Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964

 
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 >> Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 9/20/2016 4:05:48 AM   
cf_dallas


Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline 		I started out writing a simple "hey, let's use a B-58 somewhere" scenario... and as usual with my efforts, it got very out of hand. :-)
As always, comments/feedback are welcome.

It's a fairly large file, there are a lot of dumb units. I tried to make it as processor-friendly as possible by putting a lot of the "targets" on sides that are set to Blind. There's also few (possibly zero) "Unit Enters Area" or "Unit Remains in Area" triggers. It runs fairly smoothly on my machine, and it's no top-end setup.

*************************************************************
20 July 1964



Though the Cuban Missile Crisis ended with the Soviets backing down, the saber-rattling has not stopped. Both the Soviet Union and United States are maintaining round-the-clock airborne bomber alerts, and frequent encounters between the two superpowers Air Force and Navy units have kept tensions high.

Into this maelstrom of hostility has stepped Fidel Castro. A Cuban patrol boat sank two US Coast Guard cutters in international waters yesterday, and the US has decided to retaliate with a series of punitive air strikes using Tactical Air Command units based in Florida. Availability of strategic assets is very limited due to ongoing tensions with the USSR.

You never know though… these things have a way of spiraling out of control.

Total Units: >500 combatant units; 122 aircraft in player control
Scenario Time: 10 hours 


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by cf_dallas -- 10/23/2016 2:24:50 AM >

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss
Post #: 1
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 9/24/2016 6:42:20 PM   
cf_dallas


Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline 		Anyone have a chance to play this yet?

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to cf_dallas)
Post #: 2
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 9/24/2016 7:57:52 PM   
Randomizer


Posts: 1473
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline 		Sorry, have been side-tracked with other stuff of late. Plan to give it a run through Sunday (tomorrow).

-C

(in reply to cf_dallas)
Post #: 3
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 9/25/2016 12:10:30 AM   
cf_dallas


Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

Sorry, have been side-tracked with other stuff of late. Plan to give it a run through Sunday (tomorrow).

-C


No apology needed... If you do get the chance, let me know what you think.

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to Randomizer)
Post #: 4
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 9/27/2016 1:44:05 PM   
stolypin

 

Posts: 217
Joined: 12/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cf_dallas

Anyone have a chance to play this yet?


I didn't see it until today.

On my list.

(in reply to cf_dallas)
Post #: 5
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/2/2016 11:20:28 PM   
stolypin

 

Posts: 217
Joined: 12/23/2012
Status: offline 		Very nice scenario. I achieved a 379 (Average).

I certainly did not expect the Cubans to do what they did. But I made them pay for it.

(in reply to stolypin)
Post #: 6
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/17/2016 6:09:44 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		I've been playing this scenario on and off, I like it a lot. The Cuban AF is definitely giving my USAF fighters a ton of trouble. I'm getting about the same kill ratio as the USAF in the early years of the Vietnam war, even with heavy micro. CMANO does give accurate results. Next time, I'm just not going to fight the Cuban AF until time for the ground attacks.

Couple of notes:
- I like the MIG-21 scramble at the most in-opportune time for my airstrike. Really punished poor planning on my part to sanitize inbound / outbound corridor for bombers.
- Recon Recon Recon. I'm not doing it and the SA-3s are killing me. The scenario gives me recon though, so props for that too.
- Early model F-4's are really poor choices against MIG-19s. After the sparrows are used up, the Migs gun down the F-4s with impunity.
- I have to send my Bullpup armed fighters against the aforementioned SA-3 sites.

Overall, I see the struggles that the pre-Vietnam War USAF has with a defended target. The USAF just isn't set up to attack anything inside a SAM network at the time of the scenario.

For the future, I want to try this scenario with a 1972 air wing. Let me see just how much easier it gets after the lessons of the Vietnam war.

On CMANO:
- the strike range restriction really hurts in this case. The F-100Ds have a strike radius of 175nm. Havana is ~180nm from the main airbase. That makes micro much more intensive. It'd be nice to be able to extend the strike radius by a small amount, but that will have to wait until an advanced strike planner.


(in reply to stolypin)
Post #: 7
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/18/2016 4:57:36 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		Also, can you check the WRA? I haven't seen a Navy fighter use an AIM-9C yet in the scenario.

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 8
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/20/2016 4:08:43 PM   
cf_dallas


Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline 		I'm glad you guys liked it! It was definitely a challenge to find USAF jets with enough range in that time period, particularly for eastern Cuba.

I'll take a look at the WRAs this weekend. Anything else you thought needed tweaking?


_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 9
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/20/2016 4:46:00 PM   
DrRansom

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/14/2013
Status: offline 		Not much else, I really liked the scenario. It isn't easy, as I thought it would be at first, because the USAF of that time just had really bad tactical air.

(in reply to cf_dallas)
Post #: 10
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/20/2016 6:30:35 PM   
Randomizer


Posts: 1473
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline 		A solid challenge and reasonable situation with effective briefings and clear Player objectives. Not much surprise regarding the escalation to nuclear war though since Carswell AFB belongs to the Player and its Hustlers ready in three-hours. Still, a keeper that requires unlearning modern high-tech tactics and going back to the ground-attack basics. Fortunately I prefer dumb bombs and free-flight rockets so this scenario is right for my CMANO skill sets.

Haven't looked at it in the editor but perhaps the USN WRA might need tweaking as DrRansom notes.

Well done, thanks for the scenario.

-C

(in reply to DrRansom)
Post #: 11
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 10/23/2016 2:23:57 AM   
cf_dallas


Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline 		Well... I couldn't find anything wrong with the WRAs. I ran it for a while playing for the USN side, and the AIM-9C equipped Crusaders couldn't engage with the missiles. "Weapon must detect target prior to firing." Either the AIM-9C is looking for a radar return it's not getting from the F-8s radar, or it's acting like an ARM... there'll be a separate post in Tech Support, though I'm not at all certain it's not something I've got set wrong.

In the interest of expediency, I re-armed all the USN Crusaders with AIM-9B. It's a POS against fighters, but it's better than going into combat with a missile you can't use at all. Updated version here and in the first post.



Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to Randomizer)
Post #: 12
RE: Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 - 11/10/2016 7:22:27 PM   
cf_dallas


Posts: 303
Joined: 4/13/2006
From: Grapevine, TX
Status: offline 		Other than updating to the latest DB version, anyone see anything that needs changed on this one?

_____________________________

Formerly cwemyss

(in reply to cf_dallas)
Post #: 13
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> Don't Start What You Can't Finish - 1964 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

2.313