First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing Norway

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing Norway

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 >> First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing Norway

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing Norway - 11/23/2020 3:48:17 AM

ExMachina

Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

This scenario is frustrating me to no end (possible because it's graded as being less "difficult")

Basically, I struggle to get even one kill on a pair of Nanuchkas, even firing all 8 of my Penguins at close range. In every scenario I've run, most or all of Norway's missiles get shot down in rapid succession.

Is there some "trick" to this one? If it's winnable it sure doesn't seem easy :P

(FWIW I'm running CMO v 1.02)

Post #: 1

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 2:03:35 PM

AndrewJ

Posts: 2318
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline

This is a very difficult scenario. You are up against an enemy that has you outclassed in all respects. Their missiles have longer range, and bigger warheads; their sensors have longer range and OTH capability; they have twice as many useful SAMs, and their SAMs don't have the horrible box-launcher reload time. Despite all these disadvantages, you are expected to get 900 points to simply avoid defeat, which means sinking half their navy without any losses of your own. I don't think I've ever managed to win it outright.

I find that a salvo of 4 Penguins will often (not always) get one through to mortally wound a lone Nanuchka, although you need to make sure it's a concentrated salvo. Ideally the salvo should come two each from two missile boats, so they arrive in half the time, rather than a long string of four from one boat. Don't let the computer send your Mk2 missiles off on dog-legs either, since that spreads out your salvo. Against two, a concentrated salvo of eight seems to work in two sets of four. Expect to lose your missile boats in return, though.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 2

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 4:03:31 PM

ExMachina

Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

I appreciate the sanity check! What put me over the edge was that I found a video of a guy playing this scenario but in CMANO-- he basically was 100% successful with his missiles and received no counterfire. Made me think I was missing some nuance.

quote:

Ideally the salvo should come two each from two missile boats, so they arrive in half the time

That's golden advice right there-- Thanks! Going to try this out ASAP :)

(in reply to AndrewJ)

Post #: 3

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 4:31:32 PM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Use the terrain clutter.

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 4

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 4:56:06 PM

ExMachina

Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

>Use the terrain clutter.

Thanks. Yes, I've had SOME success using this to avoid missiles (mostly by hiding BEHIND the fijords).

However, my biggest problem still seems to be that I simply run out of missiles before coming close to inflicting a sufficient amount of damage. So I'm wondering if this was a more "playable" scenario in the early days of CMANO whereas now it's a little unbalanced?

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 5

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 5:50:04 PM

StellarRat

Posts: 188
Joined: 9/14/2009
Status: offline

The trick is to hide behind the little islands and spitz and use individual "spotters" to find the Soviets. You then fire your missiles from radar "shaded" positions.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 6

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 11:00:06 PM

AndrewJ

Posts: 2318
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline

Well, with the enemy OTH radars, relying on radar shadows or background clutter isn't always a reliable strategy. They can often see you just fine.

What they can't do, since they're an AI with weapons tight, is use human understanding to figure out what those ship contacts really are. That's what's saving you.

Play this from the Russian side, and your Nanuchkas can sink most of the Norwegian ships in the first few minutes.

(in reply to StellarRat)

Post #: 7

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/23/2020 11:07:01 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

To me, the beauty of First Contact isn't the individual scenarios. Its playing them in order from the oldest to the most modern. Its a great lesson in how naval warfare has changed and a great lesson in how tactics have to adapt to the technology.

(in reply to AndrewJ)

Post #: 8

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 12:07:13 PM

chrispman

Posts: 117
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

Use the terrain clutter.

Terrain Effects seem to be disabled in that scenario? Or maybe I am not up to date.

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 9

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 1:01:43 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Do you mean "Effects of Terrain type" in scenario features?

(in reply to chrispman)

Post #: 10

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 1:32:54 PM

chrispman

Posts: 117
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Do you mean "Effects of Terrain type" in scenario features?

Yes, excatly. "Terrain type affects mobility, sensor spotting and weapon effects".

