RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian

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 Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian

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 Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/6/2019 5:38:47 PM

templar42

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/16/2018
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gpotter511

templar42 - the thinking here was that the 9 F-35Bs delivered to the RAF as of last August would be pressed into emergency service. Simply not feasible, I take it? Appreciate these and any further thoughts you have from playing through the scenario.

Actually I think I was out of date there - I didn't realise the UK programme was so far advanced! Yes it does seem reasonable that they'd be pressed into service.

I noted down a few things as I played through:

Coningsby doesn't have any Meteor in the magazines so the 29 Squadron FGR.4s there have to omit optional weapons on A2G loadouts. Not sure whether this is deliberate to model NATO not being at full readiness.

There appears to be a database error such that GR.4 loadouts with differing numbers of Storm Shadow require a different version of the ECM pod. To work around this, I suggest adding a couple of Sky Shadow Mk2 DECM pods to the magazines at Akotiri so that the player can use 2x or 4x Storm Shadow Loadouts.

The database only allows Apaches to carry AGM-114Ls if they are also carrying larger numbers of AGM-114Ks. It's rather annoying that CMANO imposes these sort of loadouts. Therefore, at Amari I predict that there will end up being an unusable stock of AGM-114Ls once the player has expended the Ks. This might be intentional, but if not, I'd suggest increasing K stocks there.

Charles de Gaulle is only carrying about 80 AAMs in total, which will severely restrict operations if the scenario lasts 6 days. The magazine also lacks any air to ground weapons other than a few Scalp and AMSP.

300 victory points each time a hapless IL-78 gets shot down compared to 0 for A-50s and 150 for the SA-21 seems a little unbalanced. Additionally, I was horrified when my complacency allowed the Allied command centre at Naples to be destroyed, but surprised that I didn't lose any victory points.

Should the Kaliningrad facilities be single unit? As a general rule, single unit facilities should be used where the player isn't supposed to attack them, or where attack would be impractical anyway. I know I can't send ground units into Kaliningrad, but surely I should expect to be able to strike its airfields?

For added challenge and realism, it could be an idea to add a couple of SA-22 fire units to Kaliningrad. Given the strategic importance of its SA-21 battery, it should have some point defence. I found it quite easy to swarm Kaliningrad with AASMs and RBS-15s, especially after the Growler fired off many rounds at long range at fighters that it had little chance of hitting even with the active seekers.

(in reply to gpotter511)

Post #: 31

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/6/2019 6:27:05 PM

gpotter511

Posts: 52
Joined: 10/4/2017
Status: offline

Great ideas. I will be working on a significant balance pass over the next few days, so please - keep the notes coming!

Re: Kaliningrad - I went to heavy usage of SUAs to cut down on unit bloat, Kaliningrad included. As the scenario has evolved, the contest has become one of degrading NATO's ability to reinforce for a counterassault vs. degrading Russia's ability to conduct a campaign that can strike into the heart of Europe. Thus, most of the targetable facilities are bomber bases. However, you're right that this is a bit unrealistic. I will consider.

Has anyone completed the scenario with victory conditions either way?

(in reply to templar42)

Post #: 32

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/6/2019 10:17:59 PM

alghblag

Posts: 30
Joined: 4/3/2016
Status: offline

The ships leaving Warnemunde have no helicopter torpedoes aboard. Not sure if it's intentional or not, so just FYI. Garibaldi's a bit short on ammo for the Harriers as well.

< Message edited by alghblag -- 2/6/2019 10:33:06 PM >

(in reply to gpotter511)

Post #: 33

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/7/2019 3:37:26 PM

gpotter511

Posts: 52
Joined: 10/4/2017
Status: offline

Thanks, alghblag - very helpful. Adding to punch list.

(in reply to alghblag)

Post #: 34

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/8/2019 12:00:58 AM

templar42

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/16/2018
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline

I do think the Russian tanker track is too close to the border of the Baltic states - the tankers are often only 30 miles behind the FEBA, which makes them easy targets.

