MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!!

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!!

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> FlashPoint Germany >> Scenario Design and Editing >> MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!!

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 3/4/2005 10:30:14 PM

CarnageINC

Posts: 2208
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: Rapid City SD
Status: offline

WOW! Okay.....please someone tell me that there is a map and scenerio editors being developed? PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!

I stumbled across these links doing some research. These are a must have if you want to create entire scenerios or campiagns with massive amounts of units to choose from. These are so detailed in equipment specs...I fell off my chair! CHECK THESE OUT!

NATO
http://orbat.com/site/history/historical/nato/oob1989.html

WARSAW PACT
http://orbat.com/site/history/historical/nato/warsawpact.html

These are so close in date to what FPG has the developers must have used this info!

I thought I would share these way cool sites.

Post #: 1

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 3/5/2005 2:09:11 AM

Catgh_MatrixForum

Posts: 665
Joined: 3/13/2002
From: Durango, CO
Status: offline

Scenario editors are included. Map editor/process is being documented and probably will be coming out soon.

(in reply to CarnageINC)

Post #: 2

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/9/2005 4:28:51 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

It's prety funny that you should post a site containing those 2 orders of Battle considering I am the one that wrote those and provided the OOBs for the game:) So I guess it was a pretty good assumption on your part. The ones on the site are just a bit out of date. Since I did those long ago..I have tweaked them with the help of a few other friends and sources to get what is now in FPG.

Sabre21 aka Andy J.

(in reply to Catgh_MatrixForum)

Post #: 3

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/9/2005 4:44:15 PM

Paul37

Posts: 10
Joined: 3/28/2005
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

Sabre, are you going get to make other OOb's than theones in the game as it is?

_____________________________

Fahren, Funken, Feuern!!

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 4

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/11/2005 6:58:26 AM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Hi Paul

I pretty much have every Nato/WP OOB from that time frame..Ill be able to work on the Dutch for you..I have family coming this next weekend for a week so not sure how much time in the next week I'll have. Ill look at it though..I know Rob wants the Dutch one too.

There is an old aqaintance of mine that comes to these forums on occasion that is from the Netherlands. Jo van der Plum helped me update the Dutch OOB a while back and he has a very complete Dutch OOB for the cold war era.

I think I need to start reviewing these forums a little more often now:) Kinda slacked off after I moved.

Sabre

(in reply to Paul37)

Post #: 5

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/11/2005 9:39:28 PM

IronManBeta

Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline

Hey, I know I would appreciate it!

Cheers, Rob.

(in reply to CarnageINC)

Post #: 6

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/13/2005 3:15:06 AM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Well I re-loaded all my old work back onto my system and will get to work finishing those other OOB's. Is there a priority? I assume from what I read here is that you need the Dutch, Belgique, and French. Anyone else? I have a pretty thorough Danish, Norwegian, Italian, ans Spanish OOB too.

Sabre

(in reply to IronManBeta)

Post #: 7

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/13/2005 3:39:34 AM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Sabre,

Awesome tables. Worth the price of the game on their own. I've been using them to construct new CSV files with actual unit names and correct structures. The biggest help in your tables is the notes outlining vehicle composition of the various units. I'm in the process now of working with Rob to improve the selection mechanics so players can build "historical" battles with the units in the right zones (North and Central Germany at the moment). Rob is also looking into modding the datafile structures to allow for smaller files and easier edits and additions.

Once again awesome stuff!

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 8

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/13/2005 4:40:38 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Thanks Cap'n D:)

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 9

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/14/2005 5:53:11 AM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Sabre,

Do you have information on the types of vehicles in use in the different Soviet forces. I'd like to rebuild the Soviet structure file and looking at some of the data there are a large number of vehicle variations (T-80B, T-80BV, T-80U, etc) in the '89 timeframe. If the 3rd Shock Army used T-80BV's I'd like to have that correct in these new tables.

Thanks.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 10

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/14/2005 3:37:01 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

I have the exact data of what is in every type of Soviet formation from a rifle squad all the way up to an Army Front. The data I provided Rob is pretty precise when it comes to the OOB of the Soviet forces in general. If you want more precise data, I have it.

For instance, at 100% TO&E, a BMP equipped Motorized Rifle Company consisted of 7 officers and 103 enlisted personnel plus 1 attached enlisted radio operator from the divisional signal platoon.. A HQ section of 3 officers, 3 enlisted and 1 BMPk..the 3 officers and enlisted driver were equipped with the PM50 pistol and the other 2 enlisted had AK74's. There was a Machine Gun Platoon of 1 officer and 16 enlisted and 2 BMP2's. The Platton leader and the 2 vehicle drivers had PM50's. There were 6 Machine Gunners equipped with a PKM mg and a PM50 pistol each. the 6 assistant gunners and the 2 vehicle commanders each had an AKM74. There were 3 Motorized Rifle Platoons each with 1 Officer and 28 enlisted. Each platoon had 3 BMP2's and 3 rifle squads. The PL had the PM-50 while the Platoon Sergeant had a AK74. The rifle squads each had 9 enlisted. The Squad leader had the AK74 while the BMP gunner and driver had the PM50 pistol. The squad medic had the AK74 as did 3 of the riflemen. There was a squad grenadier with an RPG7v and a machinegunner with a RPK74. One rifleman within each platoon was also equipped with the SVD sniper rifle. Each BMP also had an R123 VHF-FM vehicle radio and there was one R148 VHF-FM low power radio per platoon.

