New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981

New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (Full Version)

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

Message

TheOriginalOverlord -> New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (8/23/2016 12:56:10 AM)
1981- Iceland Nearly six months into the Third World War NATO and its members have taken serious losses on all fronts. Iceland and most of Northern Norway have fallen. The frontline situation in Europe has stabilized with little movement on either side. With the high maintenance and losses of many of the frontline units NATO was forced to activate many older ships from the Naval Reserve Fleet and the US Navy had to bring the WW2 era USS Lexington back into active combat after pulling her from training duties in the Gulf. Her Task Group is made up of older ships from the Reserve Fleet or ships that had been used as various trials ships and even a museum ship....her composition is at best “unorthodox”. Aviation assets have been scrounged from Reserve and Guard units and even so far as pulling aircraft from Davis-Monthan Air Base. ---- I'm sure it has issues.....let me know what you think. Built using CWDB and fudged the dates just a little..

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/23/2016 3:44:57 AM)
I'm going to play this tomorrow, but you might want to change the title to Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 so people know the date the scenario is set in as well.

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/23/2016 11:53:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Excroat3 I'm going to play this tomorrow, but you might want to change the title to Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 so people know the date the scenario is set in as well. Done!

Coiler12 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/23/2016 3:41:11 PM)
Fun scenario concept. I'd separate the ships into two groups and name them (select, press R, rename). Hull, Cassin Young, and Newport News should be in the "Bombardment Group" and the rest in the "carrier screen group". You can pick the names, it just seems less clunky.

Randomizer -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/23/2016 4:25:37 PM)
I echo Coiler12 and would also suggest changing the side names to something other than colours, which makes the situation that you have created sound like an exercise. Also lowering the proficiency of the older reserve units (particularly the Guppy and the cruisers) to reflect their age and the probability that the expertise in running them is likely spread thin coupled with short work-up times. Also Lexington has virtually 100% of her airgroup operational, something very improbable in this situation situation. Even if the planes came out of refurbishment in pristine condition (doubtful), spare parts would be scarce and the institutional memories of the maintainers significantly degraded. This is particularly true for the techs responsible for the big piston engines in the Skyraiders, Trackers and Tracers. The devil is in the details but it's a good first scenario. -C

