Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962

 
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 >> RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 12:43:24 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5508
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Not easily - but I think it makes sense. They started in close range as the Cubans went hostile and we were close already, I am not sure of the minimum range for the Aim-7, and the Aim-9 is rear aspect only - but they spent all their time turning and burning. They got off a sidewinder shot automatically but the MiG-19 dodged that. Watching them try and turn inside each other was cool but frustrating. I think to make an Aim-7 shot they would have had to have a clear radar shot and not be in the middle of a fur-ball, and the Migs kept cranking away from them, so they weren't able to get a rear aspect Aim-9 shot. Those missiles are just not that good and the Migs are agile. An F-102 got a head on shot with an Aim-4, first time I had ever seen that.

Something else fired Aim-7s automatically and some Aim-9s got shot as well but not from the Phantoms, except that one in the fur-ball. The F-4 was supposed to be the super fighter but with crap missiles and no guns it is at a real disadvantage.

B

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 31
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 12:44:58 AM   
Gunner98

 

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

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 4/30/2017 12:46:33 AM >

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 32
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 1:13:13 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
I am looking at the bug you reported in the next hour or two JPFisher, should have an update on that for you soon.

It could be that we are used to much higher performance from missiles. This scenario has been a real eye opener for me about the state of things before the late 70's to 80's.

I am hoping to have a new version out in the next 48 hours

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 33
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 1:43:21 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: JPFisher55

I am having a problem with my air to air a/c and missiles with this otherwise excellent scenario. I am using 936.6. My a/c on air patrols will not engage the hostile Cuban a/c nor will they automatically fire
missiles at them. When I order a manual fire, the dialogue box says the a/c's weapons are set to hold status even though the a/c's status on air targets is tight or free. I have not encountered this issue with any other scenario using 936.6. I attach saved game file.


Hi JPFisher,

Firstly thanks for providing a save. I am not seeing this issue on my runthroughs, but I am seeing it in the save you provided. I found a way to fix the issue;

1. Open up the side doctrine window
2. Click 'reset all affected missions'
3. Go through the missions and make any changes as required

This seems to 'reset' the doctrine, and by doing that the behaviour I'm observing is consistent with the displayed WRA.

In regards to your particular savefile it's cool to see different approaches, and particularly some of the--almost goofy--weaponry in use back then that we don't hear about these days, in particular air-to-air rockets and radar guided Sidewinders.

I think this issue is worthy of a tech support post, however in the mean time you can use the work-around above. Thanks!

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 34
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 2:55:38 AM   
Jorm


Posts: 545
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Melbourne
Status: offline
Hi Apache, i had the same problem as JPFisher, i.e. aircraft would not fire. Your solution worked when i gave it ago.

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 35
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 3:06:33 AM   
JPFisher55

 

Posts: 589
Joined: 11/22/2014
Status: offline
Apache85, I'll try your solution. I know that it is peculiar to your scenario (but not for everyone) because using 936.8, I have had
a/c automatically fire air to air missiles.

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 36
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 3:13:30 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
I'm going to implement it into the next build as a default so hopefully that will fix it permanently... until the next time

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 37
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 4/30/2017 3:19:28 AM   
JPFisher55

 

Posts: 589
Joined: 11/22/2014
Status: offline
Apach85, your fix worked. Now if the planes would just stay in their patrol zones when ordered not to prosecute out of patrol zone. Has anyone else noticed this bug in 936.8? Planes assigned to a patrol with prosecution outside of patrol zone unchecked will prosecute targets where they please even if out of the patrol zone.
I did report that bug. I hope the fix is easy.

Also, Apache85 your original setting of air contacts WRA to tight works once I hit the buttons for affected units and missions.

< Message edited by JPFisher55 -- 4/30/2017 3:21:15 AM >

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 38
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/1/2017 12:06:55 PM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
New file version added to top comment.

