KF: Escalation Tactics

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

KF: Escalation Tactics

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 >> KF: Escalation Tactics

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/17/2022 9:37:41 PM

HalfLifeExpert

Posts: 911
Joined: 7/20/2015
From: California, United States
Status: offline

Now that I'm able to play the Kashmir Fire scenario "Escalation" at a smoother speed (due to patches and a RAM upgrade), I've taken a few cracks at it.

I've found it pretty challenging to pull off a successful air/missile strike against the PRC Carrier Groups. The biggest obstacle seems to be the Type 055 Destroyer/Cruiser that accompanies each flattop.

The tactics I've previously used against Soviet Surface forces in Cold War I scenarios are not cutting it.

How do you guys recommend I take on the PRC Carriers?

Due to the ready times needed onboard the JFK, I'm mainly referring to using the air group onboard USS Abraham Lincoln against the southern PRC Carrier Group, centered around Shandong. For the JFK, I've found that I pretty much have to play defensive and evade for a while.

I've tried to make use of MALD OECM decoys to spoof or distract the enemy defenses. AARGM strikes have had limited success. LRASMs get pretty close to the ships but are almost always stopped just short of the targets.

Maybe I'm using Decoys wrong? Should I try laying Chaff clouds from, say, my Growlers and/or F-35s as screens?

Should I try combining my EW/Decoy forces solely with the two B-1s out of Diego Garcia? I attempted that with failure, maybe another attempt is in order?

I've found that, if the PRC and US CV Group capabilities are accurate here, neither side can effectively airstrike each other, they can only thwart each other's attacks.

< Message edited by HalfLifeExpert -- 2/17/2022 9:50:55 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/18/2022 12:19:17 AM

SeaQueen

Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline

quote:

How do you guys recommend I take on the PRC Carriers?

A submarine.

But if you're going to use airplanes...

You're going to need to think along more complicated lines, and there isn't a single solution, or at least there shouldn't be. Build up a plan so that you get a variety of effects simultaneously. It isn't one thing or another, but rather, both.

For example, if you combine MALDS, Growler's jamming, LRASM, F-35 and AARGM you might achieve better effects. If the MALDS arrive simultaneously (or maybe a few seconds ahead or behind) the LRASM you'll make the LRASMs more likely to penetrate. At the same time, the Growler will make the LRASM harder to detect. You'll get the best effect if LRASM is fired along the same line as the Growler. With AARGM you could choose to either fire reactively, as the bad guys' light up their radars on the incoming decoys and cruise missiles or you could fire them pre-emptively (using the BOL function) and time it so that the AARGMs arrive at the same time as the LRASM and MALDS do. This further complicates the bad guy's targeting picture, right, because now you're presenting them with a dilemma. They can fire at the mass of cruise missiles coming at them (many of which are actually decoys) or they can fire at the AARGMs. If that doesn't work, you can add in F-35 with GBUs, or experiment with their onboard ECM as well.

(in reply to HalfLifeExpert)

Post #: 2

RE: KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/18/2022 11:15:35 AM

tylerblakebrandon

Posts: 173
Joined: 5/11/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaQueen

With AARGM ... or you could fire them pre-emptively (using the BOL function)....

I may be wrong but the MMW on the AARGM do you need to BOL launch since surface ships themselves are a valid target? Of course, that may not provide the desired seeker behavior and BOL may do that. Not sure, could try it both ways.

(in reply to SeaQueen)

Post #: 3

RE: KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/18/2022 7:14:56 PM

HalfLifeExpert

Posts: 911
Joined: 7/20/2015
From: California, United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaQueen

quote:

How do you guys recommend I take on the PRC Carriers?

A submarine.

Yeah I do see how a Sub may be my most effective option, the issue is that Realistic Sub Comms limits my ability to coordinate them and have them maintain stealthiness.

Perhaps I should narrow down their sea control patrol zones to expected areas of the PRC flattops (I previously had 3x sizable patrol zones, one close to Pakistan for Vermont and New Hampshire, one to the south of that for Connecticut, and one covering the approach of Abraham Lincoln for Virginia and Cheyenne)

I did this because of Realistic Sub Comms, to try to simulate the Subs operating independently while still having the same general mission as the rest of my forces.

quote:

But if you're going to use airplanes...

You're going to need to think along more complicated lines, and there isn't a single solution, or at least there shouldn't be. Build up a plan so that you get a variety of effects simultaneously. It isn't one thing or another, but rather, both.