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/24/2016 10:19:20 PM)
I am about done with this scenario I think, and I really liked it! Here are a few things that I noticed: With about 2 days left in the scenario, 2 Soviet subs surfaced seemingly on top of each other (I detected them with radar). Not sure what caused it and not sure if you could reproduce it. The Backfire (I'm assuming they were Backfires) raid got about halfway down Iceland and then they RTBed without launching missiles. Might be at their fuel limit. During one of my strikes I saw a ton of ASF aircraft parked on the airfields (certainly more than had come up to challenge me) and I was wondering why they didn't take off. They might be just readying, but I suspect that they aren't assigned to a mission. The supply ship that you assigned to the group can't supply any ship in the group, I get an error message when attempting to UNREP. No scoring? I didn't really use the strike aircraft from Greenland, but it was fun sending the ASF jets there on long air-refueled flights to try to thin out the hoard of Soviet fighters. I also took the 4 british phantoms and the 4 Avenger ASW aircraft and landed them on the Lexington. Not sure if I was supposed to do that, but they did help a ton when dealing with the huge enemy strike. I was caught short of CAP during that strike and definitely paid the price for it. Lost many ships and more aircraft, but 2 of my heavies survived so they are now inbound to the coast to pound the beach. I really liked the ASW element of the scenario, but you might want to give the ASW aircraft more than 1 or 2 loads. Many of my planes were defaulting to reserve loadout setting and I was running out of torpedoes. Air combat got desperate during the strike, the enemy planes tore through my CAP like butter and shot down any ASW aircraft in sight. Overall, might just be me, but I don't like the refueling aspect of this game (just my luck that my planes always go to refuel at the absolute worst times, so I just turn off the feature altogether), but I didn't use the strike aircraft from Greenland, the enemy ships were not even a slight problem, and no subs got close enough to target me. Only real threat was the massive air attack. I still loved the scenario though! I will update this post with losses and expenditures and any surprises I encountered tonight. EDIT: just jumped back into the scenario, and there was a long error message about how a bunch of red air strikes cant take off because there isnt enough aircraft for the flight size. To fix this, I recommend you go into the missions and deselect "Aircraft below flight size do not take off" SIDE: Red =========================================================== LOSSES: ------------------------------- 12x 100mm KS-19 42x 130mm/52 M-46 M1954 Towed Howitzer 4x 14.5mm/73 Twin ZPU-2 6x 203mm/44 2A44 2S7 Pion Mobile Howitzer 2x 23mm ZU-23-2 4x 37mm T65 Twin 4x 57mm S60 132x 7.62mm MG/Unguided Infantry Anti Tank Weapon 4x 85mm M1939 1x A/C Hangar (2x Large Aircraft) 2x AK Komar [Pr.183R] 2x Be-12PL Mail 10x Binoculars (Visual) 6x BM-21 Grad MLRS 1x Building (Control Tower) 4x FROG-3 [Conventional] TEL 12x La-9 Fritz 3x Mi-14PL Haze A 16x MiG-17PM/PFU Fresco E 4x MiG-19PM Farmer D 18x MiG-19S Farmer C 14x MiG-21SM Fishbed J 8x MiG-23M Flogger B 4x MiG-25P Foxbat A 9x MiG-27 Flogger D 1x MT Natya I [Pr.266M] 1x MT Yurka [Pr.266 Rubin] 8x Pe-2M Buck 1x PL-611 Zulu IV 1x PL-613V Whiskey V 2x PL-633RV Romeo 4x PL-641 Foxtrot 1x PL-641 Foxtrot 1x PL-641B Tango [Som] 1x PL-665 Whiskey Long Bin 2x PLA-627A November [Kit] 1x PLA-671 Victor I [Yorsh] 1x PLA-671 Victor I [Yorsh] 1x PLA-671RTM Victor III [Shchuka] 1x PLARK-661 Papa [Anchar] 1x PLARK-675 Echo II 1x Radar (Bar Lock A [P-37]) 3x Radar (Cross Slot) 1x Radar (Tall King A [P-14]) 3x RK Osa I [Pr.205] 6x SA-2f Guideline Mod 1/2 Single Rail 4x SA-3c Goa Quad Rail 1x SA-4a Ganef [2P24] TEL 2x SA-4b Ganef [2P24] TEL 4x SA-6a Gainful [2P25] TEL 6x SA-7a Grail [9K32 Strela-2] MANPADS 4x SSC-2B Mobile Launcher 2x SSC-3 Styx TELAR [3P51] 12x Su-15MF Flagon D 4x T-34/85 Main Battle Tank 8x T-55 Main Battle Tank 8x T-62 Main Battle Tank 2x Tu-123 UAV [DBR-1 Yastreb] 2x Tu-22M-2 Backfire