Known Issues:
At scenario start, civilian air traffic will all take off and land within the first 30 mins or so. This is due to bug that has been reported. A workaround is in place and after the planes land things will work as normal. Prepare for a Bogey dance in the first 30 mins. Sorry!

Degree symbols display as unknown characters in Special Messages

Fixes/Additions:
SD-41: Nuclear torpedo warheadID not available
SD-35: Too many MiG-21s on CAP
SD-37: Lua script execution error in Cuba_Waters
SD-39: Lua script execution error in Cuba_Airspace
SD-40: Lua script execution errors in Sub proximity scripts
SD-38: Tweak formatting in Cuban territorial waters messages
SD-36: Improve USSR air missions
SD-29: Final Check of Briefing
SD-4: Increased chance of nuclear exchange if USN near sub
SD-6: Add mission for boats
SD-8: add event for US ships entering Cuban waters
SD-10: Add event for detection of SSMs
SD-31: Too much tension increase for recon aircraft entering Cuban airspace
SD-16: Reset doctrine for side and unit
SD-12: OOB Issues
SD-20: Check OOB for TG 135
SD-30: Check Hullnumber.com for additional surface units
SD-28: Review escorts for Essex
SD-26: Add USS WILLIAM V. PRATT (DLG-13)
SD-18: Amend briefing to reflect Randolph returning from Med, diverted to GTMO
SD-14: Weapons not firing auotmatically
SD-25: Check DD-448 Vallette, remove if necessary
SD-24: Check DLG-7 Luce, remove if necessary
SD-23: Check DLG-10, remove if necessary
SD-19: Add CONUS Radar
SD-2: Add USS Beale
SD-3: Add USS Vesole
SD-21: Move Randolph and check escorts
SD-13: Check in and out date of Vesole
SD-1: MiG-15UTI to Bis
SD-5: Civilian airliners should stop flying at midnight
SD-11: Work-around for ferry bug
SD-9: No reliable way to turn on and off No-Nav Zones

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 39
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/1/2017 7:16:18 PM   
lamboman43

 

Posts: 96
Joined: 4/15/2016
Status: offline
Being more than three days in, I don't want to start over. But those changes are just too tempting!!!

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 40
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/2/2017 6:59:30 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: lamboman43

Being more than three days in, I don't want to start over. But those changes are just too tempting!!!


Three days in!!

You've played further than I have.

Do you mind uploading a save so I can see what you've been up to? It'll help me plan out events for the next 6 days.

As for being tempted by changes, I will be putting out updates over the next few weeks. This week coming I am incredibly busy but after that there should be a fairly large update and then final release around first week of June.

(in reply to lamboman43)
Post #: 41
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/8/2017 5:04:29 PM   
gregb41352

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/5/2013
Status: offline
Brilliant scenario. Thanks for doing this apache85.

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 42
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/28/2017 11:30:46 AM   
CCIP-subsim


Posts: 695
Joined: 11/10/2015
Status: offline
Just wanted to bump this up - no other comments but praise from me, still coming to grips with the strategy for this one!
Also a big thanks apache85 for suggesting I take a look at the Lua scripts for things like retrieving and displaying key values - this scenario should be practically a textbook for anyone who wants to learn more advanced Lua!

(in reply to gregb41352)
Post #: 43
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/2/2017 4:21:58 PM   
subunit

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/2/2017
Status: offline
New CMANO player here, this is my current favourite scenario. I'm really enjoying the "situation room feel" it gives- it's way more "real" to me than most of the other scenarios I've looked at so far. I had a few comments about my experience with the scenario in the first game-day of play:

