RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question (Full Version)

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



Message

Varangian -> RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question (12/20/2014 3:55:48 PM)

Thanks for the reply.

I did more experimentation and found that it was a weapons arc issue,
turning the ship to just the right direction wrt the incoming SSMs
allowed the Sea Cats to engage (which as you suggested they did poorly).

I looked and could not find an in-game way of knowing the weapons arcs,
or setting an ROE to automatically maneuver the ship to unmask weapons when attacked.

Thanks again



MR_BURNS2 -> RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question (12/20/2014 5:02:38 PM)

Great AAR CV60, learned a lot from it, thanks!

@Varangian

Baloogans wiki may help you there, he has engagement arc data on some units, it is all a big WIP though and there are some errors, you can see the arc though.

http://wiki.baloogancampaign.com/index.php/DataShip?ID=1000126

Getting to see the engagement arcs in game is probably just a matter of time when you consider how fast the CMANO team adds new features.



magi -> RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question (1/12/2015 3:33:30 AM)

this was interesting..... The only comment I would make… Is that it is common for allied surface groups to have to operate inside of the Soviet missile envelope... during this era and later... as they have such extreme missile range… and the key ingredient… Is not to allow them to have targeting solution on your assets.... which you successfully employed…



CV60 -> RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question (1/12/2015 10:48:24 AM)

Thanks. For the AAR, I wanted to demonstrate a multi-axis/multi-platform attack, so I closed the KYNDA SAG with the NATO SAG, and used my CAP to blind the Soviets by destroying the airborne SSC platforms (the HORMONES and TU-16s). That is one way to neutralize the considerable Soviet missile range advantage. But even with planning, it was still a near-run thing, as despite my best efforts, a HORMONE almost got a targeting solution on my SAG. Airpower alone could sink the KYNDA, making the SAG's Harpoons unnecessary in such a situation. IMHO, a better plan would have been to focus the airstrike on the missile-equipped KYNDA and MOD Kashin, keeping the NATO SAG outside the engagement envelope, and using it to sink any Soviet vessels that survived the NATO airstrike.
quote:

this was interesting..... The only comment I would make… Is that it is common for allied surface groups to have to operate inside of the Soviet missile envelope... during this era and later... as they have such extreme missile range… and the key ingredient… Is not to allow them to have targeting solution on your assets.... which you successfully employed…



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.890625