B 2x Tu-95RT Bear D 1x Vehicle (Fan Song F [RSNA-75M]) 6x Vehicle (Fire Can [SON-9]) 1x Vehicle (Flat Face B [P-19]) 1x Vehicle (HQ Unit) 1x Vehicle (Low Blow [SNR-125]) 1x Vehicle (Pat Hand [1S32]) 1x Vehicle (Sheet Bend) 1x Vehicle (Spoon Rest C [P-12]) 1x Vehicle (Straight Flush [1S91]) 7x Yak-28P Firebar 1x ZM Alesha [Pr.317] EXPENDITURES: ------------------ 346x 100mm KS-19 Frag 24x 14.5mm/73 Twin Burst [20 rnds] 30x 20mm B20 x 1 Burst [25 rnds] 1x 23mm Gsh-23L Burst [40 rnds] 12x 23mm NR-23 x 2 Burst [40 rnds] 100x 23mm ZU-23-2 Burst [20 rnds] 1x 30mm NR-30 x 2 Burst [20 rnds] 120x 37mm/63 Twin Burst [20 rnds] 204x 57mm S60 HE 32x 85mm M1939 17x AA-1a Alkali Mod 1 [PC-2V] 2x AA-2a Atoll [R-3S] 33x AA-3 Advanced Anab E [R-98MR, SARH] 13x AA-3 Advanced Anab F [R-98MT, IR] 6x AA-3 Anab C [R-98R, SARH] 2x AA-3 Anab D [R-98T, IR] 8x AA-7 Apex A [R-23R, SARH] 4x AA-8 Aphid [R-60T] 8x AS-10 Karen [Kh-25L] 16x AS-12 Kegler [Kh-25MP, ARM] 80x FAB-250M-54 GPB 33x Generic Acoustic Decoy 7x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges] 2x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral] 18x OFAB-100-120 Frag 60x RGB-NM-1 [Passive Omni] 320x RS-82 (TRS-82) Rocket 30x S-21 (ARS-212) Rocket 8x S-24B 240mm Rocket 236x S-5K 57mm Rocket 26x SA-1b Guild [S-25M Berkut / V-300] 18x SA-2f Guideline Mod 1 [S-75M2 Volkhov, 5YA23 / V-759] 18x SA-3c Goa [5V27D, V-601PD] 4x SA-4a Ganef [3M8M1] 6x SA-4b Ganef [3M8M2] 8x SA-6a Gainful [9M336] SIDE: Blue =========================================================== LOSSES: ------------------------------- 4x A-4M Skyhawk 2x A-7C Corsair II 2x AD-7 Skyraider 1x Avenger AS.4 1x Canberra Mk.8 1x CLG 5 Oklahoma City 1x DD 890 Gearing FRAM 1 (AGM-45 Shrike) 1x DD 931 Forrest Sherman [Gun] 1x DDG 31 Decatur [Mod Forrest Sherman] 4x F-106A Delta Dart 4x F-4D Phantom II 8x F-8J Crusader 1x FF 1052 Knox 2x Lightning F.6 4x Phantom II FG.1 1x QH-50D DASH 2x RF-8G Crusader 2x S-2G Tracker 2x SH-2D Seasprite 1x SH-2F Seasprite 1x SH-3A Sea King 1x SH-3D Sea King 1x Valiant B.(K).1 EXPENDITURES: ------------------ 2x 12.7mm/50 MG x 2 Burst [100 rnds] 4x 127mm/38 AA-VT [AntiAircraft Common] 10x 127mm/38 HE-PD [HiCap] 660x 127mm/38 Twin AA-VT Burst [AntiAircraft Common, 2 rnds] 909x 127mm/38 Twin HE-PD Burst [HiCap, 2 rnds] 41x 127mm/54 HE-CVT [HiFrag] 13x 127mm/54 HE-PD [HiCap] 50x 152mm/47 Mk16 Triple AP Salvo [3 rnds] 82x 152mm/47 Mk16 Triple HC Salvo [3 rnds] 990x 203mm/55 Triple 35x 20mm Mk12 x 4 [100 rnds] 11x 20mm/85 M61A1 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds] 20x 20mm/85 SUU-23/A Gun Pod Burst [100 rnds] 1x 20mm/85 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds] 3x 30mm ADEN Mk4 x 2 Burst [60 rnds] 1096x 76mm/50 Twin Frag Burst [2 rnds] 843x 76mm/50 Twin HE Burst [2 rnds] 46x AGM-12B Bullpup A 16x AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] 20x AGM-62A Walleye I ER/DL 40x AGM-62B Walleye II ER/DL 19x AIM-4F Falcon [SARH] 4x AIM-4G Falcon [IR] 54x AIM-7E2 Sparrow III 19x AIM-9D Sidewinder 52x AIM-9H Sidewinder 5x AIM-9J Sidewinder 52x AN/SSQ-15 Julie Active Range-Only 57x AN/SSQ-2 Jezebel LOFAR 143x AN/SSQ-28 Jezebel LOFAR 122x AN/SSQ-41A Jezebel LOFAR 203x AN/SSQ-47 Julie Active Range-Only 32x AN/SSQ-50B CASS 4x CBU-59/B APAM [717 x BLU-77/B Dual-Purpose Bomblets] 13x FIM-43C Redeye Blk III 32x Generic Active Directional Sonobuoy 13x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges] 2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral] 30x Generic Passive Non-Directional Sonobuoy 6x Mk11 Depth Charge 26x Mk13 1000lb GPB 1x Mk14 24x Mk20 Rockeye II CB [247 x Mk118 Dual Purpose Bomblets] 2x Mk34 Mod 1 Torpedo 5x Mk37 Mod 2 2x Mk43 Mod 1 10x Mk44 Mod 1 41x Mk46 LWT Mod 2 7x Mk48 Mod 3 4x Mk54 Depth Charge 46x Mk77 Mod 1/2/3/4/5/6 500lb Incendiary Bomb 72x Mk81 250lb LDGP 198x Mk82 500lb LDGP 20x Mk83 1000lb LDGP 4x Red Top 39x RIM-24C Tartar 2x RIM-7E Sea Sparrow 16x RIM-8G Talos 28x RIM-8J Talos 55x Type 17054 Active Directional [Mk1c] 30x Type 30059 LOFAR [Mk1c] 152x ZUNI 127mm HVAR Rocket SIDE: green =========================================================== LOSSES: ------------------------------- 1x Biologic Tuna Fishes EXPENDITURES: ------------------