-I had MiGs chasing my early AAW patrols right up the Florida peninsula, which gave me the sense that "airspace" was not really being modelled. Since the Cubans didn't seem to mind violating US airspace, I didn't see any issue with responding with lots of overflights of Cuba- until one of my Crusaders was shot down by a SAM site. I see from this thread how that mechanic works, but it feels weird. One of my overflights is singled out for execution, the rest are being tailed by MiGs as they have been for the last 6-8 hours behaving as if nothing has changed.. and then when I retaliate by shooting down a MiG in American airspace, the whole side goes hostile. I think what might help is to keep the Cubans out of American airspace unless things go hot, to explicitly mark what the Cubans consider their airspace (I couldn't really tell if Leeward Field flights were automatically going to be violations or not), and to give some kind of message or feedback if the random-SAM-site-weapons-free event is triggered. Even just something to tell the player "The Cubans have attacked one of our overflights- It's at your discretion how to respond to this" would help understand what's going on, why the rest of the Cuban units aren't hostile, etc.

-I ran into the following bug after save/load:
"WARNING! Area validation for Unit Remains In Area trigger 'USSR_B59_Zone' has FAILED! The polygon that makes up the area crosses itself which means it is INVALID!"
I have attached the save game to the post for your examination.

-It seems like the scenario could benefit from the day/night/weather effects on air operation option, given the context. I think I will probably add the Aircraft Damage option for my own use in the editor, as I think the more granular combat will suit this era well (it's too bad that scenario designers using this option will "fragment" the scenario community into Chains/non-Chains owners).

In any case, fantastic scenario, I look forward to updates and to any other topics you take on. Kudos!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to CCIP-subsim)
Post #: 44
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/9/2017 5:12:33 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: subunit

New CMANO player here, this is my current favourite scenario. I'm really enjoying the "situation room feel" it gives- it's way more "real" to me than most of the other scenarios I've looked at so far. I had a few comments about my experience with the scenario in the first game-day of play:

-I had MiGs chasing my early AAW patrols right up the Florida peninsula, which gave me the sense that "airspace" was not really being modelled. Since the Cubans didn't seem to mind violating US airspace, I didn't see any issue with responding with lots of overflights of Cuba- until one of my Crusaders was shot down by a SAM site. I see from this thread how that mechanic works, but it feels weird. One of my overflights is singled out for execution, the rest are being tailed by MiGs as they have been for the last 6-8 hours behaving as if nothing has changed.. and then when I retaliate by shooting down a MiG in American airspace, the whole side goes hostile. I think what might help is to keep the Cubans out of American airspace unless things go hot, to explicitly mark what the Cubans consider their airspace (I couldn't really tell if Leeward Field flights were automatically going to be violations or not), and to give some kind of message or feedback if the random-SAM-site-weapons-free event is triggered. Even just something to tell the player "The Cubans have attacked one of our overflights- It's at your discretion how to respond to this" would help understand what's going on, why the rest of the Cuban units aren't hostile, etc.

-I ran into the following bug after save/load:
"WARNING! Area validation for Unit Remains In Area trigger 'USSR_B59_Zone' has FAILED! The polygon that makes up the area crosses itself which means it is INVALID!"
I have attached the save game to the post for your examination.

-It seems like the scenario could benefit from the day/night/weather effects on air operation option, given the context. I think I will probably add the Aircraft Damage option for my own use in the editor, as I think the more granular combat will suit this era well (it's too bad that scenario designers using this option will "fragment" the scenario community into Chains/non-Chains owners).

In any case, fantastic scenario, I look forward to updates and to any other topics you take on. Kudos!


Hey thanks for the feedback subunit, I'm glad you're enjoying it. I've added all of your points to my list and will implement/fix as appropriate.

As for night/day and weather restrictions on AC that's not currently enabled in CMANO; so no dice on that one. Aircraft damage will be in the next update (which should be sooner rather than later; I feel bad I haven't given this scenario more love but I've been really busy with RL and also some other CMANO projects that are yet to see the light of day)

On day/night and weather, I know I scripted in the civilian air traffic to stop flying late at night (midnight IIRC), and also the Cubans won't fly at night. The Russians however are night capable with their MiG-21s, and I've left any restrictions on US aircraft at the discretion of the player. Personally I try to stick to the day night restrictions, but I know this would not be everyone's cup of tea.