(in reply to gpotter511)

Post #: 35

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/10/2019 7:42:16 PM

gpotter511

Posts: 52
Joined: 10/4/2017
Status: offline

Operation Eagle Guardian has been released! Version 3 of this scenario is attached. Thanks so much to everyone who has offered feedback so far. Updates in this release:

� (General) Briefing and Description Updated
� (General) Victory Point Scheme Overhauled
o (NATO) Various adjustments to point values for destruction of certain Russian combatants; point value now awarded for destruction of Russian fixed-wing AEW.
o (NATO) Point value substantially reduced for saving RyanAir Flight 441
o (Russia) Various adjustments to point values for destruction of certain NATO combatants; point value now awarded for destruction of NATO ISR aircraft.
� (NATO) RAF Tornados and associated loadouts removed from RAF Akrotiri, consistent with real-world conditions
� (NATO) F-35 aircraft in Norway and UK set to �novice� proficiency due to outstanding technical limitations of delivered F-35s
� (NATO) Removed FGS Erfurt reflecting recent collision in the Kiel Canal
� (NATO) Removed six (6) Lynx Mk88 helicopters as BRAUNSCHWEIG-class motherships were not eligible; added two (2) P-3C Maritime Patrol Aircraft and increased relevant munitions
� (NATO) Restocked the Charles de Gaulle�s magazines for AAM, buddy stores
� (NATO) Added Meteor armament for Project Centurion Typhoons at RAF Coningsby
� (NATO) Restocked AGM-114K Hellfire missiles at Amari and Lielvarde ABs
� (NATO) SM-3 missiles added to USS PORTER and USS DONALD COOK consistent with ABM mission
� (NATO) Doubled the magazine stocks of Italian carrier GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI
� (Russia) Added Pantsir-1 SHORAD systems to assist in defense of Kaliningrad S-400 battery
� (Russia) Removed impractical number of AA-13 Arrow missiles for MiG-31 interceptors and replaced with AA-9 Amos. Adjusted relevant scripts to reflect.
� (Russia) AA loadout for Su-35s at Voronezh adjusted

Operation Eagle Guardian will continue to be supported, and will also be added to the Community Scenarios thread as well as Steam. Thanks everyone who helped make this possible, and I look forward to your hopefully enjoying the scenario!

(in reply to templar42)

Post #: 36

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/11/2019 1:05:22 AM

templar42

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/16/2018
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline

I played to early on Day 2 using the first updated version of the scenario. It's been great fun up to this point.

I have one or two bits of feedback but the most glaring is this: 5 hours after the Russians initiated hostilities, I'd destroyed all the invasion forces - well over 400 vehicles - and by a few hours later had destroyed pretty all the helicopters and fighter aircraft in the central area that had ever launched. Siauliai was devastated by Kh-22s and I didn't even get a shot at the bombers from Dyagilevo that launched them. Overall though, my casualties were light and I spent the rest of the day destroying every SAM battery on the map except the ones in Syria, and every aircraft that launched, plus all the remaining TU-22s at Olenegorsk once they landed after an attack I mostly foiled. A fun day!

I was preparing to spend the next few hours reducing the Med and Norwegian Sea battlegroups (I'd sanitised the Baltic already) and carefully guarding against any other bombers in single unit airfields, when I got a special message at 00:30:33 to say that Russian forces were assessed to be in control of strategic ports and airfields in Estonia and Latvia, and Lielvardes had been captured.

I get this is scripted, but what about the total destruction I was entitled to think I'd inflicted on the invasion force? It doesn't seem satisfactory that the Russian side launched very few sorties and moved no ground units prior to this message, and yet magically captured parts of the Baltic states. Should the player be expected to just accept that they destroyed all the ground forces around the Baltic states and achieved air supremacy, but that doesn't count because it's not in the script? I therefore wonder whether you should consider some sort of forking logic in the scripted events so that if the Russian invasion forces are destroyed before Day 2 something else happens instead.

(in reply to gpotter511)

Post #: 37

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/11/2019 1:46:03 AM

gpotter511

Posts: 52
Joined: 10/4/2017
Status: offline

templar42 - that's wild! Thrilled that you enjoyed playing it out that far.

For those events to have triggered, Russian forces should have had to have occupied a specific zone centered on Riga and Tallinn for 6 hours. If you destroyed all Russian forces by 0500 11FEB, they never should have made it and the events never should have triggered.

To confirm, you destroyed all Russian ground vehicles, and they never approached Tallinn or Riga? I will investigate, as that's odd. The scenario is designed to reward players for achieving the success that you experienced.

(in reply to templar42)

Post #: 38

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian - 2/11/2019 5:22:37 AM

templar42

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/16/2018
From: United Kingdom
Status: offline

I'm glad you identified 0500 - I saved twice just before and after that time as I was worried at the time that I might provoke the Russians if I obliterated the non-BMEW C4I facilities around Moscow (they didn't seem to mind)!

I just opened the attached saves in the editor and in fact the only Russian unit in the Baltic states is a single SA-25 section 14nm inside the Latvian border. Being personnel it wasn't visible to AESA radars. Nothing ever got to Riga or Tallinn.

Hope these saves might be of use.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to gpotter511)

Post #: 39

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: New Scenario for Testing: Operation Eagle Guardian

Page: << < prev 1 [2]