[RELEASED] New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992

[RELEASED] New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (Full Version)

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

Message

Excroat3 -> [RELEASED] New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/2/2016 10:58:23 PM)
Another one of my what if within a what if scenarios, this one taking place after the events of The Sixth Battle by Barrett Tillman (so spoilers for the book). This scenario is pretty difficult so I would like your opinions on the difficulty, scoring, events, etc. I want the scenario to be a challenge but still remain fun instead of frustrating. A side note, some units start with no loadout so be careful when taking stock of all your units. All airfields are not to be attacked. If you have read the book and there is an inconsistency between the book and the scenario, please let me know. I tried to keep everything from the book in the scenario, right down to the names of individual planes. Enjoy! EDIT: Version 4 has been posted! Scroll down for changelog!

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/4/2016 8:43:24 PM)
Has anyone been able to play this one yet?

magi -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/4/2016 11:03:11 PM)
i missed it.... looking at it now....

magi -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 12:05:31 AM)
i think it could be more fun if port elizabeth wasnt a single unit airfield... its only natural that it would be a target.... it seem like there should be some tanker assets.... is there a sub threat...? there would probably be a long range shooter in the eisenhower groupe....

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 1:04:27 AM)
I could make Port Elizabeth a target but your main focus is to eliminate the UER SAGs and CVBGs off the coast I could stage tankers out of Diego Garcia but there are KA-6s on the Eisenhower IIRC Yes there is a sub threat, I added that to the briefing for the next version Any recommendations for a long range shooter for the Eisenhower group?

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 4:42:21 AM)
Excroat3, Hi, I just finished the scenario. First, thank you for a great long weekend. Your scenario was a lot of fun. I got a Triumph at 2730. I got every UER vessel except two Udaloys, and they had harpoons inbound when time expired. Is there some way I can send you the ending report? It seems I can't through the forum for 7 days after my 10th post.[;)] I thought you did a great job of setting it up, there was lots of action (I even got into a surface action![:D]) but I would like to make a couple of observations if I may. The Backfires out of the northern airbase, Quratro or something like that, well they never attacked me. I set up defense in depth toward both major threat axis, North for the CVGB and ENE for the Phibs and the French. I got bogies from both at about the same time and they were all Bears, I was able to take them out and the Backfires showed up. My AAW Screen over the Phibs and French task forces were able to take out 32 bombers. However, the bogies to the north of the CVGB just kinda hung around for a while then they left. I couldn't get my Tomcats to them before they bugged out. I waited a little over 20 hours, REALLY ready for them to show up and the same thing happened. I don't know if they were set up to be a decoy or not, but I never got attacked and I was thinking maybe I should have.[:D] Also I noticed the CAP over Port Elizabeth seemed to be stacked just north of the airport. When things got a little clear on the water I was able to make repeated fighter sweeps with my Tomcats and take them all out plus the three Hawkeyeski's. I never lost a ship but the cost in AC was tremendous! And my subs had a really bad weekend! I lost all but the Triumph. I don't know if a real admiral would have taken those losses. But I really wanted to try to sweep up the UER. Everything was totally going my way up until I tangled with the Kuznetsov and the two Moskva's. They all seemed to be together. I got 'em, but it really was tough. Other than mentioning ASW in the brief, that's it for me. I found I had plenty of power if I was willing to take the losses that resulted. It was absolutely not frustrating, but it was VERY challenging! I hope this makes some sense! C

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 5:15:21 AM)
Thanks for the report! I think you can PM me the ending report. Both the backfire strikes are at their most extreme range, and I copied Gunner98's way of setting up backfire strikes (patrol area with prosecution zones). If you got the bears, the backfires have a very slim chance of detecting your CVBG, because I was initially very worried that the backfire strikes + the AsuW power of the SAGs would be way too overpowered. Next version I will be sure to edit the patrol zones so they can detect the carrier group. Thanks for your comments on the Port Elizabeth CAP, I will extend their patrol zone so any replacement CAP has more time to get in the air to counter any fighter sweeps. Could you elaborate a bit on how you dealt with the UER SAGs and CVBGs? Did the Backfire strike on the French group and PhibGru3 launch? It doesn't have to be in this thread, you can PM me if you want to keep your tactics a secret [:D]. Thanks a lot for this, I'm going to start work on it right now!