For example, if you combine MALDS, Growler's jamming, LRASM, F-35 and AARGM you might achieve better effects. If the MALDS arrive simultaneously (or maybe a few seconds ahead or behind) the LRASM you'll make the LRASMs more likely to penetrate. At the same time, the Growler will make the LRASM harder to detect. You'll get the best effect if LRASM is fired along the same line as the Growler. With AARGM you could choose to either fire reactively, as the bad guys' light up their radars on the incoming decoys and cruise missiles or you could fire them pre-emptively (using the BOL function) and time it so that the AARGMs arrive at the same time as the LRASM and MALDS do. This further complicates the bad guy's targeting picture, right, because now you're presenting them with a dilemma. They can fire at the mass of cruise missiles coming at them (many of which are actually decoys) or they can fire at the AARGMs. If that doesn't work, you can add in F-35 with GBUs, or experiment with their onboard ECM as well.

Hmm, I wasn't aware AARGMs have Bearing only launch capability. I've become so accustomed to needing that enemy sensor to emit.

I found JSOWs to be largely useless against such a strong surface force, the problem is that some of my aircraft are already armed/arming with them, and I hesitate to take up more time re-arming the aircraft.

Perhaps a risky low altitude run with F-35s with internal bombs only may have good results? It could be costly in aircraft, but in a major, war-deciding sea battle, perhaps it would be worth it?

I guess I need to improve my airstrike coordination abilities then.

< Message edited by HalfLifeExpert -- 2/18/2022 7:24:22 PM >

(in reply to SeaQueen)

Post #: 4

RE: KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/18/2022 9:04:06 PM

Twistedpretzel

Posts: 47
Joined: 9/6/2020
Status: offline

The BOL capability of the ARRGM is nice for units that aren't actively emitting. They see an incoming attack, thus encouraging them to radiate and unintentionally presenting themselves as targets.

(in reply to HalfLifeExpert)

Post #: 5

RE: KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/18/2022 10:46:41 PM

SeaQueen

Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline

quote:

I may be wrong but the MMW on the AARGM do you need to BOL launch since surface ships themselves are a valid target? Of course, that may not provide the desired seeker behavior and BOL may do that. Not sure, could try it both ways.

Maybe? I'm usually using AARGM against SAMs, but if you can go for it. I'm not sure if it will have the same effect, though. If one homes on the boat and the other homes on the radar, it might not damage the same systems, which is what you're looking for. I don't know if CMO gets that detailed or not.

(in reply to tylerblakebrandon)

Post #: 6

RE: KF: Escalation Tactics - 2/18/2022 10:58:58 PM

SeaQueen

Posts: 1451
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HalfLifeExpert
Yeah I do see how a Sub may be my most effective option, the issue is that Realistic Sub Comms limits my ability to coordinate them and have them maintain stealthiness.

Perhaps I should narrow down their sea control patrol zones to expected areas of the PRC flattops (I previously had 3x sizable patrol zones, one close to Pakistan for Vermont and New Hampshire, one to the south of that for Connecticut, and one covering the approach of Abraham Lincoln for Virginia and Cheyenne)

I did this because of Realistic Sub Comms, to try to simulate the Subs operating independently while still having the same general mission as the rest of my forces.

In my opinion, "realistic" sub comms are anything but in any era past the early 80s. In the modern age, submarines are not nearly as "alone and unafraid" as they once were as communications options are greater. Furthermore, the necessity to oversee the AI's often less than intelligent behavior counter balances the "realism" improvement that might be made by communications limitation.

quote:

I found JSOWs to be largely useless against such a strong surface force, the problem is that some of my aircraft are already armed/arming with them, and I hesitate to take up more time re-arming the aircraft.

JSOWS are best for use against the relatively low end threats, where maybe they have some point defense SAMs or guns that you don't necessarily want to tangle with (and hence you want to stand off a bit) but at the same time, they're not so much of a threat that the lack of speed and stealth of a JSOW will limit the effectiveness of the raid. Think things like FFLs and PTGs.

quote:

Perhaps a risky low altitude run with F-35s with internal bombs only may have good results? It could be costly in aircraft, but in a major, war-deciding sea battle, perhaps it would be worth it?

It's worth a try. One of the advantages of SDB is that even though it has a small warhead, you can drop lots of them from a fairly substantial distance. Sometimes more smaller weapons is better than a few bigger weapons. Even if you manage to just degrade the threat, that opens up the possibility of a more effective restrike. Don't be afraid to grind on 'em. Ships are meant to survive for months at sea and face multiple raids over the course of that deployment. One raid is often not what it'll take.

(in reply to HalfLifeExpert)

Post #: 7