New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018)

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: Queen for a Day (2018)

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: Queen for a Day (2018)

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 4:25:28 AM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

July, 2018.

In celebration of her commissioning, the HMS Queen Elizabeth is conducting a global cruise from Portsmouth to Sydney, with several high profile ports of call along the way with valued allies. Working closely with the Indian military, a naval exercise meant to test both the capabilities of the RN and IN as well as send a cautionary message to potential regional opposition has been initiated.

Let me know what you think. Problems, improvements, what worked well and what didn't. Thanks!

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/6/2016 2:34:27 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 5:48:31 AM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

A word of caution. Both Ocean and Bulwark have a max speed of 18 kts. Yet you can set the group speed for much more than that. Be aware, if you do, those two HVUs will be left behind! This doesn't preclude you from separating them with their own escort and sending a faster element forward, of course.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/2/2016 6:51:19 AM >

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 2

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 11:20:02 AM

mikkey

Posts: 3142
Joined: 2/10/2008
From: Slovakia
Status: offline

This scenario looks very interesting, thanks Chris. It is ok, that Sri Lanka is as playable side (do not contain usable units)?

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 3

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 12:43:17 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

Fixed a few issues. Added ammo to airbases, tweaked some patrols, added exclusion areas, removed Sri Lanka as a playable side. Download in first post updated.

ETA: Second Revision up in first post. Sortie rates updated for OPFOR and minor patrol zone tweaks.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/2/2016 3:47:27 PM >

(in reply to mikkey)

Post #: 4

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 6:47:51 PM

Excroat3

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

A bit into the scenario (2d 21h left) and I noticed that a lot of the civilian ships have already run out of fuel. I cheated a bit and went into gods eye view, and about half of that huge civilian fleet is already empty. Given that I will most likely never make radar contact with those units, would it just be easier to completely remover them? Also, I sunk a single SSK, and about 5 minutes later, I detected a P-8I headed right toward me at 1k feet. No radar on or anything. I would think that because that plane had Harpoons, maybe it would gain some altitude and try to find the ships the submarine reported. But it just flew right at me, not even trying to escape the missile shot at it. Good scenario so far, though! If you want, I will post a full AAR when I can finish this one, although no promises when that will be.

EDIT: Also, consider making those airfields in India single unit? I have no plan on hitting them in this scenario, even if I had the weaponry to do so. Seems like I'm going to have enough to deal with already. If you have a mission that is going to have aircraft hit the airbase at Sri Lanka, I would not make that airbase single unit. Also, I feel that I have way too many ASW helicopters, there are hordes of them protecting my carrier and my losses and expenditures already show 200+ sonobouys deployed.

< Message edited by Excroat3 -- 1/2/2016 7:55:09 PM >

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 5

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 9:53:03 PM

AlexGGGG

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline

The airbase, SLAF China Bay, I cannot seem to be able to use it? It does not have "Aircraft" button on it? And I can't rebase aircraft to it. is it supposed to work like this?

Also, I ran out of Meteors fairly quick, that is, at 2d 15h to go. And looks like there is nothing I can use practically against ships. Paveways do not look promising, and does not look like there is enough of them.

< Message edited by AlexGGGG -- 1/2/2016 11:17:51 PM >

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 6

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 10:03:29 PM

Excroat3

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlexGGGG

The airbase, SLAF China Bay, I cannot seem to be able to use it? It does not have "Aircraft" button on it? And I can't rebase aircraft to it. is it supposed to work like this?

I'm having the same problem. I tried making it as a home base for my aircraft, no luck. Anyway, the enemy fleets seemed to never get a good fix on me, charging towards me then breaking off when (I assume) the contacts are lost. The Mig-29 and Jaguar strike never launched because I shot down all the Mays. I ran out of Meteor missiles at about 1d 13h remaining, so I gave myself some more. Subs were not a problem, and I destroyed one SAG with my submarine alone, the other with my F-35s. This scenario might need some touching up to make it harder for the player, although I did have some tense moments with Su-35s shooting for my AEW helicopters, and only 1 F-35 to stop them. With enough work, this can truly be a great scenario.

