Slitherine

quote:

Setup
I noticed that Surge was turned off but available for the player to turn on. I recommend either setting it to on from the start, or mentioning this in the description/briefing.

quote:

I was somewhat surprised to see F-35As at a Naval Air Station (NAS Kingsville).

quote:

I enjoyed the inclusion of some US units I don't see much in scenarios - the E-4, AC-130 variants, and RC-135S were a treat to see in action!

quote:

Purely as a matter of personal preference (not a critique of the scenario design), I'm not a fan of tracking hosted units in AFB names - I do that in a spreadsheet or word document, so I removed them from the airport names.

quote:

I stumbled into the SSN during the period of rising tension, about 8 miles away from the carrier and heading in the other direction. I started tailing it with the Alexandria, and taking it out was the first thing accomplished after the ultimatum expired. 4 ADCAPs might've been overkill, but it had stumbled closer to the carrier than I'd have liked. I don't believe the Alexandria was ever counterdetected. This set the stage for my playthrough, with lots of micromanagement during the successful strikes (and not enough during the failures).

quote:

I tried a squadron-sized SEAD strike which, due to a lack of micromanagement, suffered approximately 90% attrition.

quote:

CSG-9 threw its entire TLAM-C loadout against a Chinese airbase on the west coast, and inadvertently neutralized the majority of the Badger threat that I hadn't even known about.

quote:

AFGSC led a large cruise missile strike on unidentified mobile targets. It wasn't so coordinated as it should have been, and many expensive missiles were attrited, but it was respectably successful. Between all the JASSMs and TACTOMs, the majority of the targets were neutralized.

quote:

My score with 31 hours left to go (and after the UTC time when I had expected a strike to be launched) was 31275, which was 50% more than the threshold for a Triumph, so I called it.

quote:

During the rising tension, I noticed that the TEZ radius was not defined until it was violated. Was this intentional?

quote:

Does destroying the IRBM facility have any impact on the nuclear strikes that come if the launchers were not destroyed?

quote:

It wasn't clear to me how to treat the Nicaraguan forces - should they be considered hostile or not? Explicit guidance on this in the briefing or an EAM might be helpful. I wound up attacking them anyways because I assumed their radars were integrated with the PRC's IADS, but realized after the fact that it might have been a mistake.

quote:

What's the role of Puerto Corinto in the scenario?

quote:

Is there a reason there's no biologics off the east coast?

quote:

Guidance about the diplomatic stances of Mexico, Honduras, Belize, and Guatemala would be helpful - is it permitted for aircraft or munitions to overfly them?

quote:

This is a very interesting scenario - it's got elements of Gulf War style SEAD/DEAD and Scud hunting, with a very condensed timeframe.

It takes advantage of airframes in the database that I think are underappreciated.

The world-building is fantastic - among the best of any standalone scenario I've played.

quote:

The unlimited munitions enabled me to throw many (probably an unrealistically large amount of) very advanced cruise missiles at the targets, and eventually the defense ran out of ammunition, since SAMs don't get unlimited magazines from the scenario feature.

quote:

I think the difficulty of the scenario would increase significantly (and appropriately) if loadouts were more limited and/or if the defense had more reloads.

quote:

I'd suggest mobile ammunition trucks, not increased magazine depth in the SAM units themselves, to allow the player to create a hole in the IADS.

quote:

I would play this version again as a sandbox, and am eager to play through any future revisions you care to make. Thanks for making and sharing an excellent scenario!

quote:

- Make the road-mobile IRBMs mobile (put them on a support mission along their route and add them to the strike mission to fire them)

quote:

- Communications jamming with EA-18s (implementable with Lua)

quote:

- Give the C-2s something to do

quote:

- Based on the diplomatic situation, consider adding basing in Panama (even if only for VTOL)

quote:

- Consider adding satellites. I haven't needed to do any ABM work in this scenario yet, but would a MASINT satellite or two be helpful?

quote:

- Consider adding UAVs beyond the AAR ones embarked on CSG-12 (Personally I like the idea of an RQ-180 or RQ-4 or two because I think the player is a bit short on dedicated recce assets)

quote:

- Civilian/neutral nation air traffic/shipping

quote:

If I didn't catch 'em all, I'd better get going on that replay.

quote:

You did call out the F-35As specifically - that's my bad.

quote:

Maritime patrol is an intriguing use for the C-2s that I hadn't considered.