Thanks again for the feedback!

(in reply to subunit)
Post #: 45
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/11/2017 12:08:09 AM   
subunit

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/2/2017
Status: offline
Thanks for the reply, apache85. I didn't realise the day/night/weather air ops option was a placeholder, that explains why it's never being used

Looking forward to the update to this excellent mission!!

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 46
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/11/2017 8:02:30 PM   
Demetrious

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 4/22/2016
Status: offline
Well, this is one hell of a scenario. It really, really showcases what CMANO is capable of.

Two small bug reports:

* The sub B-59's fourth perimeter reference point wasn't made fixed, so after the sub moves a bit the polygon goes twisty and won't validate.

* Lua script threw an error when my reece planes discovered a nuclear-capable SSM battery:

11:41:26 AM - 11:41:26 AM - Lua script execution error: [string "US_SovNucClassified"]:1: attempt to call global 'ScenEdit_GetGeyValue' (a nil value)


Other than that, so far, so good!

(in reply to subunit)
Post #: 47
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/12/2017 8:57:28 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
Updated to 0.24 Beta 5.

(in reply to Demetrious)
Post #: 48
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/12/2017 6:10:15 PM   
Demetrious

 

Posts: 50
Joined: 4/22/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98
Something else fired Aim-7s automatically and some Aim-9s got shot as well but not from the Phantoms, except that one in the fur-ball. The F-4 was supposed to be the super fighter but with crap missiles and no guns it is at a real disadvantage.


That is unfortunately accurate. There were fighters even earlier that completely discarded guns in favor of guided missiles, placing far too much faith in their ability when they were still an immature technology and far from reliable enough for such treatment. The F-8s in this scenario also carry Mighty Mouse air-to-air rockets (another air-to-air "innovation" of the 50s) and their in-game pK of 15% is accurate - just read about the Battle of Palmdale and you'll see the problem. The USAF prematurely ditching guns as last year's technology was a definite problem in this era. For an excellent scenario that depicts what the consequences of this would've been had those early gunless, missile-only interceptors been called upon to stop a Soviet nuclear bomber attack, I suggest "Deter, Detect, Defend" from the community scenario pack (and its excellent companion "Wargasm," which lets you attack the Soviet Union and see how gun-armed MIGs would fare.)

quote:

Watching them try and turn inside each other was cool but frustrating.


Dogfighting is still rough in CMANO and it crops up precisely because of the issues with missiles listed above. Most of the scenarios with air-to-air combat that use the Cold War database suffer from this, because frequently you need to resort to guns. AI limitations exacerbate this - especially how the AI will fly right up your tailpipe until side stances change and let them actually release weapons (the "intercept" logic seems to be the same, as you'd expect, so they follow it to a T even if they can't release weapons. This same issue affects submarines; they'll literally sit underneath your keel waiting patiently for permission to fire a torpedo.) You can set up "shadowing" with fixed RPs and clever lua for subs, but aircraft... you just have to be conservative with the prosecution zones, for now. From a scenario design perspective there's not much to be done.

My best advice (from experience) is to emulate the real-world tactic of just... not dogfighting; i.e. "one pass, haul ass." Manually steer with a waypoint you adjust to get their nose on-target (preferably closing at afterburner,) let them rip off their cannon fire, than extend away (gain distance) which gives you room to turn around for another pass. Since the AI will happily chase you I've found that turning off group view and controlling each fighter individually helps a lot, since the AI will keep maneuvering as a group - you can do a "thatch weave" and use one fighter to lure the chasing AI into your second fighter's gunnery envelope. This kind of micromanagement is a royal pain in the ass but at least it's something!

quote:

ORIGINAL: subunit
-It seems like the scenario could benefit from the day/night/weather effects on air operation option, given the context. I think I will probably add the Aircraft Damage option for my own use in the editor, as I think the more granular combat will suit this era well (it's too bad that scenario designers using this option will "fragment" the scenario community into Chains/non-Chains owners).