Gunner98 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 11:45:14 AM)
quote: the backfires have a very slim chance of detecting your CVBG, Excroat, haven't had a look at this one yet, been busy: but getting detection on a CVBG is quite a trick. Some ideas: -Check the threshold levels of the mission, set it to 'unknown', weapons Free -With these settings all you should need is some ESM hits, some Bear J's or even a decent Sub (tight patrol zone, wpns HOLD, doesn't prosecute, periscope depth) ~4-500 miles away, from 2-3 different directions should be able to get you some decent location data. You need to play with it a bit. -If the scenario allows some 'innocent' traffic with the right posture is always helpful [;)] (see NF9.1) There are some sneaky ideas that I have not tried yet, so if the methods above don't work PM me. B

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 6:39:43 PM)
Version 1 is up! CHANGELOG: Added subsurface threat to briefing Changed scoring Multiple minor changes to patrol zones, typos, etc.

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 7:24:02 PM)
Excroat3, I sent you a couple of PM's. Did you get them? C

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 7:40:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cajunnavy Excroat3, I sent you a couple of PM's. Did you get them? C I have not received them [:(]

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 7:42:40 PM)
Well Dang! One was the ending report and one was on how I did it. I must have done something wrong. I'll try again. C

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 7:55:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cajunnavy Well Dang! One was the ending report and one was on how I did it. I must have done something wrong. I'll try again. C Now I got the ending report (and replied), but I have not gotten your PM on how you did it This forum is super confusing lol

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 8:55:04 PM)
You Got that right Brother! [:D]

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 9:05:31 PM)
Looking at my options I may have sent you two e-mails last night instead of two PM's. I really don't know what I'm doing. [:D]

wild_Willie2 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 9:20:17 PM)
Just finished version 0 and its an interesting scenario but not terrible difficult and I sank all enemy surface vessel and finished with 2700 points. I contracted the eastern TF's into a single compact group and shrugged of the backfire strike without a single loss (my CAP was out of position and the bombers where not intercepted). I only lost two french ships due to an Akula getting to close, but this was more because I was to lazy to set up ASW patrols. The Su-25 attack might have worked in the books but is useless in game as these where all shot down by SAM's before getting even close. I would definitely change them for better strike craft with standoff weapons (SU-24's) that can survive this attack. The brit subs are also useless as every single vessel can outrun their torpedos :s An interesting scenario but I would get a bit more creative regarding the surface strikes to make it perfect. Good job. W.

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 9:53:05 PM)
And I was thinking that the scenario was going to be too difficult! [:D] I can't do much about the Su-25 strike if I want to stay realistic to the forces that were actually in theater for the book. What do you recommend I do to the british subs? I also have no idea how to make the UER surface groups more effective other than moving them closer to NATO forces. I will definitely go a bit further and add some more UER aircraft out of captured bases in South Africa.

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 10:54:36 PM)
Wild Willie, Dis the Backfires from that northern base attack you? C

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/5/2016 11:38:01 PM)
Version 2 is up! I tried to increase the difficulty by adding more UER airbases w/ fighers, as well as more bombers. This may be a bit too much, so please let me know how you feel about it! CHANGELOG: Changed scoring Added Lanseria International airport w/ Badgers, Flankers, and Mainstays Added AFB Bloemspruit w/ Su-24s and Mig-21s Misc tweaks and fixes Changed briefing Gave 4 Mirage III CZ fighters to NATO side

magi -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/6/2016 1:58:12 AM)
first.... i really like the geographic theater of this scenario.... i just started it.... i dont know how you guys can play so fast... i am so slow.... but i look at everything... i have a feeling this is gonna be really fun when your finished... i do believe there should be some s-3's on the eisenhower as they didnt go any where without them... and they are multi mission asset... groups of that time would probably have a long range shooter... like a.. leahy... belknap.. cgn bainbridge... etc... the british and french torpedoes are challenging.... you gotta be right on top of your prey... you could stick a 688 in there... that would be reasonable... i think the burks should have more sm2's and fewer tlams... some oceanhawks instead of so many seahawks on eisenhower... im going to load this new version now...