quote:

The Nicaraguans did attack - I just wasn't sure whether that was because I'd done something wrong or not.

quote:

I got the pop-up from the diplomat that specifies the ADIZ is 400 nm, and while a TEZ is mentioned, no radius is defined in the message.

quote:

I happen to agree adding limited magazines to the US is probably the better way to restore balance to the forces. C:MO now allows UNREP of ground units (https://command.matrixgames.com/?p=4982). I've checked it out today manually, but I haven't yet tried to implement it for a computer-controlled side.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

quote:

Purely as a matter of personal preference (not a critique of the scenario design), I'm not a fan of tracking hosted units in AFB names - I do that in a spreadsheet or word document, so I removed them from the airport names.

Well just did this as a player aide. Not sure everyone follows with a spreadsheet as you do, so given the base density I figured it would help. Did the same in the Libyan War, 1986 and folks seemed to have liked it.

quote:

Love the world building you've done here. I'm going to assume any country that doesn't have a NFZ (Mexico, Belize, Panama, etc.) have authorized me to fly over.

quote:

Not that the scenario needs more units but perhaps add a few E-6Bs over CONUS. Already have NAOC and AF1, might as well have E-6s as well. You already have two of the bases where they fly out of (Tinker and Offut). Could add Patuxent River NAS as well but as you said have to stop adding bases at some point.

Sure, I actually considered that but didn't as there weren't any Trident SSBNs. But yeah why not. There was an SSBN in my first version, it was a short nuclear war!!!!

quote:

You mention in the description to leave the Air Force One mission intact. To avoid players messing with it, you could move AF1, E-4, and E-6s (if they are added) and the AF1 support tankers to their own allied side. That will still have the world building of them being present, but the player unable to mess with them.

quote:

Are the Patriot Btys meant for AD or for ABM? If they are meant for ABM perhaps replace them with THAAD?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kushan04

E-6Bs are also used to control the USAF nuclear forces. When the USAF retired its Looking Glass aircraft, the E-6Bs took up the role for them as well as the navy Trident submarines.

quote:

I just checked its actually the other way around. The DF-100s are a cruise missile, they fly way lower then THAAD can intercept at. THAAD is used for high altitude, Patriot for lower altitudes.

quote:

Are the positions of the missile launchers, and other Chinese units, randomized?

NO!!!!

Now here is why...
I am always very careful in my scenario unit placement to ensure a unit CAN ACTUALLY GET TO ITS LOCATION! I am sometimes driven crazy by designers who do things like placing a mobile Cheese Board radar at the top of a sheer cliff with no roads leading there, because it is the highest place and radars work better there! How did it get there? last time I looked we didn't have real world teleportation yet.

Ok, what does that have to do with this scenario? TELs, SAMs and Mobile Radars are IFR (I Follow Roads ) and in this area there aren't many roads that can support those units. I considered teleporting for randomization, but those teleports would need to be along the very sparse road network to follow my rule above, so it just didn't make sense. Instead I took the approach I believe a real commander would take for deployment and the TELs and their IADS protection are dispersed along the main highways that could support them. This is one reason why I made the weather so bad to make recon more challenging. There is another aspect to this, in the real world Intel is looking for units where they are likely to be. So I feel it is very realistic for them to dispersed along the highways so no single TEL is close enough to the others to be hit by a single aircraft conventionally (maybe a nuke could get two or so, but I tried to take that into account as well).

quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Thanks! Issue is Can you load an allied aircraft on a Friendly base? I made Command Aircraft its own side. I am going to try to place them on Offutt but if not I made Joint Base Andrews as Command Aircraft side base. So I can base them there but prefer the E-6Bs to be at Offutt.[/color]

quote:

Yes, you can base allied aircraft at another allies base. I had the same setup in EDC. The USN carrier groups are on an allied but unplayable side, but the aircraft on them are on the players side.

quote:

Bugger. Saw this last night and was planning to download today but was late to the party. Dude I await your rereleased version!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Selchu

I'll take a shot at it with or without lol.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude



Now I know I have used EMP weapons before but weren't they removed nd only in the Professional version now?

quote:

C:MO now allows UNREP of ground units (https://command.matrixgames.com/?p=4982). I've checked it out today manually, but I haven't yet tried to implement it for a computer-controlled side.

quote:

I believe omnidirectional EMPs are usable by everybody, high altitude nuclear explosion EMPs are usable by everybody (but not the player in this scenario because they have no ballistic missiles), and directional EMPs are Pro only.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

quote:

I believe omnidirectional EMPs are usable by everybody, high altitude nuclear explosion EMPs are usable by everybody (but not the player in this scenario because they have no ballistic missiles), and directional EMPs are Pro only.