Aircraft damage modeling goes a huge way towards reducing the dogfight problem (bombers not dying to a single burst of .50 cal, for instance,) so it's a big deal for the whole Cold War database, IMO. As for Chains/Non-Chains, the good news is scenario designers can fix it just as fast as you did by opening up the scenario, unticking the right boxes, saving it as a new filename (Scenario_Name[Non-CoW Version]) and pushing it to the workshop. I do this with ARMA 3 missions I make so people who don't have my ~exact mod set~ can play them, or at least load a vanilla-ized version into the editor and customize it for their own mod set.

Welp, lets fire up the new beta and see how she goes!

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 49
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 7/25/2017 10:10:05 PM   
morphin

 

Posts: 572
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Hi

Well i'm in about 5 houres. Activated all recon and have medium tensions. I have also a few SAM Sides get Red (tried to shut down my U-2). Strange is that all my recon (except U-2) flies at 8000 ft but all the Mig's are all at 36000ft and it seems that they can't or will not find me? I have discovored most of the enemey SAMS's, AAA and Artillery missiles and quite detailed report of the AC on the Airports. So no news in the last houres and it is getting a little bit boring. Should i go further and shut down the nasty fighter that are near my AEW? Or wait until i disocver finally my first sub? ( i have discoverd 2 unfriendly ships and 12 cuba KOMAR boats in the port)

Andy

(in reply to Demetrious)
Post #: 50
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 8/2/2017 2:42:13 AM   
subunit

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/2/2017
Status: offline
OK, I had some time to play the new beta, and got about 24 hours in before starting WW3 by accident again

A few notes:
-Cubans are definitely flying at night, I had a flight of P-47s buzz the Enterprise task group at 3 AM, and their MiGs are up at night as well. I attached a save showing this.

-The default WRA for antisub weapons seems to allow at least both Tracers and Neptunes (haven't tried anything else) to release on unidentified contacts- probably not the best default setting for this mission as the Cuban MiGs pilots have telepathic links to the Russian bubbleheads... on that note this scenario would be really good for the devs to look at for ideas about how to improve "peacetime ROE" missions- units that could not plausibly be in contact with their side should not cause side alignment changes when attacked/destroyed, for instance.

-Sub at possub Charlie came to the surface and started using surface search radar, not sure if this was intended. I would have missed him entirely if he'd not done this.

-Cuban SAM sites are instantly localised with perfect accuracy by ECM. This seems like a big handicap for the Cubans as I had even subs at PD giving me exact fixes on SA2 radars that were only lit up briefly.

-I'm not sure how aggressive the Cubans are supposed to be, but they do seem VERY aggressive still- not flying up the Florida peninsula, but they're happy to intercept aircraft & surface contacts south of Haiti, Jamaica, etc. I don't know what their historical behaviour was, though, so this could easily be intended.

-I can't find U2s anywhere- are these unlocked later? I see the poster above mentioning them but I don't know where they're meant to fly out of.

-It might be nice to use the CoW cargo loading system to explicitly model the civilian evacuation from Guantanamo, I don't know how much work this would be.

As I get further into this mission I'm really appreciating the little details, like the Cubans radioing ships leaving Gitmo telling them to get out of territorial waters, etc. I really hope this mission gets the attention of the devs, because it shows up a lot of the game's "peacetime" limitations while showcasing how awesome the game could be if there were a few more peaceful options (like if you could run off the cubans attempting overflights of your carriers with CAP, etc).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 51
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 8/4/2017 5:30:50 PM   
subunit

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/2/2017
Status: offline
A few more notes having played through the second day.. Soviet RO/ROs are now showing up and I'm thankful for Classic Bullseye..

