|
Korvar -> RE: Under African Skies (2017) v1.5 -- Testing Now! (10/1/2014 5:50:47 AM)
|
Regarding the "inevitability" of conflict with the Chinese -
From my experience with the scenario, it appears to be possible to maintain Chinese neutrality, although it is not an easy task. That said, there is a lot of time left in my playthrough, so anything can happen.
A lot of micromanaging is required to mitigate the risk of open conflict, especially with regards to navigating aircraft around the Chinese SAM kill zones and the manual re-classification of Chinese forces (they get auto classified as hostile as contacts are lost and picked up again). Using Ctrl+A to disable AI auto fire is also helpful.
Even then, I got a little too close with one of my B-52s, and a Chinese SA-20 site took a shot at it where a die roll to hit occurred - luckily I was at the very edge of its range and it missed, but it's a delicate balance to say the least. The Chinese have cooperated in one significant way - none of their combat aircraft have ventured outside of the Port Harcourt area. Only their Y-8CA Cubs have roamed outside of that area, and they have only been a nuisance (jamming).
It has also created an interesting tactical development that the Chiense have effectively conducted area denial in the entire area between Warri and Port Harcourt. I've been forced to use only standoff weapons, and even then the Chinese take shots at my missiles.
I agree with Luidzi that my strategy is not optimal from a scenario scoring point of view, as I'm missing out on a lot of points; however, as Feltan mentioned, the scenario can be played in a myriad of ways - more than the author can possibly anticipate. I think one of CMANO's strong suits is its ability to simultaneously be mostly an open sandbox environment while at the same time providing the framework to be very structured, and it is up to the player to find the right balance for his play-style. It is also a testament to Feltan's work on this scenario that it is still very playable despite a significant detour from the intended course of events.
Here are some snippets from the latest losses report, as well as a screenshot of the overall situation (note: all Chinese losses were a result of their exchange with the French task force, and my Seahawk loss was a result of a landing glitch where it refused to land until it ran out of fuel):
SIDE: CWA
===========================================================
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
6x 35mm/90 Twin Type 90 [China Type 902 FC]
1x A/C Hangar (2x Very Large Aircraft)
1x A/C Tarmac Space (2x Very Large Aircraft)
1x Alpha Jet C
3x Ammo Shelter
3x ATR-42MP Surveyor
2x AvGas (150k Liter Tank)
4x AvGas (400k Liter Tank)
2x AvGas (40k Liter Tank)
7x Building (Barracks)
1x Building (Communication Hub)
6x Building (Medium)
1x Building (School)
1x Building (Very Large Leadership Compound)
1x F 89 Aradu [Meko 360]
2x F 90 Thunder [Hamilton Class]
15x F-7N Airguard
10x HQ-2a Guideline Single Rail
5x J-7II Fishbed
2x L-39ZA/ART Albatros
2x Platform [Class B, 70000t]
3x Radar (China HQ-64 Search)
12x Roland 2
1x Runway Access Point (Large Aircraft)
2x Structure (Oil Refinery)
34x Structure (Oil Well)
3x Vehicle (China Type 902)
4x Vehicle (Chop Rest)
4x Vehicle (Gin Sling)
SIDE: China
===========================================================
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Commercial Tanker - Large Range 2 [150,000t DWT]
1x Ka-28 Helix A
1x Type 056 Jiangdao [582 Bengbu]
SIDE: United States
===========================================================
LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x MH-60R Seahawk
[image]local://upfiles/49925/7BD672F49FAF4CFCA5C2228AF087A747.jpg[/image]
|
|
|
|