Thanks, I can never remember which we can use as I want to zero out the unusable (Directional EMP) weapons so no one loads them accidently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

quote:

Are the positions of the missile launchers, and other Chinese units, randomized?

NO!!!!

Now here is why...
I am always very careful in my scenario unit placement to ensure a unit CAN ACTUALLY GET TO ITS LOCATION! I am sometimes driven crazy by designers who do things like placing a mobile Cheese Board radar at the top of a sheer cliff with no roads leading there, because it is the highest place and radars work better there! How did it get there? last time I looked we didn't have real world teleportation yet.

Ok, what does that have to do with this scenario? TELs, SAMs and Mobile Radars are IFR (I Follow Roads ) and in this area there aren't many roads that can support those units. I considered teleporting for randomization, but those teleports would need to be along the very sparse road network to follow my rule above, so it just didn't make sense. Instead I took the approach I believe a real commander would take for deployment and the TELs and their IADS protection are dispersed along the main highways that could support them. This is one reason why I made the weather so bad to make recon more challenging. There is another aspect to this, in the real world Intel is looking for units where they are likely to be. So I feel it is very realistic for them to dispersed along the highways so no single TEL is close enough to the others to be hit by a single aircraft conventionally (maybe a nuke could get two or so, but I tried to take that into account as well).

quote:

That wasn't meant as a criticism. Was asking for planning on subsequent play throughs.

quote:

I agree with your reasoning. If these were Scuds in the Iraqi desert then I think not randomizing would be a missed opportunity. But in the jungle like this is set in, with limited roads, not randomizing makes perfect sense.

quote:

As for units being on top of mountains, where there's a will (or a commissar with pistol) there's a way.

Well maybe I think too much like an American Yes, military history is replete with forces doing the unexpected or "impossible" (Torpedoes at a "too shallow" Pearl Harbor). On this, yes I can see some of the older radars helioed to the top, I can see a switchback path getting it up there. I can even see some being disassembled and taken u by pack mule and reassembled. BuT, those would be exceptions not the rule, like some designers think! Consider the USMC transportable GATOR radar, meant to be portable, and look at all that goes with it!!!!

https://www.northropgrumman.com/what-we-do/land/an-tps-80-ground-air-task-oriented-radar-g-ator/

Imagine a Cheese Board taken up there. So yes older units and some newer units, but I think folks really need to think about where they are placing MOST modern radars in ultra modern scenarios.

quote:


So I didn't take it as a criticism, but it (obviously) did touch an issue for me.

quote:


SIDE: China
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
21x H-6G Badger [H-6M]
24x J-10C Vigorous Dragon
11x J-11B Flanker B [Su-27SK Copy]
6x J-20B Mighty Dragon
4x Y-8Q Cub [GX6]
29x A/C Hangar (4x Very Large Aircraft)
34x A/C Hardened Aircraft Shelter (1x Large Aircraft)
3x A/C Underground Aircraft Shelter (4x Large Aircraft)
1x Building (Electric Sub Station)
1x Building (Large)
1x Building (Transformer)
1x Building (Very Large Leadership Compound)
1x Bunker (Comm Center)
1x Bunker (Missile Alert Facility (MAF))
1x Radar (China JY-14 Great Wall)
5x Radar (China Type 120 [JY-29/LSS-1 Mod])
3x Radar (China YLC-2V Mod [Type 305B])
2x Radar (China YLC-2V)
1x Radar (China YLC-8B)
2x Radar (HQ-16A Search Radar)
1x Structure (Generator)
1x Structure (Power Station - Gas)
1x Underground Hardened Bunker (C3M)
4x 30mm China LD-2000 [Type 730] [Cargo]
4x 35mm/90 PGZ-07 SPAAG [Cargo]
18x DF-100 [Nuclear] TEL [Cargo]
17x HQ-12 Twin Rail [Cargo]
12x HQ-16A [LY-80] TEL [Cargo]
3x HQ-22 TEL [Cargo]
10x HQ-64 TEL [Aspide, LY-60] [Cargo]
16x HQ-9B TEL [Cargo]
3x SA-16 Gimlet [9K310 Igla-1] MANPADS [Cargo]
4x SA-20b Gargoyle [5P85SE] TEL [Cargo]
1x Vehicle (Cheese Board [96L6E]) [Cargo]
1x Vehicle (China H-200 HQ-22 Mod) [Cargo]
2x Vehicle (China H-200) [Cargo]
5x Vehicle (China HQ-64 Illuminator) [Cargo]
2x Vehicle (China HT-233 [HQ-9]) [Cargo]
2x Vehicle (China YLC-2V) [Cargo]
3x Vehicle (HQ-16 FCR) [Cargo]
1x Vehicle (Tombstone [30N6E]) [Cargo]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
88x HQ-16A [SA-17 Semi-Copy]
72x PL-15
11x 23mm Type 23-3 Burst [40 rnds]
14x 30mm China H/PJ-12 [Type 730, 240 rnds]
13x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
27x 30mm Gsh-30-1 Burst [30 rnds]
94x HQ-64 [Aspide, LY-60N]
32x SA-20b Gargoyle [48N6E2]
97x HQ-12
128x 35mm/90 Twin Type-90 Burst [20 rnds, China Type 902 FC]
149x HQ-9B
5x PL-10
9x HQ-22
2x YJ-12



