RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME

RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios

Message

Veni -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/2/2014 5:32:15 PM)
Well stated, GrumpyMel. It seems nearly impossible to NOT go into 'politics' when the scenario revolves around the Middle East/Central Asia. It seems a shame; I trust there are varied viewpoints with the potential for much fruitful, intelligent and reasonable discourse in this community, yet the appropriate focus here would be crafting lion_of_judah's scenario. Of course it's hypothetical (e.g., anyone who has spent quality time in Afghanistan would recognize the implausibility of an AF-PAK alliance), but as GrumpyMel notes, it's lion_of_judah's baby. I guarantee my 'politics' differ sharply from lion_of_judah, but it seems a kick-ass scenario all the same. @Lion_of_Judah: Out of curiosity, though, how are you modelling: 1. Non-state actors (e.g. Al-Qa'ida) 2. People/people groups (from the screenies above, I see 'Muslim' and 'Israeli' [religion and national]. It might be interesting to break 'Muslim' down (Arab/Kurd, Sunni/Shi'a, etc.) and duke out a Sa'udi coalition vs Iran coalition conflict (neutral Israel?), versus viewing Islam as a unified political entity (my two cents). 3. The current Syrian conflict (if at all?). That might be interesting (per nr.2) as precipitating a wider regional conflict.

ironduke1955 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/2/2014 10:27:58 PM)
If in fact the statement was purely a fantasy and had no political commentary intent. Then I apologize. But perhaps it would be possible to refer to the US President as just that the US President. We suffer everyday a continual barrage of anti Obama comments on all US forums and public sites whatever the topic it will be Obama's fault. I am now on a hair trigger regards such comments.

Twotribes -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/3/2014 12:57:42 AM)
Ya cause heaven forbid someone disagree with his policies and his administration.

ironduke1955 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/3/2014 3:40:24 AM)
And that is the reason Politics should be kept out of the Forum North Carolina. Because with some people there is absolutely no doubt which side of the political divide they stand. And now I have no doubts that you were pleased with the comment made by the Lion of Judah, even if he was unaware what he had said you certainly were not.

Twotribes -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/3/2014 3:45:01 AM)
Pot meet kettle.

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/3/2014 5:57:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ironduke1955 "obama's arab spring has backfired, why Pakistan and Afghanistan are now united" Not sure if Obama is responsible for the Arab spring, I believe it started in Tunisia and had more to do with rejection of the old political status quo in the middle east in some countries. Duo to high unemployment Corruption nepotism and police state leaning's of the regime's. Sometimes Hi jacked by the Islamists. If you were to blame any US president it would be Bush and his overthrowing of Saddam Hussein touting western democracy. Saddam being the worst of the Arab tyrannical Regime's but also secular there was no place for extreme Islamist's in Saddam's Iraq. I'm not getting into any political discourse as I respect others opinions and vice-versa. As this is just a game based in the real world, I based the premises of the scenario on the Arab spring and it failure as I see it and what consequences this will or could have. Is this meant to be political, NOPE just a what if, let the chips fall where they may as one would say ( in game terms). Just as all these WW2 hypothetical scenarios we see all the time, this is no different. The Islamic states idea was what would happen if both Afghanistan and Pakistan would unite (very hypothetical), and form one large Islamic nation. what would the consequences be for the region, as a whole ( including Israel). I promise ( my opinion)that nation would be a large threat to Iran and that starts a whole new group of problems. Like I said this is hypothetical what if's nothing more. People group for the Islamic states, I could not think what these two united nations would call themselves so the easiest route was to go with " Muslim" as with all the Arab regimes was to go with Arab. I did not want 10 different Arab regimes to deal with so going with Arab was the easiest as was going with Muslim. So any non political way to make this scenario good I will appreciate. As for the guerrilla groups I would turn the Mercenaries into these groups and go from there. I have added the Russians as they appear too be re-establishing their old alliances with the Arab world. I'm thinking about adding the Syrian free army into the mix, but not sure. Israel, keeping them as neutral in my view even for a hypothetical situation would be too unreal and so they are active. So any opinion on this scenario will be appreciated. This needs to be kept to hypothetical game play only, nothing more

GrumpyMel -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/3/2014 5:37:56 PM)
It looks to be a very interesting scenario, Lion_of_Judah. One of the things you might want to think about toying around with to bring the neutral powers into play aside from a simple "neutral until attacked" is the use of a political influence mechanism where the players can play event cards to lower the neutrality of different inactive powers in an attempt to bring them into the conflict on their side, then do a random check to see if that threshold was surpased. You could maybe even handle non-state actors or limited support from out of theatre forces (limited US support, UN PeaceKeepers, etc). The advantage of that mechanism, I think is that it adds a bit more tension and uncertainty to the scenario (appropriate to the theme). A player can't simply assure himself that a given power will remain out of play by avoiding attacking it.... he'll have to wonder if his opponent is trying to influence....and if so, should he attack first when he might have the advantage of a first strike? Something to think about.

