE-PD Burst [HiCap, 2 rnds]
41x 127mm/54 HE-CVT [HiFrag]
13x 127mm/54 HE-PD [HiCap]
50x 152mm/47 Mk16 Triple AP Salvo [3 rnds]
82x 152mm/47 Mk16 Triple HC Salvo [3 rnds]
990x 203mm/55 Triple
35x 20mm Mk12 x 4 [100 rnds]
11x 20mm/85 M61A1 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
20x 20mm/85 SUU-23/A Gun Pod Burst [100 rnds]
1x 20mm/85 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
3x 30mm ADEN Mk4 x 2 Burst [60 rnds]
1096x 76mm/50 Twin Frag Burst [2 rnds]
843x 76mm/50 Twin HE Burst [2 rnds]
46x AGM-12B Bullpup A
16x AGM-45B Shrike [ARM]
20x AGM-62A Walleye I ER/DL
40x AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL
19x AIM-4F Falcon [SARH]
4x AIM-4G Falcon [IR]
54x AIM-7E2 Sparrow III
19x AIM-9D Sidewinder
52x AIM-9H Sidewinder
5x AIM-9J Sidewinder
52x AN/SSQ-15 Julie Active Range-Only
57x AN/SSQ-2 Jezebel LOFAR
143x AN/SSQ-28 Jezebel LOFAR
122x AN/SSQ-41A Jezebel LOFAR
203x AN/SSQ-47 Julie Active Range-Only
32x AN/SSQ-50B CASS
4x CBU-59/B APAM [717 x BLU-77/B Dual-Purpose Bomblets]
13x FIM-43C Redeye Blk III
32x Generic Active Directional Sonobuoy
13x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
30x Generic Passive Non-Directional Sonobuoy
6x Mk11 Depth Charge
26x Mk13 1000lb GPB
1x Mk14
24x Mk20 Rockeye II CB [247 x Mk118 Dual Purpose Bomblets]
2x Mk34 Mod 1 Torpedo
5x Mk37 Mod 2
2x Mk43 Mod 1
10x Mk44 Mod 1
41x Mk46 LWT Mod 2
7x Mk48 Mod 3
4x Mk54 Depth Charge
46x Mk77 Mod 1/2/3/4/5/6 500lb Incendiary Bomb
72x Mk81 250lb LDGP
198x Mk82 500lb LDGP
20x Mk83 1000lb LDGP
4x Red Top
39x RIM-24C Tartar
2x RIM-7E Sea Sparrow
16x RIM-8G Talos
28x RIM-8J Talos
55x Type 17054 Active Directional [Mk1c]
30x Type 30059 LOFAR [Mk1c]
152x ZUNI 127mm HVAR Rocket

SIDE: green
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Biologic Tuna Fishes

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

< Message edited by Excroat3 -- 8/25/2016 12:20:21 AM >

(in reply to Randomizer)

Post #: 6

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/25/2016 7:12:30 AM

magi

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

this could be fun....

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 7

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/25/2016 3:49:07 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Excroat3,
Thanks for the comments..I'll be going in and checking out those things.

Do you think another missile armed DD/FF would have helped balance it out?

Expect an updated version soon

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 8

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/25/2016 5:16:33 PM

Excroat3

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

Not sure, I think that more experienced players would have reinforced the Carrier's CAP with air refuled F-106Ds or those brit fighters, so not sure if another DD would break the balance. Considering I didn't really use a good 1/4 of the aircraft avaliable to me (the strike fighers at Greenland) I'm not sure if I'm the best guy to ask

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 9

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/25/2016 5:35:03 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Gotcha..oh yes...the F-4 should NOT have been on the Lexington as she was too small to handle the heavy F-4 Phantom.

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 10

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/25/2016 11:13:34 PM

magi

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

im enjoying this..... need more tankers.....

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 11

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/26/2016 1:10:23 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

I'm thinking of switching out the Valiants for Victors and don't forget you have a few buddy stores packages on the CV.

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 12

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/26/2016 5:21:48 AM

magi

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

thats good... but i put a few marine kc hurks at sonderstrom.... im ingressing with my group 100nm of greenland traveling north... i will atack iceland from the west... with good support from sonderstrom.... im really enjoying this....

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 13

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/27/2016 4:58:18 PM

Vulcan101

Posts: 26
Joined: 2/27/2014
Status: offline

The Valiant's were well gone by 1981, I think there were a couple of definitely non-flying gate guards around then.

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 14

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/27/2016 5:20:12 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vulcan101

The Valiant's were well gone by 1981, I think there were a couple of definitely non-flying gate guards around then.

Thanks for confirming that... Victors it will be.

Also just got a copy of Jane's Fighting Ships 1979-80 so will flesh out the names/ships some.

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to Vulcan101)

Post #: 15

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/28/2016 10:21:00 AM

magi

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

very clever how you set up the air defenses at keflavik....

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 16

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/28/2016 5:23:42 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Is it effective?

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 17

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/29/2016 5:05:17 PM

magi

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

Yes.... Like hitting a bee's nest with a stick...... All the longer range patrols I gang up on and kill.... But the ones over Keflavik won't come out... Then if I get to close they are all over me and I'm in Sam range.... I'm going to do my first strike coming up.... and I think I have a way to break the eeg.... But it's very clever for sure....