-I received the message:
quote:

12:00:00 - 12:00:00 - \\PRIORITY FROM: CNO TO: COMSOLANTRE: OPERATION BLUE MOON231200Z OCT 62EXCOM REQUIRES DETAILED LOW LEVEL RECONAISSANCE OF MRBM SITES IN ORDER TO ASCERTAIN MRBM READINESS AND THEREFORE THREAT TO CONUS.COMSOLANT IS TO FACILITATE LOW-LEVEL OVERFLIGHT OF THE FOLLOWING AREAS OF INTEREST: SAN CRISTOBAL IVO N22?44',W83?08'GUANAJAY IVO N22?57',W83?58'NPIC PHOTINT SPECIALISTS RECOMMEND RF-8 TYPE AIRCRAFT OPERATING AT NO HIGHER THAN 2000FT AGL FOR ADEQUATE IMAGERY.PREVIOUS IMINT INDICATES SIGNIFICANT AAA THREAT OVER THE TARGET AREA. THE CURRENT STRATEGIC CLIMATE DICTATES THAT THE ABOVE MUST BE COMPLETED WITHOUT CASUALTY TO US, USSR OR CUBAN FORCES IN ORDER TO PREVENT ESCALATION.TOP SECRET\\EYES ONLY\\NOFORN


I think the coords for Guanajay are incorrect- should probably be W82 58'

-Received the following script error:
quote:

23:59:20 - 23:59:20 - Lua script execution error: [string "Cuba_AirOpsChange232359Z"]:87: expected near 'end'


-Most of the Soviet/Cuban naval behaviour has been sensible (putting the Komars in position to threaten TG135 off the south coast for instance), but there have been a couple of weird things: I have 3 Komars sailing right up the east coast of Florida, which seems like a crazy risk for them to be taking, and at least one of the Soviet AGIs is "stuck" on one of the coastguard cutters at its weather station, just doing donuts around the poor guy.

-The SP-5B Marlins are bugged and can't be used in their intended role because of absurdly high fuel consumption. I reported this in the tech support forum, hopefully it'll get fixed.

(in reply to subunit)
Post #: 52
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 8/23/2017 4:38:10 PM   
ForceMajeure

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 8/23/2017
Status: offline
I have to say that this is probably my favorite scenario so far in CMANO along with Pole Positions. I'm a huge fan of non-dynamic scenarios where recon and intelligence gathering is the focus and direct military action has dire consequences.

My strategy so far has been to keep the situation as stable as possible by surrounding Cuba with Sea Control Patrols and aerial recon along the Cuban border, only occasionally overflying Cuba when I am tasked to do so or wanted more intelligence on SAM positions. I have been fired at about 5 times by SA-2's but my lucky U-2 managed to survive. My F-8 low level recon flights were much more effective and safe from attack, although they were always intercepted. I'm 3.5 days in, medium tension, and it looks like the USSR has decided to turn their ships home.

The best mechanic of the mission by far, and something you should continue to build on, is the special actions menu to activate units and thus adjust the tension. I wanted to let the USSR know I was serious, but also avoid open conflict with Cuba and the scenario allowed me just to do that. I always felt tense when I flew units over Cuba because I had no idea if the Cubans would shoot back or not.

BUGS:

For the Action "USSR_MerchTurn", I received a script error at 14:00Z October 25th on line 35. I fixed this script error myself when I replaced line 35 with "if current_tension >29 and current_tension <51 then".

For the low level recon overflight tasking, there is an error in the coordinates given for Guanajay in the "US_BlueMoon_Init." The coordinates should read "GUANAJAY IVO N22°57',W82°58'<BR>".

When I was tasked with evacuating GITMO, I sent 6 C-97's on a ferry flight there but I neither received feedback on completion of this task, nor was able to load any personnel using the "load interface" when clicking Leeward Field>aircraft>C-97>Cargo Load. I did look up this event in the editor, and it looked like you had to evacuate the aircraft within a certain time frame for this to event to trigger. Is that correct?