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 11

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 1:51:25 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Why I asked for if its that setting specifically. From the manual.

"Effects Of Terrain Type: When activated, this allows for
different terrain types to have their effect on unit movement,
visibility, and resistance to blast effects (see 3.1, The Globe
Display for details). When deactivated, all types of terrain are
treated similarly."

I wasn't sure if there was another setting that removed terrain masking, which is specific to sensors.

(in reply to chrispman)

Post #: 12

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 2:02:21 PM

ExMachina

Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Well, with the enemy OTH radars, relying on radar shadows or background clutter isn't always a reliable strategy. They can often see you just fine.

Yeah, I have not been able to observe any of the "clutter" that is supposed to make the Norwegians harder to spot/track. Background clutter also doesn't seem to affect weapon seeker hit probabilities. The best I've been able to do is hide behind cliffs, but even then the Soviet anti-ship missiles seem to be able to climb and dive nearly instantaneously (maybe that's realistic but seems pretty acrobatic for a 3+ ton missile)

(in reply to AndrewJ)

Post #: 13

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 2:35:58 PM

.Sirius

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

To me, the beauty of First Contact isn't the individual scenarios. Its playing them in order from the oldest to the most modern. Its a great lesson in how naval warfare has changed and a great lesson in how tactics have to adapt to the technology.

Thankyou I built them

_____________________________

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 thewood1)

Post #: 14

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 2:45:22 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExMachina

quote:

Well, with the enemy OTH radars, relying on radar shadows or background clutter isn't always a reliable strategy. They can often see you just fine.

Yeah, I have not been able to observe any of the "clutter" that is supposed to make the Norwegians harder to spot/track. Background clutter also doesn't seem to affect weapon seeker hit probabilities. The best I've been able to do is hide behind cliffs, but even then the Soviet anti-ship missiles seem to be able to climb and dive nearly instantaneously (maybe that's realistic but seems pretty acrobatic for a 3+ ton missile)

A couple years ago there were issues with ships being masked by terrain. After the fix, I did extensive testing on it and it does work very effectively at times. But there are all kinds of parameters around masking. Type of radar is a big one and modern radars don't have as much of an issue. So isn't distance from shore. Masking terrain height is also a factor.

As to the 1986 version of the scenario. I consider it a worst case for Norway, of the four scenarios. The difference in missile tech and radars are to the advantage of the Soviets. I think it might be the only one of the four where the Soviets really outclass Norway's capabilities. IIRC on the 1986 one, I had to sacrifice one or two ships to get the Soviets to expose themselves. I actually had to play it a couple times to figure that out. In all the other years, Norway killed all Soviet ships with some damage, but no losses to Norway.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 15

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 3:00:26 PM

Gunner98

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

We wrote a scene for H-Hour which depicts this type of setup, actually two scenes but one got cut. Key difference was that when the Norgi missile boats started their run, the Soviets pulled further out to sea to take advantage of their longer range missiles and get a better radar picture - right over top of a waiting Type 209 S309 Ulstein. Working in combination with the sub with the missile boats flushing the pray was the best way we found to make it work. Time & technology was not a friend to the Norwegians in this fight until the Skjold class started arriving in the late 90s

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 16

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 3:07:14 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Its probably the one weakness of these scenarios in relation to realism. Norway's ships are on their own. No air or sub support. But I can see leaving them out to simplify the scenario execution.

(in reply to Gunner98)

Post #: 17

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 3:12:36 PM

Gunner98

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

Agree, they are great for a study in the subject and point out the usefulness of a comprehensive approach.

The other gap is shore based radar which the boats rely on to maintain stealth. In the book we dropped a few FAB-250s onto the Nordkapp surface search radar just as they were starting their run to make it more sporting.

B

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 18

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 3:18:58 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

Its also good the the author didn't fall victim to scope creep. There are always a million "what about" possibilities. The scenarios, as is, are a lot of fun and educational.

