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 - Royal Problems

 
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 - Royal Problems Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/1/2019 6:05:44 PM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Update v4: Changed scoring and made some enemy units stronger / more difficult.

Update v3: Updated the AAA for historical appearance, reduced the number of paratroopers at Ras Banas AB, deleted weapons for SOF and recons


Update v2: Updated code for base swap (now you can capture the planes as well, changed the points for tanks destroyed and gave UK a better radar and new internal no-fly zone.



My first published scenario after a long time lurking and hopefully learning from all the forum members here. I have taken some liberties with radar sites in this scenario. Historically there were not that many radar sites on ground. Many sorties were flown without encountering each other. I changed it for playability reasons. But it still happens. Have fun testing. I need your feedback.

#########################

United Arab Republic (UAR) vs. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia / United Kingdom playable with Chains of War

Date/Time: 10th October, 1962 / 05:30:00 Zulu
Location: Yemen
Duration: 1 Day, 18 hours
Playable Sides: United Arab Republic (Egypt, Syria, Republic of Yemen in being)

Following the Coup of September, 26th, 1962. Egypt immediately recognised the newy declared Republic of Yemen. Supposedly concerned over a possible Saudi intervention from the north and a British move from the south of the Protectorate Aden, Egypt actively supported the new Republic of Yemen.

To target the pro-roylists army which had assembled at the southern border of Saudi Arabia, Egypt sent three brigades of their army, IL-28 bombers of the UARAF flew regular air strikes from Ras Banas airfield in southern Egypt and deployed squadrons of MiG to Yemen. In October 1962 the situation escalated quickly as the pro-royalist forces gained more and more support from Saudi Arabia. Additionally the United States of America sent weapons and aircrafts to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by sarjen -- 9/3/2019 5:15:39 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/3/2019 6:39:17 AM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Has somebody played it already? Any suggestions? Was it interesting or boring? What can i do to make it more interesting? Any errors encountered? Many thanks in advance.

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 2
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/3/2019 10:25:50 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		I'm playing it right now and I'm having a blast, I usually play more advanced eras and the problems of target adquisition and identification are being a big part of the fun. If historically as you said, the contenders have even less radar coverage than here, I cannot fathom how they managed an effective aerial campaign.

As for issues, none as such, but I have discovered that is trivially easy to destroy the SAM battery and the radar of Mandib AB with a special forces raid. That makes the paradrop far more easy that it should be otherwise, perhaps you should add some ground units for perimeter defence.

Also the few Vampire that have punched though my interceptors to strike against Yemen area's airbases, have failed to score any relevant hits. Perhaps you could tweak the target list to make them focus in the juiciest targets, like the ammo bunkers, or the early warning radars; losing one of these would be crippling.

The Invader bombers are fairly easy targets (even if one of them downed a Yak with their tailguns) so perhaps they should have some type of escort, albeit range can be an issue in this case.

Other than that it's being a very fun ride, I love opportunities like his for visiting unusual and forgotten arenas, good work.

Ancalagon

EDIT: There aren't enough An-12 for carrying of all the paratroopers, not sure if it's intended and I have to make two waves, of there is a mismach in the quantity of planes and troops.

< Message edited by Ancalagon451 -- 8/3/2019 10:32:38 PM >

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 3
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/4/2019 1:22:59 PM   
VIF2NE

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 7/12/2013
Status: offline 		A PSBN-N radar was installed on the Il-28. The range to the ship is 50 kilometers. 

http://xn--80aa2bkafhg.xn--p1ai/34096/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B5-%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B5-%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85-%D1%81%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2-%D0%B4%D0%BB%D1%8F-%D0%92%D0%92%D0%A1




_____________________________


(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 4
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/4/2019 8:14:23 PM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Ancalagon, many thanks for your feedback. The SAM battery is randomly placed at different Airbases, so in one case it’s easy to take it out and in two it is suicidal. And without recon you can’t bomb the armored targets with the juicy points. Did the Mandib AB switch sides after you stayed there for an hour?

The paratrooper mismatch with capacity is a leftover of my cargo tastings. Will remedy that in the next version. As for the target list I have plans to change targets. Thanks again for your input.

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 5
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/4/2019 9:02:01 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline
quote:

Did the Mandib AB switch sides after you stayed there for an hour?

Cargo planes are still inbound, tomorrow will resume play and tell you what happens after the drop.

quote:

And without recon you can’t bomb the armored targets with the juicy points.

Are you talking abour air recon? Because I have located both armored groups relying only in the tribal scouts, while some low level flybys by the Yaks on the other hand, utterly failed at locating anything.

Ancalagon

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 6
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/5/2019 8:07:15 AM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Are you talking abour air recon? Because I have located both armored groups relying only in the tribal scouts, while some low level flybys by the Yaks on the other hand, utterly failed at locating anything.

Ancalagon


I meant your Inf scouts. They can be easily dismantled by the armored groups if you would have tried to kill the SAM near their places. The SAM is randomly placed at different airbases and not always where you have found it.