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/4/2014 6:23:36 AM)
that is a good idea. One problem is that I suck at programming and would need help in this area. If this becomes reality, then I would like to have the neutral nations in question become active on specific events as well as just plain old declaring war against them. But each regime would still be their original regime and controlled by a specific player. This has major possibilities though and I'm interested in seeing this become a reality....

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/4/2014 7:18:28 PM)
I have added another regime " Islamic Caliphate" or another name is the ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham) real world jihadi group fighting in Syria/Iraq. I have attached a article regarding this latest battle in Iraq and only for information purposes only, nothing more. http://debka.com/article/23571/Al-Qaeda-defeats-a-major-Iraqi-army-offensive-invades-Ramadi-and-Falluja

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/4/2014 7:24:40 PM)
Veni it appears that Al'Qa'ida does have a state of sorts now stretching from portions of Iraq into Northern Syria 160km from the Syrian City of Aleppo so I have added it as another regime " Islamic Caliphate" thoughts appreciated.

Veni -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 12:38:35 AM)
Yes, I've been following this closely. Here's a good read if you're interested: http://www.juancole.com/2014/01/iraqs-sunni-civil.html Cheers!

Jeffrey H. -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 2:08:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ironduke1955 If in fact the statement was purely a fantasy and had no political commentary intent. Then I apologize. But perhaps it would be possible to refer to the US President as just that the US President. We suffer everyday a continual barrage of anti Obama comments on all US forums and public sites whatever the topic it will be Obama's fault. I am now on a hair trigger regards such comments. But you weren't on a hair trigger when GB was president right ? Or were you ? TBH I felt the same way back then. It doesn't bother me now. Right or wrong the administrations policies now get stuck on whose running the show at the time, regardless of whether they are simply a continuation or not.

Twotribes -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 3:05:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H. quote: ORIGINAL: ironduke1955 If in fact the statement was purely a fantasy and had no political commentary intent. Then I apologize. But perhaps it would be possible to refer to the US President as just that the US President. We suffer everyday a continual barrage of anti Obama comments on all US forums and public sites whatever the topic it will be Obama's fault. I am now on a hair trigger regards such comments. But you weren't on a hair trigger when GB was president right ? Or were you ? TBH I felt the same way back then. It doesn't bother me now. Right or wrong the administrations policies now get stuck on whose running the show at the time, regardless of whether they are simply a continuation or not. He called me hairtiggered I replied Pot meet kettle.

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 3:12:52 AM)
Veni read the article and watched the news video. Very interesting indeed, thanks for the information. any thoughts on how to implement any of this

ironduke1955 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 4:54:56 AM)
Lion of Judah has cleared up his intent several days ago. So follow your own advice and No Politics, or when you say no Politics are you unable to take your own advice. And stop whistling Dixie over bush nobody's buying.

Jeffrey H. -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 5:52:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffrey H. quote: ORIGINAL: ironduke1955 If in fact the statement was purely a fantasy and had no political commentary intent. Then I apologize. But perhaps it would be possible to refer to the US President as just that the US President. We suffer everyday a continual barrage of anti Obama comments on all US forums and public sites whatever the topic it will be Obama's fault. I am now on a hair trigger regards such comments. But you weren't on a hair trigger when GB was president right ? Or were you ? TBH I felt the same way back then. It doesn't bother me now. Right or wrong the administrations policies now get stuck on whose running the show at the time, regardless of whether they are simply a continuation or not. He called me hairtiggered I replied Pot meet kettle. I agree with you.

baloo7777 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/6/2014 11:19:04 PM)
If I was a "good" player, I would like to enter into this scenario in a multiplayer game! It looks very good. I have played the basic ATG mirrored vs AI game twice. First time I lost badly, and the 2nd time I won after a long slugfest (more like WW1 with static attrition). But the game ATG is excellent and this mod looks like it would be fun to play. Thanks for the screenshots!

ironduke1955 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/7/2014 12:24:17 PM)
I guess it must take some time for a idea to sink into your obfuscated minds. But what part of no politics don't you understand.