As for tank and other vehicle types and variants for that time frame I can say off the top of my head that the 8th Guards Army was equipped with the T80U and BMP2 which are the primary variants of those types and the T80K which is the command tank variant. The 3rd SA was equipped with the T64B, BMP2 and the T64K. As for the other Armies I would have to look them up to be certain, I do know that there were some units still equipped with the T64A but not in the 8GA. All Soviet forces in GSFG were equipped with the 2S6 by that time but the regimental SAM regiment varied fom one division to another whether they used the SA6 or the SA8B, the SA15, as far as I know wasn't yet deployed outside the SU. As for Artillery, Tank and BMP regiments used the 2S1 and BTR regiments used the D30. Divisional artillery was the 2S3 for GSFG units. Army level artillery included the 2S5 and the 2S7. The SS21's had replaced the Frog7's at division level and ScudB's were still at Army level although some SS23's were being deployed. The T72 ,T62, or T55 was not found in any of the GSFG units but both the T72 and T55 were in the East German Armies (but not the T62, T64, nor T80).

I'm not sure to what degree of info you want, as you can see it can get pretty nitty gritty. One thing I want to point out though is that at any given time different units within the GSFG were undergoing upgrades from older to newer models. To precisely pinpoint which units had what at a specific date would be impossible to determine. The same was true of any Nato unit, especially the US, there were 3 variants of the M1 in Germany alone along with the M60A3, but we were upgrading to the M1A1 at the rate of 1 battalion per month by 1988. We also had the M2, M2A1, and the M2A2 along with the M113 still in some of the MechInf units. The info I provided Rob was a snapshot in time for the US forces.

But here is the real clincher, had we gone down the slippery slope to war, both sides would have expedited the upgrades to the frontline units depending on time available. Don't forget the US had over 5 full divisions worth of firstline equipment sitting in Pomcus storage sites throughout Germany, and this equipment, while intended for reforger units, could easily have been used to reconstitute or reinforce existing units. So to say exactly what each variant type of equipment a unit had would be involving the use of a crystal ball and mine is out of batteries at the moment:) The Soviets weren't much different either, so while the 79th GTD was equipped with the T80U, after the first week of combat, some of it's units may have been reconstitued with some of the 30,000 T55's or T62's the Soviets had in storage.

What I am getting at here is that it is a pretty safe bet to use the best equipment available or create a scenario that could involve any number of possibilities. Heck, you could even add a Rumanian variant since some of their units still had the T34/85.

Sabre

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 11

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/15/2005 12:07:53 AM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Sabre,

I'm pretty sure I don't need to know that the 3rd BMP driver walks with a limp. LOL. The info on what units used what version of vehicles will do just fine. The game doesn't have variants other then the command tanks right now and I want to go in and add the T-80BV, T-80U, and correctly define the T-80B (one in game currently). Given some of the issues people are having with the WP forces I may jump to them next instead of the rest of the NATO structures. One other bit of info that would help is a breakdown on artillery loadouts. In partiular, percentage of ICM, GAS, Minelettes and smoke used. From some reading I did last night it appears that the Russians had a fair amount of laser guided arty (Krosnopol) in 89. Be nice to verify that though.

Thanks again for all your help.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 12

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/15/2005 5:24:48 AM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Cap'n D

One of my additional duties when I served as a pilot starting back in 83 all the way until the soviet collapse was the Battalion Threat officer. My job was to train the other pilots and crewmembers on identifing warsaw pact and nato vehicles and equipment, doctrine, and organization. Every day I would spend 10-15 minutes at the pilots briefs showing slides on vehicles/aircraft or providing some sort of intel update. Usually once a month I would give a couple hour long spill. I even used to play Russian army music over the intercom system and had russian slogans painted on various hanger walls. On several occasions I thought I was gonna get lynched for going a bit far..hehe. Heck..I even got the pilots out to shoot live fire on various soviet small arms. There was an on-going joke that I was on a first name basis with all the tank drivers in the 8GA. On a serious side though I did have a friend that was shot and killed by a Russian soldier trying to take a few pics he wasn't supposed to and I do recall standing about 6 inches from a Russian captain with an armed soldier behind him..hey...so much for the good ol days.

I have never heard of a T80B though..T64B..yes...but I will be getting an actual hard copy of the game soon so I can see whats in there. As far as knowing whhich tank a unit had in GSFG..probably the best I can do is whether they had the T80U or not. It is possible that in the latter nineties some of the different variants became more apparent..I will check thru what I have though to be sure.