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 7
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/5/2019 3:19:55 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		Well, today I played it until completion and it has been a hell of a fun time. It's fairly leasure and easy to play but still punish you if don't plan it well. Meaning of course that I took not one but two beatings in my bomber forces for underestimating the enemy both in the ingression route and later in the return trip.

Still managed to score a triumph, after obliterating the Saudi forces at Jizan and capturing Marib AB, the Najran forces where still untouched so the scenario has points to spare.

The capturing event worked when intended but I'm not sure it did as intended. In the attached image you can see that the runway has not changed sides, only one hangar has been assigned to the newly created "Marib captured" group and now I'm the proud owner of four Saudi Venoms still owned by the enemy Side (I tried making them take off and I was said that they weren't mine to command). So I have quite literally the enemy within here, talk about weirdness. The damaged facilities where due to the flak batteries firing on them as soon as they switched sides, so that one is normal.

Also the British didn't came even when I taunted them with a pair of fighters skirting on the no-fly border, a message appeared in the log saying "UAR hostile" (to the english side presumably) but that was it.

Like I said, very very fun. Thanks for this piece.

Ancalagon

EDIT: Found a little anachronism, Najran defenders have a M163 VADS SPAAG with them, IOC with the US army varies between sources but all of them put it between 1964-69, so it's presence here it's at least two years early and probably several more.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Ancalagon451 -- 8/5/2019 6:05:39 PM >

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 8
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/5/2019 7:04:54 PM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Many thanks for playing through this scenario. I will change the M163 to Bofors and look into the LUAcode of the airbase changing side. Thanks again for your feedback.

Did you feel that the scenario was too easy to win? Should I up the enemy or change point value for destroyed aircraft and troops?

< Message edited by sarjen -- 8/5/2019 7:08:13 PM >

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 9
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/5/2019 8:44:37 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		As I said It's a leisure paced scenario, where you have time to plan and the enemy actions while very much not negligible, are also not overwhelming.

That's not a bad thing and as a matter of fact I liked it as a change from , for example, the recent mediterranean fury scenarios and their "survive four harrowing hours against an avalanche of more planes than you have missiles to shot at them with". But at the same time if you don't plan carefully the enemy will make you paid for it dearly, so definitely it's not too easy at all.

Also consider that I had the lucky draw with the HAWK SAM positionement. Another play can yield a substantially harder experience, so I wouldn't change the enemy forces at all.

If I were to change something it would be reducing a little the scoring for the armored units. Right now you can win with only two of the three stated targets, (the two armored groups and Marib AB) and that was with a far from perfect play, with plenty of casualities on my side.

If, for example, the "armor destroyed" poins went down to 20 for light armor and 25 for heavy from their current 30 and 35, the player would be forced to engage all three of the targets unless it made a flawless play without casualities.

So a slight reduction in the scoring for enemy armor it's the only change that I recommend on the enemy side.

On the British side, I gave a look with the editor and I saw that right now; the RAF radar in the coast has barely the range to detect anything in the border of the no-fly zone, so even if the proximity to the border triggers hostilities it's next to impossible for then to know where you are to come fighting.

I recommend either transform them in a "false alarm" menace deleting the Hunters to save CPU recourses (they weren't willing to fight after all, but intelligence didn't get the clues), or give them a longer ranged radar even if ahistorical (gameplay compromise) and a more reaching violation and prosecution zones (they were looking for an excuse to intervene didn't they?).

Finally here you have the Loses&Expenditures log, you'll see that while slow paced, there was action aplenty with both sides taking and dishing lots of punishment:

SIDE: Saudi Arabia
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x RB-26 Invader
8x Vampire FB. Mk52
6x M192 I-HAWK
2x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-33 HPI)
1x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-35 PAR)
1x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-51 ROR)
1x Radar (Generic 2D Air Search Radar [Short-Range])
14x AMX-13
16x Centurion Mk 3 Main Battle Tank
7x F-86F Sabre
25x Infantry Section [7.62mm MG/Unguided Infantry Anti Tank Weapon]
4x Venom FB.Mk1
8x 40mm/70 Single Bofors


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
18x 12.7mm/50 MG x 6 Burst [150 rnds]
64x 20mm Hispano Mk5 x 2 Burst [50 rnds]
12x RAF 500lb LDGP
2x 12.7mm/50 MG x 2 Burst [100 rnds]
22x 20mm/85 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
972x 40mm/70 Single Bofors Burst [4 rnds]
66x 12.7mm/50 M2 MG Burst
8x AIM-9B Sidewinder



SIDE: UAR
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Yak-9U Frank
10x Il-28 Beagle
2x An-12 Cub BP
2x MiG-15bis B Fagot


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
33x 20mm ShVAK Burst [20 rnds]
23x 12.7mm/50 MG x 2 Burst [100 rnds]
49x 37mm N-37 Burst [10 rnds]
49x 23mm NR-23 x 2 Burst [40 rnds]
319x 7.62mm MG Burst [20 rnds]
1934x Generic Unguided Anti Tank Weapon
29x 23mm NR-23 x 3 Burst [60 rnds]
8x 85mm M1939
144x 57mm S60 HE
12x S-5K 57mm Rocket
8x AA-2a Atoll [R-3S]
16x RS-82 (TRS-82) Rocket
12x FAB-500M-54 GPB
64x 23mm Twin Burst [20 rnds]
13x FAB-1000M-62 GPB



SIDE: Great Britain
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


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


Ancalagon

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 10
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/14/2019 6:38:08 PM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		I am away at the moment but will update the scenario once I am back in 2 weeks.