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/6/2016 2:10:18 AM)
Thanks for the comments magi! In the book, the author describes the Eisenhower as having 2 Intruder squadrons, which would leave no deck space for S-3s if you don't change anything else about the carrier's air wing. I was going to add a long range shooter but now that some people who have played the scenario are saying that they can swat away the strikes with ease, I'm not so sure I should make it easier. Not sure how to deal with the british and french subs, I think that the player will just have to plant themselves right in front of the enemy groups, the subs should have enough time to position themselves correctly.

magi -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/6/2016 2:33:55 AM)
okidokie.... i would use the book as a guideline... i have noticed that many authors of this genera.... are often not very knowledgeable... and you are designing a scenario... its all fine with me as.. while i really appreciate what you guys do... i always play in editor mode and if i feel something is not right.. i just change it... especially things like.. position composition,.. loadouts... i like to just play a plausible mission... not the designer... i see you made some basses stikable... cool... thanks...

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/7/2016 4:31:06 AM)
Version 3 up (Hopefully 3rd time's the charm) CHANGELOG: Edited some UER patrol doctrine Edited UER patrol zones (especially submarines) Moved Northern Backfire base closer to South Africa

cajunnavy -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/7/2016 4:51:23 AM)
Thank you sir.[8D] And thanks for all the hard work. It's a real fun scenario. C

magi -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/8/2016 9:40:07 PM)
this is perty fun so far....

wild_Willie2 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/9/2016 8:50:47 AM)
Running v3 right now and you REALLY want those French fleets dead, this version indeed has an increased difficulty but its still winnable if you play your cards right, although at the cost of many of your own ships. The soviet subs are the most deadly threat by far in this scenario, in this play through, two attacked the US fleet with torpedoes at the same time and sank four US escort ships before I killed them. This turned out to be quite an interesting scenario, although mopping up the soviet fleets becomes a bit tedious after after doing it a second, third and fourth time. You may now increase the indicated difficulty level of this scenario to very high ;) Good job. W.

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/9/2016 8:43:30 PM)
Thanks for the response! Here is the 4th and (hopefully) final version of this scenario! This will be your last chance to comment on it if you want any changes, so make sure to say something now! CHANGELOG: Changed difficulty level from 3 to 4 Edited briefing Enjoy!

Sardaukar -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/9/2016 9:00:28 PM)
Thanks for making this! I was actually thinking of making this myself, but I am not much of a scen designer. [8D] I really liked the book.

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/10/2016 12:03:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar Thanks for making this! I was actually thinking of making this myself, but I am not much of a scen designer. [8D] I really liked the book. I always get just a little worried when I try to make a scenario based off a book. For example, if I didn't make this scenario it was going to be the Alpha Strike on the bridges during Red Phoenix, and someone just released a beta for that too!

AlexGGGG -> RE: New Scenario For Testing - The Seventh Battle, 1992 (7/12/2016 10:39:31 AM)
I scored 3700 on version 3. I did play with unlimited ammo though. Backfire strike from Quatro did RTB before they were in range for missiles (they do not have enough endurance for the strike? range from base to target at the time was just above 1500 NM). I lost all subs but one. Found subs near useless in the environment saturated by Soviet ASW helos. Taking advantage of unlimited ammo, spent more HARMs than any other type of missile. And last not least, I enjoyed it very much. Great scenario.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.953125