By aproching from the west off Greenland I have not been located.... It's been a good tactical use of battle space.... A lot of bioligic's out there though....

You've done good... This is really a good scenario.... One of my favorites now.... I did add more tankers... Some more AAW loadouts and I moved the Brit F4's to the Lexington also..... They and the tankers have been alpha assets.... I think I would get creamed without them....

< Message edited by magi -- 8/29/2016 5:07:35 PM >

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 18

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 8/30/2016 8:48:52 PM

Schr75

Posts: 803
Joined: 7/18/2014
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Hi Overlord

I have found a small bug in your scen.
Reykjavik airport only have large aircraft runway access points.

The Be-12 Mail is a very large aircraft and will need very large runway access points.
At the moment, the mails are just waiting to taxi and the patrol mission never leaves the ground.

Otherwise loving the scen. Lots of action.

Hope this was helpful.

S�ren

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 19

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 9/2/2016 2:28:08 AM

magi

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

i cant find the mines.... and i dont think i will need to mine as i will be able to occupy keflavik...

(in reply to Schr75)

Post #: 20

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 9/2/2016 6:26:54 PM

magi

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

i have been having an odd deal happening.... my ROE keeps switching to hold.... i lost 6 aircraft as a result... before i caught it...

< Message edited by magi -- 9/2/2016 10:57:37 PM >

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 21

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue - 9/3/2016 12:28:42 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

OK..back home...will look at these issues and see if I can get an update out this weekend.

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 22

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/3/2016 1:05:12 AM

Jorm

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

hey I really liked the idea of this scenario

I cant get the crusaders to do anything , i cant get them to fire their aim-9s any thoughts ?

Ill give it another go, but ive lost the carrier twice now as my CAP wont fire and keeps resetting to HOLD fire. Im sure its something silly im doing wrong. Yo havnt set up some sort of global HOLD WRA have you that im perhaps missing ?

Cheers

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 23

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/3/2016 1:59:21 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorm

hey I really liked the idea of this scenario

I cant get the crusaders to do anything , i cant get them to fire their aim-9s any thoughts ?

Ill give it another go, but ive lost the carrier twice now as my CAP wont fire and keeps resetting to HOLD fire. Im sure its something silly im doing wrong. Yo havnt set up some sort of global HOLD WRA have you that im perhaps missing ?

Cheers

Unknown...will check that out as well..

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to Jorm)

Post #: 24

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/3/2016 4:16:12 PM

magi

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jorm

hey I really liked the idea of this scenario

I cant get the crusaders to do anything , i cant get them to fire their aim-9s any thoughts ?

Ill give it another go, but ive lost the carrier twice now as my CAP wont fire and keeps resetting to HOLD fire. Im sure its something silly im doing wrong. Yo havnt set up some sort of global HOLD WRA have you that im perhaps missing ?

Cheers

Ya..... I had the same issue.... I didn't notice it being an problem in the first day approximately of game time.... What I did so I could keep playing was.... In the side bar.... I keep the ROE box open... If units showed HOLD.... I would select a bunch and reset their ROE..... Not ideal... But I wanted to keep playing as I had many hours into it....

I lost 8-10 aircraft as a result of this... I play in editor mode so replaced some of them....

< Message edited by magi -- 9/3/2016 4:17:58 PM >

(in reply to Jorm)

Post #: 25

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/3/2016 10:59:57 PM

Excroat3

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

I had the same problem, here is the fix: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4138082 Seems specific to this scenario only.

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 26

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/4/2016 4:15:56 AM

magi

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

thank you sir....

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 27

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/4/2016 3:04:15 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Ok..need a little more info Excroat... UNREP works fine in my game. v1.11 B839.5
What ships weren't UNREPing and I'll take a look.

Fixed the RoE...not sure what happened but individual ships had "hold" while side was set for "tight".

Replaced Valiants with Victors.
Working on some more tweaks.
Working on scoring
Mines should be available on the AE for UNREP and loading on the strike aircraft.
F-8 Crusaders AIM-9s are rear aspect heat seekers like most of the IR missles in this scenario. It does have some AIM-9C SARH versions available.
Fixed BE-12 access point

What else?

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 28

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/4/2016 5:16:01 PM

magi

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

In the magazine... I saw only one mine.....
I'm not sure why we are mining the harbor when we can take it.... If I had som Royal Marines... I would land them... I'm actually saving key facilities at the NAS so they can be used by the allies...

< Message edited by magi -- 9/4/2016 5:21:42 PM >

(in reply to TheOriginalOverlord)

Post #: 29

RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, ... - 9/4/2016 6:16:44 PM

Excroat3

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

Here is a save. When you do to UNREP and select "Select tanker manually" it does seem to work for a second, the ships change bearing and slow down, but then they just forget that they were going to UNREP and break off. When you try to select a tanker automatically, you get the message "No suitable UNREP location within 100nm".

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Excroat3 -- 9/4/2016 6:17:43 PM >

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981

Page: [1] 2 next > >>