(in reply to Gunner98)

Post #: 19

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 5:52:50 PM

ExMachina

Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

A couple years ago there were issues with ships being masked by terrain. After the fix, I did extensive testing on it and it does work very effectively at time

If I wanted to see this for myself, what setups would you recommend I try to best see these effects? I've already tried placing surface units with two other ships at the same distance away, one with background clutter and one without. However, I cannot seem to make the detections of one ship less likely than the other, even going back to 1970s radar equipment on the detecting platform. I must not be getting the terrain placement right

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 20

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 6:14:50 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

I'll see if I can find my own tests. I had several ships staggered in a line from the detecting platform to the shore off the northern coast of the Philippines for my test. I don't remember the units or the era. It was 2-3 years ago and I've changed laptops 2-3 times since then so no telling where it is.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 21

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 7:40:36 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

I found the old test. I updated it to db487 because it was having an issue with a sensor on one of the units. The deep rebuild fixed it. Its a 1970s era radar against an abrupt elevation change on shore. The main purpose of the test to to make sure terrain LOS was working with older model radars a few years ago. I think it was 1.01 CMNAO. I also just tested out of curiosity how radar clutter worked. What I saw was that with the solid shoreline that had a rapid elevation increase behind the target, the detection range went from 17nm to 4nm if the target ship was within 1 to 1.5nm of the solid shoreline. You can see I put a ref. pt. on the shoreline. In this scenario, just switch sides, hit play, and you can let it run. Then just check the message logs and contact reports for a play-by-play.

Its not a perfect test, but at least gives a clue that something is effecting detection distance when very close in shore. I'm going to play around with newer and older radars and see what it shows.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 22

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 8:58:20 PM

ExMachina

Posts: 462
Joined: 9/25/2013
Status: offline

Super! Thank you very much!!

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 23

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/24/2020 9:49:50 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

I just ran it with a modern Burke DDG and it detected the inshore ship at 14nm and all the others around 18nm. So there is significantly less clutter impact on a modern radar set.

(in reply to ExMachina)

Post #: 24

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/25/2020 9:39:27 AM

deepdive

Posts: 125
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

Norwegian MTB`s where never intended to engage armed opfore they would be used for ambush, hit and run on invasion forces and support ships. The MTB squadrons where experts in camoflaging their boats and they would hug the coast line if they had to move in hostile environment. The sivil fishing fleet would be extremly important in supporting MTB operations wherever possible.

(in reply to thewood1)

Post #: 25

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/25/2020 1:29:18 PM

Gunner98

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

That's a good theory, and perhaps in the late '40s or early '50s would have been feasible.

Unfortunately for the Norwegian navy, the Soviets also understood this tactic and had no intention whatsoever in complying with it.

The Northern Fleet had dozens (50+) missile boats - which really only had one purpose since they were not really ocean going and there was no immediate threat to their northern coast or bases. That is not counting the hundreds of small patrol and ASW craft they had available.

The Soviets would not intentionally put their amphibious forces at risk, if there were no major NATO formations in the Norwegian sea they would stay out to sea where the Norgi's couldn't get to them. Or, in the more likely case that there were were; they would use short hops and scour the fjords in advance with dozens of boats and Be-12 amphibious aircraft. As soon as they had air superiority it would be a matter days before the Norgi boats were sunk or forced south.

So strategically, the Norwegian missile boats were a success as they made the Soviets devote significant resources to counter them. Operationally they were also a success as they limited the Northern Fleets options until they were dealt with. But here we are talking about their tactical use; and this is where they would have had problems probably from the late 1960's or early 1970s onward because of sensor technology and Soviet superiority in weapons.

It would have been a very happy Norwegian missile boat commander who had survived long enough to actually see a Soviet amphibious craft. But that is unlikely.

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to deepdive)

Post #: 26

RE: First Contact 1986: having a terrible time playing ... - 11/25/2020 2:56:55 PM

thewood1

Posts: 6529
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline

I have always regarded these Soviet boats as an offensive sweep prior to the big push. Specifically to get at the Norwegian boats the Soviets knew were waiting.

(in reply to Gunner98)

Post #: 27