SIDE: CONUS Aimpoints
===========================================================

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


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



SIDE: Nicaragua
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
7x J-7C Fishbed [MiG-21 Copy]
18x J-8F Finback B [J-8II]
1x Ammo Pad
4x Radar (Bar Lock A [P-37])
4x Radar (China HN-401R)
4x Radar (China HN-503)
3x Radar (China JY-8 Wall Rust)
1x Radar (China JY-8A Wall Rust)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
38x 30mm Type 30-1 x 2 Burst [30 rnds]
10x PL-8B [Python 3]
12x PL-12
7x 23mm Type 23-3 Burst [40 rnds]
22x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]



SIDE: United States
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
3x F/A-18F Super Hornet Blk III
2x F-35A Lightning II
3x RQ-4B Global Hawk Blk 40 UAV


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
3x RIM-174A ERAM SM-6 Blk IA
166x UGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
84x RGM-109I Tomahawk Blk IV MMT [Multi-Mission]
108x RGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
104x RGM-109C Tomahawk Blk III TLAM-C
6x RIM-174A ERAM SM-6 Blk IB
8x UGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM
102x RGM-109D Tomahawk Blk III TLAM-D
1x AN/ALE-50 [RT-1646/ALE]
1x RUM-139C VLA [Mk54]
1x RIM-66M-5 SM-2MR Blk IIIB
179x GBU-53/B SDB-II
39x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4
4x AN/ALE-70 FOTD
10x AN/ALE-70(V)/T-1687 Expendable Decoy
16x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Dual Spectral]
32x AGM-88E AARGM
32x AGM-154A JSOW [145 x BLU-97/B Dual Purpose]
20x GBU-31(V)4/B JDAM [BLU-109A/B]
12x AGM-154C-1 JSOW [BROACH]
2x AGM-84K SLAMER-ATA
192x AGM-158B JASSM-ER



SIDE: Biologics
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Biologic Orcas


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



SIDE: Command Aircraft
===========================================================

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


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

quote:

Ok, my nitpicks to pay the bill.

quote:

Typo in West Palm Beach Airport. I do that all the time!

quote:

CV Groups- CSG-12 CVN has no MH-60S or MH-60R helos. I know this is dressing,

quote:

but C-2's should be replaced with CMV-22B.

quote:

JATM is on the CV's so its a possible loadout. Did you want that?

quote:

Numerous Squadron #'s are higher than in real life, but it's your game world.

quote:

Global Hawks are high-end strategic drones. Very pricey and won't be forward. Perhaps the Medium drones like Reapers, Avenger, etc., in Mexico?

quote:

Any chance you can plop a few reference points down after the general location message? I had to google where these locations are. (I know boo hoo!)

quote:

Lot of clicks due to so many facilities being so close to each other. I usually end up grouping as much as I can, but it would be a good playability thing.

quote:

I did give it the full salvo tomahawk test before playing for real and was able to kill known radars, tons of aircraft and shut down all runways of the big fields. A lot of different approaches to handle this issue. It is something I'm always tinkering with on my end.