Artillery loadouts shouldn't be too hard to find out..but as for warhead types..they had lots of HE and lots of gas...but minlettes or laser guided munitions..I seriously doubt there was much of that. Those munitions are extremely expensive, I know the loadout on an M109 back in them days was only a single copperhead...just one. The thing was 5 feet long and had to be inserted in the tube in 2 pieces. I will do some research on that though and check with a friend I know at Ft Rucker..if he is still there..he's as old as dirt and a guru on anything from the Cold war era.

Sabre

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 13

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/15/2005 6:43:36 AM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Cap'n d

So far here is what I have. I double checked and in 1989 only the 8GA and the 1GTA were equipped with the T80U and T80UK. The other 3 Armies..3rd Shock, 2GTA and 20GA all were equipped with the T64B and T64BK. Earlier variants of the T80 were not present in GSFG from what I can find, from what I read..and suspected the T80B and BV variants had to do with armor upgrades or era. The T64B that was deployed was the modified version capable of using the era.

While I am sure that there is a possiblility that some units may have been in a transition to upgrading to the T80U, from what I can find by 1989 that transition was complete for 8GA and 1GTA. From what I read, what is now referred to as the T80B is what we all referred to in 1989 as just the plain T80. As it turns out the original T80 was not produced in large numbers and quickly replaced with the T80B. As for the BV variant and using ERA, I am pretty sure this is the variant used in GSFG prior to the T80U. But as I indicated above, all data I have show both the 8GA and 1GTA equipped with the T80U.
But you could create a scenario using them by adding a unit from the 28th CAA that was supposed to reinforce into the 8GA area from the SU.

Sabre

< Message edited by Sabre21 -- 4/15/2005 7:00:38 AM >

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 14

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/15/2005 1:53:57 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Sabre,

Thanks for the info. I'll use it when I start putting together the enhanced CSV file for the WP. I'm also getting data together to add a number of the key variants in the the games platform database.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 15

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/25/2005 5:01:22 PM

Sabre21

Posts: 8231
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: on a mountain in Idaho
Status: offline

Cap'n D

Here is more info on the artillery systems.

The Semi-Active Laser Guided munition (SLP) can be fired from most 122mm or 152mm howitzer. The primary weapon systems in use were the Division and Army level 2S3 and D20 howitzers and Regimental level 2S1 and D30 howitzers. As for Artillery delivered mines..both AP and AT, can also be delivered by the 2S3 or D20 plus the BM22 Rocket Launcher system found at Front level. In 1989 the BM22 was not yet at Army level and only in the Front level Rocket Regiments.

I just want to caution you on that the SLP and scatterable mines were very new in 1989 and would be considered very rare for WP forces, although I would assume that in wartime the latter may have had procurement increased. IMO, in the case of the SLP, there were much cheaper and better ways to kill armor. SLP is not cost effective considering what the primary mission of the artillery is used for.

Units of fire and basic loads for the artillery systems are:

2S1 - UoF is 80 basic load is 40 HE, HEAT, Chemical, WP (smoke), Illum, Flechette, SLP
2S3 - UoF is 60 basic load is 46 ammo type: HE, HEAT, Chemical, Nuclear, WP (smoke), Illum, Flechette, Scatterable mines, SLP
D30 - UoF is 80 no basic load ammo type: HE, HEAT, Chemical, WP (smoke), Illum, Flechette, SLP
D20 - UoF is 60 no basic load ammo type: HE, HEAT, Chemical, Nuclear, WP (smoke), Illum, Flechette, Scatterable mines, SLP
2S9 - UoF is 80 basic load is 60 ammo type: HE, HEAT, WP (smoke), Illum
2S5 - UoF is 40 basic load is 25 ammo type: HE, Chemical, Nuclear
2S7 - UoF is 40 no basic load ammo type: HE, Nuclear
BM21 - UoF is 120 basic load is 40 ammo type: HE, Chemical
BM22 - UoF is 48 basic load is 16 ammo type: HE, Chemical, AP/AT scatterable mines, Incendiary bomblets (ICM)

As noted above, the only ICM type is fired by the BM22, and then it's an incendiary type munition.

The definition of a basic load is what the actual weapon system has on board the vehicle while the UoF is what is readily available in ammo carries plus what is carried onboard.

Sabre

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 16

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 4/26/2005 1:43:14 AM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Sabre,

Thanks for the info. It will come in handy as I work through the data.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 17

RE: MUST HAVE LINKS FOR SCENERIOS!!! - 5/1/2005 5:17:00 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Sabre,

I'm starting to work throught the Brit's right now to clean up the CSV file. I have 3 questions looking at your OOB and also the existing CSV.

1. Are the Battle Groups in the CSV file correct? They do not match anything in your OOB.

2. Are the Army Aviation Regiments the same as the Airborne in your TO&E?

3. What is the composition for the various NATO scout and attack helo units (US, UK, WG)? I have them as attached units for scenario generation but need better numbers on flight compositions. I'd also like your opinion on if they should be a large group or broken down to teams for game play (Looking for the realist approach given the games scale).

Thanks for your help.

S!

Cap'n D

(in reply to Sabre21)

Post #: 18