GrumpyMel -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/7/2014 2:56:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: baloo7777 If I was a "good" player, I would like to enter into this scenario in a multiplayer game! It looks very good. I have played the basic ATG mirrored vs AI game twice. First time I lost badly, and the 2nd time I won after a long slugfest (more like WW1 with static attrition). But the game ATG is excellent and this mod looks like it would be fun to play. Thanks for the screenshots! ATG can actualy feel a bit more like WWI sometimes depending upon the map. I think the change in concentric attack values along with potential tight restrictions on oil reducing the volume of armor and air needed for more mobil warfare can sometimes lend it a more "WWI-ish" feel....it's possible those changes might have gone a bit overboard. I suggest you try a game with the AT classic ruleset sometime and see what you think about the difference.

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/7/2014 9:42:11 PM)
i have added the Islamic Caliphate as stated earlier. the tank units they have represent Syrian tank units which have changed sides and now fighting for the islamists. they have 1 tank bltn, 9 infantry brigades with 30 tanks each and several infantry bltn's. 2 anti tank brigades. they cannot produce their own tanks as they don't have the research yet. they hold the northern part of Syria. the only items the ISIS can produce now are infantry types small arms,nothing more.

baloo7777 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/8/2014 3:36:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GrumpyMel quote: ORIGINAL: baloo7777 If I was a "good" player, I would like to enter into this scenario in a multiplayer game! It looks very good. I have played the basic ATG mirrored vs AI game twice. First time I lost badly, and the 2nd time I won after a long slugfest (more like WW1 with static attrition). But the game ATG is excellent and this mod looks like it would be fun to play. Thanks for the screenshots! ATG can actualy feel a bit more like WWI sometimes depending upon the map. I think the change in concentric attack values along with potential tight restrictions on oil reducing the volume of armor and air needed for more mobil warfare can sometimes lend it a more "WWI-ish" feel....it's possible those changes might have gone a bit overboard. I suggest you try a game with the AT classic ruleset sometime and see what you think about the difference. quote: ATG can actualy feel a bit more like WWI sometimes depending upon the map. I think the change in concentric attack values along with potential tight restrictions on oil reducing the volume of armor and air needed for more mobil warfare can sometimes lend it a more "WWI-ish" feel....it's possible those changes might have gone a bit overboard. I suggest you try a game with the AT classic ruleset sometime and see what you think about the difference. Thanks G-Mel! Will give AT classic a try to see the difference. Do you know if the near east aflame mod is available for download? Did I miss the link or is it available on some other forum?

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/8/2014 6:23:16 AM)
The scenario is no where complete. Needs play testing, and events programmed ( which I will need help with) before this is ready.

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/8/2014 4:59:06 PM)
here is a screenshot of the new regime in northern Syria. " Caliphate" I have added a couple of Hezbollah brigades for Syria as well [image]local://upfiles/23616/66CBACC61EA34F2B833E6C36B1FD5A4A.jpg[/image]

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/8/2014 10:25:13 PM)
who ever wants to help play test this when the time comes just let me know, thanks

baloo7777 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/9/2014 2:37:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah who ever wants to help play test this when the time comes just let me know, thanks I do! Umm, as long as my newbieness (is that a word?!!) doesn't bother you! I could take a minor player. Also, I have not PBEM'd this game yet, but would like to try. The screen shots are neat!

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/9/2014 3:29:28 PM)
no problem, will add your name to the play test list. Thanks

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/13/2014 5:05:13 PM)
have added more territory for Egypt. All of the Sinai and past Cairo [image]local://upfiles/23616/7AB41783F4D248C2B89F70D682DE72E7.jpg[/image]

baloo7777 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/14/2014 4:15:32 AM)
Looks very good. Started a AT classic vs AI in mirror mode. I can tell the difference in being able to use air and armor without oil penalties. However I think ATG with factories and oil/ore limits more fun (and leader mod/ and AI enhanced)! If I could tweek the oil production or the amount consumed I could have a more fluid game. Does the Near East Aflame allow for air/armor to have more realistic movement/sorties?

ironduke1955 -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/14/2014 3:22:41 PM)
Looks like a great MOD count me in to play.

lion_of_judah -> RE: NEAR EAST AFLAME (1/14/2014 9:20:37 PM)
what type of movement sorties are you hoping for?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.859375