RECOMMENDATIONS:

A wonderful scenario, I feel that there are several ways to improve it. First, the scenario could really use more direction as a whole, specifically through special message events like Blue Moon overflights or sub searching tasks. Give us more taskings to overfly parts of Cuba even if no missiles or found. Another tasking could be finding at least "10 Soviet merchants heading to Cuba to confirm USSR intentions" etc. I really liked how you added the Kennedy Speech as a special message. Maybe include more event messages like, "Adlai Stevenson is now talking at the UN and showing aerial photography of missiles you found" or "The USSR has sent this message, 'Mr. President, we and you ought not now to pull on the ends of the rope in which you have tied the knot of war...'." I was fairly engaged throughout the scenario, but for a seven day time span I felt that there could be even more ways to engage the player in already amazing scenario.

(in reply to subunit)
Post #: 53
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 8/24/2017 5:03:03 AM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
Hey ForceMajuere thanks for the feedback, I played this myself yesterday for the first time in ages and have identified a few areas to improve on. I will add your comments to my task log.

One day I will finish this, but I have a whole bunch of other CMANO stuff piled up at the moment which has priority. Feedback like yours really helps though!

Glad you're enjoying it!

(in reply to ForceMajeure)
Post #: 54
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 8/24/2017 8:38:26 PM   
fortyporkpies


Posts: 18
Joined: 4/8/2009
From: Washington DC
Status: offline
EDIT [note: thank you, again, to the site admins for resolving posting issue; this review was completed 1 Sep]
Hi Apache85- i finally got a chance to do a second, more serious playthrough with this scenario; had to quit 3d 3h in. I took notes as I went through the gameplay - I will try to leave out things that have already been mentioned in this thread so as to not be redundant.
*Spoilers Below* -CoW version
1)Bugs
-I was thrown only one runtime error, "Cuba Airops Change 222359Z:87:expected near 'end'
-Every time I loaded a save game, I was given a "Warning! ...Mission Flight Size restriction" screen that had a lengthy list of effected missions..Don't know if that's important, but I did take a screenshot. I played the game in the mission editor, so as to use the console to interrogate certain key vars to get a better understanding of what was going on
2)Gameplay - non ai-behavior related
-Would be nice to be more aware of the current DefCon level, and how it affects gameplay other than getting nuke authorization at defcon 1. is/are defcon 4 thru 2 just cosmetic?
-Why would I want to investigate Russian PosSubs or ProbSubs? Especially if I'm repeatedly being told to not engage the Soviets, although they keep Splashing my fighters at a horrendous rate- and for the life of me I couldn't get them [the Soviets] to go hostile on me, or even get down to defcon 1 (more on that later)
-scoring, I lost so many fighters that I'm pretty embarrassed at my finally tally- although this brilliantly highlights the shortcomings of US fighter design during the era- fast as , corners like a freight train, no internal cannon, subpar missile armaments.. this makes for poor firing solutions when you get into a knife fight, so you try to stay BVR as much as you can, but the Soviets and thus the Cubans have so many nimble, maneuverable craft that they really cut you to pieces if you don't micromanage your interceptors and fighters when engaging---- so it would be nice to have more scoring opportunities for the US
-love the OOB, had a lot of fun checking out all the crazy and now-seemingly-absurd military tech of the day, as well as these things called cannons on ships- being used for shore bombardment or *even* AsuW! Had real cool ship to ship gun battles.
-Kept getting war warnings, of the "prepare yourself for Cuban hostilities, don't engage the Russians"-type special messages, quite often, once I got two indentical messages within five minutes of each other;
-the mongoose missions are somewhat tedious, and could use a little more explanation and meaning as well as success notifications with the gitmo mission, (which has been addressed above)- where am I supposed to sail those ships that appear at gitmo, where do I evac those personnel to?
-I tried to ratchet the tension up slowly, but found that there was a seemingly small leap from "Low" to "High". Once I got to "high " I thought that I might as well go nuts and activate everything I had and try to use those Mk41 25Mt monsters
3) Gameplay - AI
-with my tension level at 2000+ near the end of the third day, and doing everything I could to anger the Soviets into going hostile, I quit the playthrough.. I had to keep manually marking the soviets as hostile, they kept reverting back to unfriendly. I wanted to get to defcon 1 but was unable. Didn't want to make large exclusion zones bc of the (btw totally awesome, love the..) civilian aircraft, boats, and um.. the "fishies". I think i accidentally tried to torpedo a Whale, that should automatically get you fired as theater commander and exit the scenario :)
-soviet subs would just sometimes surface and turn on their radars, and be easily detected. Don't know if this is intentional
-The Cubans are super aggressive. This makes for good action and gives you a deep desire to exact revenge, But sometimes it feels like too much. Need more SAM or AAA systems for the US side, or even more non-pure interceptors for the US side?
-the Soviet behavior was sometimes odd. I conducted many recon overflights, found the MRBM sites, they would disappear after about an hour or so, I'd find them again, repeat, meanwhile I was focusing on taking out Cuban airbases to try to fix my fighter attrition problem. In the end, I leveled most of their bases and the Soviets still didn't go fully aggressive (every unit going "red") as the Cubans had about 10hr in; oddly, after about 12 hours, The soviets got really aggressive and sent nuclear- and conventionally- armed bombers into Florida and bombed some radar sites, only with conventional munitions. . That was the last time the soviets were aggressive with respect to bombing. They continued to harass me with their "unfriendly" fighters until almost the end
-"Turned Merchants"- these Soviet ships would sometimes just sit and stay put, although I did have a few that were aggressive and posed a minor threat to my fleet forces. Occasionally I would get a "SS-N-1 Styx has been fired" show up in the message log, but was never able to find the shooter or the target. And again, I always had to manually mark the soviets as hostile bc they would revert back to unfriendly
4)Conclusion
- This is a superbly built scenario, the tension mechanic is great, the escalation mechanic is great (it would be cool to give peace a chance) The OOB is fantastic, the scripting is phenomenal, the research and time and effort you've put into building this is incredible. Kudos, this is one of the sharpest scenarios I've ever played in Command.
That's just my two cents, thanks again for an excellent scenario!!