(in reply to AlexGGGG)

Post #: 7

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 10:19:26 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

Good stuff. China Bay will need to be allied in both ways, I think. Ships running out of fuel are dhows (why do they have just a few hours' fuel?). Most are now gone. Left the ones in the 'fishing' areas, for now. Kept the air bases multi instead of single-unit in case the player wanted to consider striking them, not a great plan probably, but the unit count isn't that bad in this one.

You shouldn't give yourself more Meteors. Avoiding detection is a big deal (and no, India doesn't appear to have OTH radars, I checked) but you only have so many aircraft and missiles to deal with everything that can pick you up. What are folks thoughts on upping India's fleet detection options?

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/2/2016 11:19:39 PM >

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 8

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/2/2016 11:21:35 PM

Excroat3

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Primarchx

Good stuff. China Bay will need to be allied in both ways, I think. Ships running out of fuel are dhows (why do they have just a few hours' fuel?). Most are now gone. Left the ones in the 'fishing' areas, for now. Kept the air bases multi instead of single-unit in case the player wanted to consider striking them, not a great plan probably, but the unit count isn't that bad in this one.

You shouldn't give yourself more Meteors. Avoiding detection is a big deal (and no, India doesn't appear to have OTH radars, I checked) but you only have so many aircraft and missiles to deal with everything that can pick you up. What are folks thoughts on upping India's fleet detection options?

My thought was that you make one unit in the brirish fleet auto detectable, and when that ship enters the prosecution area, the fleet will go after it. The downside is that the unit being autodetectable means that the indians can launch their missiles at max range. I don't have a solution that would fix that problem. I guess I will have to pick and choose my fights in the future. I forgot to mention that I took out the radars in India with my sub launched tomahawks. Is that a thing the player should do?

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 9

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/3/2016 12:25:49 AM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Excroat3

quote:

ORIGINAL: Primarchx

Good stuff. China Bay will need to be allied in both ways, I think. Ships running out of fuel are dhows (why do they have just a few hours' fuel?). Most are now gone. Left the ones in the 'fishing' areas, for now. Kept the air bases multi instead of single-unit in case the player wanted to consider striking them, not a great plan probably, but the unit count isn't that bad in this one.

You shouldn't give yourself more Meteors. Avoiding detection is a big deal (and no, India doesn't appear to have OTH radars, I checked) but you only have so many aircraft and missiles to deal with everything that can pick you up. What are folks thoughts on upping India's fleet detection options?

My thought was that you make one unit in the brirish fleet auto detectable, and when that ship enters the prosecution area, the fleet will go after it. The downside is that the unit being autodetectable means that the indians can launch their missiles at max range. I don't have a solution that would fix that problem. I guess I will have to pick and choose my fights in the future. I forgot to mention that I took out the radars in India with my sub launched tomahawks. Is that a thing the player should do?

Absolutely. I did that, too.

Autodetection should be a tool of last resort, IMHO.

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 10

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/3/2016 3:33:23 AM

Excroat3

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

Ok, I was just not sure that I should have, given that I got no points for destroying the radars.

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 11

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/3/2016 12:01:49 PM

AlexGGGG

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline

As far as autodetection goes, I'd say it should be enabled for nonmovable objects, like runways, hangars, whatever, on assumption that their location is known from satellite passes, or from past HUMINT. Everything else should probably not be autodetectable unless there is some explanation because of the way the scenario goes.

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 12

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/3/2016 5:01:11 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

Next Revision: Moved QE CVBG significantly closer to Sri Lanka, altered some patrol areas and behaviors. Update in original post.

ETA - one more revis, with minor timing improvement.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/3/2016 7:48:55 PM >

(in reply to AlexGGGG)

Post #: 13

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/4/2016 9:01:27 PM

AlexGGGG

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline

OK I scored 715 without additional Meteors. However, I still ended up flying CAP with F35s loaded with Storm Shadow ;)

I did not manage to evade detection. Frankly I can't see how this can be done without being detected, and once I am detected, I need CAP, which spends missiles. I was also almost out of SAMs by the time I arrived on destination. Enemy carrier was sank by my sub. However I had to shoot down ASW helos first (with short-range missiles), before risking approach.