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 11
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/14/2019 8:56:31 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		OK, there is no rush at all, have a safe trip.

Ancalagon

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 12
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/24/2019 2:44:14 PM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Ok. here is the new version. Updated code for base swap (now you can capture the planes as well, changed the points for tanks destroyed and gave UK a better radar and new internal no-fly zone.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 13
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/26/2019 9:28:10 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		I'm fairly swamped of work this days so I've been only able to give it a few minutes of gameplay but I found a pair of minor issues:

-The Vulcan battery has not been replaced

-The excess of paratroopers has not been culled

I'll keep playing as time allows, will post issues as they appear.

Ancalagon

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 14
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/27/2019 3:56:00 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		I've been playing a little more and discovered that the scouts at Najran are as able to destroy the SAM battery with impunity as the SOF team at Marib was.

I suggest you just delete the scouts weapons, it's both an easy solution and a tematically appropiate one since, while they probably carry some small arms, I doubt they carry the firepower for such a raid, and even more so that they are willing to risk the attemp.

I would go as far as to suggest also deleting the weapons of the SOF team at Marib, for the playthroughs when the SAM it's deployed in this site, and to avoid the trivially easy destruction of the EW radad placed there. It can be argued that since they are on a recon mission, they have standing orders not to engage until the arrival of the paratroopers.

That way the player must deal with the HAWK the hard way. As a matter of fact I haven't saved after the raid, and I'll keep playing withoud destroying it to see how the things go.

Ancalagon

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 15
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/28/2019 7:04:55 AM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Thanks again for your testing, Ancalagon. Your findings are now taken care of in this new version. I delted the weapons of all SOF and recons.
Thanks again for your relentless testing.



Attachment (1)

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 16
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 8/30/2019 2:08:12 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		Well I finally found some time to complete the playthrough and unfortunately a pair of significant issues arised.

First, the scoring still needs a good shaving. I made a smarter play this time suffering much less casualities and I managed a major victory just hitting all the units at Jizan again.

Didn't even have to bother with the town itself, just infantry and armor plus the flak was enough.

Of course the capture of Marib pushed me way beyond the Triumph scoring ending the scenario without having to take a single point from the Najran group (I managed to neutralize the SAM deployed there as preparation to follow-on strikes, but the unit was not fully destroyed and didn't score).

So I suggest a reduction of 5 points in the main scoring event both for ground and air units.

It's a hefty cut but I made a few numbers and just the ground unis, with the current 13/18 extra points for light/heavy armored units, still amount to 425 potential points available for the player.

With the points for Marib's capture, there are still points for a triumph with several dozen to spare, and that's without taking in account the extra points for shooting down enemy planes.

Second, the Marib switching sides event has become even weirder, see yourself:




I can't made heads or tails about what the game it's trying to tell me putting an allied simbol in an unit formally assigned to my own side.

Also the new group (Marib Captured) still has only one unit and the enemy fighters inside are still enemy fighters trapped within what have become enemy hangars.

On the bright side the runway switched sides this time.

I suggest you carry this issue to the Lua Legion subforum and ask for help there, I have no programming skills of note so I can't help you here.

Ancalagon



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Ancalagon451 -- 8/30/2019 2:16:15 PM >

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 17
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 9/3/2019 5:14:33 PM   
sarjen

 

Posts: 111
Joined: 7/14/2004
Status: offline 		Ancalagon, thanks for taking on it again. I have doublechecked the code and the scenario. I now upload the latest version which is a bit harder but the capture of the airbase is working on my side without problems. You cant use it but its not allied either. Its just about the capturing.

I tinkered with the scoring a bit. Regarding the points i think that a casual game will just give you an average score but with much thinking and micro-managing you will get a triumph.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Ancalagon451)
Post #: 18
RE: New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems - 9/6/2019 9:30:30 PM   
Ancalagon451

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 1/4/2018
Status: offline 		I gave it a quick run and I think it's mostly ready. The new scoring forces you to hit both armored groups, and the base capture event both removes it from the enemy, and gives you the points which, as you said, it's what matters so it's better calling that done.

The only remaining point it's that, to disarm the scouts, you removed the machine gun mounts and those where also carrying the binoculars of the units; so their current detection capability it's severely diminished.

They are still workable if you want leave them as they are, but I suggest you leave the mounts in place, and remove the ammunition instead.

Other than that it's ready and it's been very fun to play, thank you.

Ancalagon

(in reply to sarjen)
Post #: 19
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for testing - Royal Problems 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

0.988