nickG



< Message edited by fortyporkpies -- 9/18/2017 5:35:59 PM >

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 55
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 9/5/2018 8:34:43 PM   
gregb41352

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/5/2013
Status: offline
Hi

I don't know if this forum is still active but I'm about a day in when I get a
11:52:52 PM - 11:52:52 PM - Lua script execution error: [string "Cuba_AirOpsChange222359Z"]:87: expected near 'end'

I'll attach a save if I can. The error happens almost immediately.

(in reply to fortyporkpies)
Post #: 56
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/25/2020 10:44:20 AM   
Ekaton


Posts: 254
Joined: 9/30/2013
From: The War Room
Status: offline
Does it work with CMO?

_____________________________

I need ten females for each male...

(in reply to gregb41352)
Post #: 57
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/26/2020 7:42:38 PM   
gregb41352

 

Posts: 198
Joined: 10/5/2013
Status: offline
I'd like to know this as well. Doesn't work for me (see error message above).
Real bummer because this was my favorite scenario by a distance.

(in reply to Ekaton)
Post #: 58
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/27/2020 5:27:33 PM   
Schr75


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ekaton

Does it work with CMO?

CMO is backward compatible with CMANO, so you can use old CMANO scens in CMO (but not the other way around).
I just downloaded it and it launches just fine.
Just remember that the old reported bugs will still be there

Søren

(in reply to Ekaton)
Post #: 59
RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 - 5/27/2020 8:23:31 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 2625
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
I was looking at your Lua Code to try to pick some tricks up. NOW THAT'S SOME CODE! WOW!

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to JPFisher55)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: New Beta Release: Seven Days in October, 1962 Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

3.139