SIDE: United Kingdom
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Apache AH.Mk.1 [WAH-64D]
5x Lightning II [F-35B] <--- That's what happens if you fight Su-30s with short-range missiles only.
1x Lynx HMA.8

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
14x 25mm GAU-22/A Equalizer Burst [30 rnds]
16x AGM-114K Hellfire II
28x AIM-132A ASRAAM
32x Aster 15 PAAMS [GWS.45 Sea Viper]
64x Aster 30 PAAMS [GWS.45 Sea Viper]
6x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
12x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Dual Spectral]
20x Martlet [FASGW(L) / LMM]
107x Meteor
2x RGM-84D Harpoon IC
3x RGM-84L Harpoon II
17x Sea Ceptor [CAMM(M)]
11x Spearfish Mod 0
2x SSQ-926 ALFEA
9x SSQ-963D CAMBS VI
7x Stingray Mod 1
6x Storm Shadow

SIDE: India
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x A-50E/I Mainstay
1x D 51 Rajput [Pr.61ME Kashin II]
1x D 61 Delhi [Pr.15]
1x D 63 Kolkata [Pr.15A]
1x F 23 Brahmaputra [Mod Godavari]
1x F 45 Teg [Pr.1135.6 Krivak IV]
1x F 47 Shivalik [Pr.17]
4x Il-38SD May
1x Jaguar IM [Darin 3]
4x Jaguar IS [Darin 3]
2x K 40 Veer [Pr.1241.1T Tarantul I]
3x Ka-31 Helix
18x LCA Tejas Mk1
12x MiG-29K Fulcrum D
1x P 28 Kamorta [Pr.28]
2x P-8I Neptune [Poseidon]
1x R 23 Vikramaditya [Gorshkov]
1x Radar (TRS 2215)
1x S 44 Shishumar [Type 209-1500]
1x S 50 Kalvari [Scorpene]
1x S 55 Sindhughosh [PL-877E Kilo]
1x S 71 Chakra II [PLA-971M Akula II]
4x SA.316B Chetak MATCH [ASW, Alouette III]
9x Sea King Mk42B [HAS.2]
16x Su-30MKI Mk2 Flanker H

EXPENDITURES:
------------------
8x 76mm/62 Super Rapido HE Burst [2 rnds]
2x A.184 Black Shark
20x AA-12 Adder A [R-77, RVV-AE]
32x AGM-84L Harpoon II
1x AIM-132A ASRAAM
25x AN/SSQ-53F DIFAR
18x AN/SSQ-62E DICASS
2x CIRCE Torpedo Decoy
2x CIRCE Torpedo Jammer
3x Derby
4x Derby [SPYDER-MR]
6x Generic Acoustic Decoy
34x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
19x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
1x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
1x MG-114 Berilly
8x PJ-10 Brahmos
8x PJ-10 Brahmos
4x PK-16 Chaff [TSP-60U]
2x Python 5
11x SA-N-1b Goa [M-1M/P Volna-M/P, 4K91 / V-601]
20x SS-N-25 Switchblade [Kh-35 Uran]
2x SS-N-27 Sizzler [3M54E1 Klub]

< Message edited by AlexGGGG -- 1/4/2016 10:04:15 PM >

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 14

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/4/2016 9:57:56 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

Cool! Thanks for report, AlexGGGG and good work. I think one challenge of the QE air wing is how to handle adequate ship-based air defenses (pre-Brimstone II, if it materializes). It's also how to use your stealth capability and tactical depth to shape the battlefield before detection occurs.

Looks like a few more Meteors may be needed, though. Perhaps an UNREP from a Fort Victoria somewhere in the scenario instead of having the AO?

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/4/2016 11:00:42 PM >

(in reply to AlexGGGG)

Post #: 15

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/6/2016 1:33:54 AM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

New update in original post with some additional stores available for UNREP and a scoring rubric.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/6/2016 2:38:03 AM >

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 16

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/6/2016 2:52:14 PM

AlexGGGG

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline

I have a question about Brimstone. Which aircraft am I supposed to load it on or how can I otherwise use it? I don't see any loadout for them?

