Falkland Scenario (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series



Message

Krasny -> Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:30:17 AM)

The Falkland scenario opens up with a neutral missile heading towards your ship.

The only sane thing to do is shoot it down. But that leads to all Argentinian forces becoming hostile.

There is a question here somewhere.

Does shooting the missile down violate the ROE? If so why don't I lose the scenario?

Thanks.



ComDev -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:39:39 AM)

Which Falklands scenario?[8D]



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:46:32 AM)

Stand Up.



mattpenfold -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:48:55 AM)

The RoE allow you to defend yourself.



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:49:55 AM)

The ROE in this scenario do seem to be a complete nonsense.

I just had the Portland sunk due to not shooting at neutral units.



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:53:46 AM)

Like I said the only sane thing to do when a missile is coming towards you is to shoot it down.

Since that occurs at the start of the scenario, and results in all Argentine units turning hostile, the ROE is borked.



mattpenfold -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 11:56:46 AM)

How is that nonsense ?

The RoE allow you to defend yourself. To quote the RoE: "UK forces may only fire in self defense or when its absolutely clear they're going to be attacked."

Being fired on means you can fire back.



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 12:01:16 PM)

Because the scenario begins in a de facto state of war anyway, and because the shooting down of one missile should not result in total war.



mattpenfold -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 12:12:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krasny

Because the scenario begins in a de facto state of war anyway, and because the shooting down of one missile should not result in total war.


It does not result in total war.

What part of the British having to wait until they are either fired on, or are certain they are going to be fired on are you having problems understanding ? The rules represent British uncertainty about Argentinian intentions. They are allowed to defend themselves if attacked. They are not allowed to initiate hostilities. Pretty much standard rules of engagement in peacetime. Clearly in your game the Argentinians attacked you early on - that is not always the case. Once they attack you you are allowed to shoot back - if you could not be bothered doing so that is your lookout.




kaburke61 -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 5:13:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mattpenfold


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krasny

Because the scenario begins in a de facto state of war anyway, and because the shooting down of one missile should not result in total war.


It does not result in total war.

What part of the British having to wait until they are either fired on, or are certain they are going to be fired on are you having problems understanding ? The rules represent British uncertainty about Argentinian intentions. They are allowed to defend themselves if attacked. They are not allowed to initiate hostilities. Pretty much standard rules of engagement in peacetime. Clearly in your game the Argentinians attacked you early on - that is not always the case. Once they attack you you are allowed to shoot back - if you could not be bothered doing so that is your lookout.




Yep, in my run through, Argentina did not attack early at all, in fact I finally initiated hostilities when a flight of their aircraft (a4? can't remember now) was on an attack vector to my ship.



$trummer -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 5:55:24 PM)

I was curious about the ROE here, too. I wasn't attacked but initiated hostilities when one of the Argentinian warships came too close to Port Stanley for comfort and large numbers of fighters were launching from the mainland. I don't agree that the ROE make no sense, but it would be more realistic if (i) the briefing/ROE incorporated a specific exclusion zone around the islands, incursions into which will formally initiate hostities and/or (ii) it were possible to program the AI to have a "disengage" option so that the scenario is not automatically "all or nothing". Deterrence operations do not generally result in worst-case outcomes; they generally play out as standoffs, games of "chicken"; difficult, if not impossible, for computer AI to model this, though.



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 6:15:44 PM)

Is there any downside to initiating hostilities?

Also firing on a missile does result in total war. All Argentinian units become hostile.



kaburke61 -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 8:12:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krasny

Is there any downside to initiating hostilities?

Also firing on a missile does result in total war. All Argentinian units become hostile.


I don't think so, least not in my playthoroughs....

I'm not sure, but I don't think currently there is a way to penalize for breaking ROE (for instance to tell who sunk a neutral unit) I just started playing with scenario creation so I may not have figured it out yet.



mattpenfold -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:00:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krasny

Is there any downside to initiating hostilities?

Also firing on a missile does result in total war. All Argentinian units become hostile.



All Argentinian units becoming hostile is not total war. Total war is a term with a quite specific meaning and that meaning involves the entire industrial and economic focus of a nation being devoted to the war. A small war in the South Atlantic does not qualify, despite your claims to the contrary. Not even the war in '82 was a total war. The last total war the UK was involved in was the Second World War.



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:16:24 PM)

Well whatever you wish to call it, shooting down one missile results in all Argentinian units becoming hostile.



mattpenfold -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:26:21 PM)

Who do you think fired the missile ?

I really cannot understand quite what your issue is.

The situation is like this. There are tensions between the UK and Argentina at the start of the scenario but as yet no hostilities. Your role as commander of the UK forces is to position your units in such a way you will be able to respond to any Argentinian aggression without being the side that initiates hostilities. If and when the Argentinians start shooting you are free to fire back.

What is so hard to understand about that ?



Krasny -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:33:25 PM)

I'm saying that shooting down a missile should not necessarily start a war.

Also this scenario exposes the RoE as being merely roleplaying guidelines.



ExMachina -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:35:33 PM)

quote:

Well whatever you wish to call it, shooting down one missile results in all Argentinian units becoming hostile.


The "hostility" is merely a designation by the British player. Argentina lobs a missile at a British vessel and the Brits say "ok, looks like Argentinian forces are hostile".



mattpenfold -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:38:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krasny

I'm saying that shooting down a missile should not necessarily start a war.

Also this scenario exposes the RoE as being merely roleplaying guidelines.


I am still not understanding what your issue is.

The Argentinians fired a missile at you, thus initiating hostilities.



ExMachina -> RE: Falkland Scenario (10/8/2013 9:39:43 PM)

quote:

I'm saying that shooting down a missile should not necessarily start a war.


Technically correct--the shooting down shouldn't start hostilities. Rather, the hostilities should start when the missile was first detected...are you saying that the scenario waits too long to declare Argentina's forces hostile?



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
6.90625