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 17

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/6/2016 3:13:04 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

Brimstone is in the default QE magazine but the Lightning isn't able to use them. Brimstone II is an available store for the UK F-35B, though there's no established IOC for that weapon I'm aware of. As such the Paveway IV is pretty much the go-to naval ASuW weapon available for the QE's F-35B. I made this decision intentionally as I wanted to explore how the RN would use the Lightning in a naval war with currently available/authorized weapons.

< Message edited by Primarchx -- 1/7/2016 3:21:59 AM >

(in reply to AlexGGGG)

Post #: 18

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/6/2016 5:18:42 PM

AlexGGGG

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline

On one of the attempts, with initial version I recall, I flew like six sorties and never hit any ship with Paveways. So I went for Hellfires/Martlet, trickier but looked more effective. I will have to revisit that aspect - probably I used them wrong.

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 19

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/7/2016 1:36:33 AM

Excroat3

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

I was able to use Paveways successfully on the first version of the scenario, I used them on the SAG without long range SAM, and they got through fine. I did notice that many missed by ~60 feet, and a few malfunctioned, but I was able to get all the ships down within 2 sorties of 4 fighters.

(in reply to AlexGGGG)

Post #: 20

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 1/9/2016 2:27:58 PM

Maromak

Posts: 1030
Joined: 12/26/2007
From: Australia
Status: offline

I also noticed the large miss distances by the Paveway IVs. These weapons are INS/GPS guided which might explain the misses even though Surface Ships are valid targets. I checked the F-35B laser designators while the bombs were in the air the F-35B was within range (15nm) of the target but, as expected, the designator was not active.

_____________________________

Certa Cito

(in reply to Excroat3)

Post #: 21

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 6/8/2017 5:27:36 AM

AlexGGGG

Posts: 685
Joined: 9/25/2014
Status: offline

Primarchx,

I'm replaying this with aircraft damage and whatnot, and I'm getting area validation warnings on load. Would you please take a look, or is it not the latest version in the first post? Thank you.

(in reply to Maromak)

Post #: 22

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 6/8/2017 5:17:29 PM

Primarchx

Posts: 3102
Joined: 1/20/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlexGGGG

Primarchx,

I'm replaying this with aircraft damage and whatnot, and I'm getting area validation warnings on load. Would you please take a look, or is it not the latest version in the first post? Thank you.

If I get some time this weekend I'll see if I can do it. I don't think I submitted it for Community Pack so it was sort of always in Beta.

(in reply to AlexGGGG)

Post #: 23

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 10/8/2020 5:20:27 PM

ojms

Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline

Was this ever released?

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 24

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 10/8/2020 5:50:35 PM

.Sirius

Posts: 1404
Joined: 1/18/2013
Status: offline

Looking good

_____________________________

Paul aka Sirius
Command Developer
Warfaresims
Cold War Data Base 1946-1979 Author

Old radar men never die - Their echoes fade away in accordance with the inverse fourth power law

(in reply to Primarchx)

Post #: 25

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 10/8/2020 6:00:53 PM

ojms

Posts: 230
Joined: 9/16/2014
Status: offline

I can't get it to load in CMO can someone convert it from CMANO to CMO ?

EDIT: I installed CMANO, updated the latest DB and then copied to CMO and it's working now.

< Message edited by ojms -- 10/8/2020 9:35:23 PM >

(in reply to .Sirius)

Post #: 26

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 10/10/2020 11:50:44 AM

Lukew

Posts: 33
Joined: 8/14/2019
Status: offline

This scenario won't open Error You have (explicitly or implicitly) attempted to load a database that does not exist on the DB folder.

What database did you use to create the scenario and where do I locate said database? Thanks.

(in reply to ojms)

Post #: 27

RE: New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018) - 10/10/2020 12:26:33 PM

BeirutDude

Posts: 2625
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline

Probably created with the BETA as well.

_____________________________

"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 Lukew)

Post #: 28

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> New Scenario for Testing: Queen for a Day (2018)

Page: [1]