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/25/2016 7:12:30 AM)
this could be fun....

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/25/2016 3:49:07 PM)
Excroat3, Thanks for the comments..I'll be going in and checking out those things. Do you think another missile armed DD/FF would have helped balance it out? Expect an updated version soon

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/25/2016 5:16:33 PM)
Not sure, I think that more experienced players would have reinforced the Carrier's CAP with air refuled F-106Ds or those brit fighters, so not sure if another DD would break the balance. Considering I didn't really use a good 1/4 of the aircraft avaliable to me (the strike fighers at Greenland) I'm not sure if I'm the best guy to ask [:D]

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/25/2016 5:35:03 PM)
Gotcha..oh yes...the F-4 should NOT have been on the Lexington as she was too small to handle the heavy F-4 Phantom.

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/25/2016 11:13:34 PM)
im enjoying this..... need more tankers.....

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/26/2016 1:10:23 AM)
I'm thinking of switching out the Valiants for Victors and don't forget you have a few buddy stores packages on the CV.

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/26/2016 5:21:48 AM)
thats good... but i put a few marine kc hurks at sonderstrom.... im ingressing with my group 100nm of greenland traveling north... i will atack iceland from the west... with good support from sonderstrom.... im really enjoying this....

Vulcan101 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/27/2016 4:58:18 PM)
The Valiant's were well gone by 1981, I think there were a couple of definitely non-flying gate guards around then.

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/27/2016 5:20:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vulcan101 The Valiant's were well gone by 1981, I think there were a couple of definitely non-flying gate guards around then. Thanks for confirming that... Victors it will be. Also just got a copy of Jane's Fighting Ships 1979-80 so will flesh out the names/ships some.

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/28/2016 10:21:00 AM)
very clever how you set up the air defenses at keflavik....

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/28/2016 5:23:42 PM)
Is it effective? [:)]

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/29/2016 5:05:17 PM)
Yes.... Like hitting a bee's nest with a stick...... All the longer range patrols I gang up on and kill.... But the ones over Keflavik won't come out... Then if I get to close they are all over me and I'm in Sam range.... I'm going to do my first strike coming up.... and I think I have a way to break the eeg.... But it's very clever for sure.... By aproching from the west off Greenland I have not been located.... It's been a good tactical use of battle space.... A lot of bioligic's out there though.... You've done good... This is really a good scenario.... One of my favorites now.... I did add more tankers... Some more AAW loadouts and I moved the Brit F4's to the Lexington also..... They and the tankers have been alpha assets.... I think I would get creamed without them....

Schr75 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (8/30/2016 8:48:52 PM)
Hi Overlord I have found a small bug in your scen. Reykjavik airport only have large aircraft runway access points. The Be-12 Mail is a very large aircraft and will need very large runway access points. At the moment, the mails are just waiting to taxi and the patrol mission never leaves the ground. Otherwise loving the scen. Lots of action.[:D] Hope this was helpful. Søren

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (9/2/2016 2:28:08 AM)
i cant find the mines.... and i dont think i will need to mine as i will be able to occupy keflavik...

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (9/2/2016 6:26:54 PM)
i have been having an odd deal happening.... my ROE keeps switching to hold.... i lost 6 aircraft as a result... before i caught it...

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue (9/3/2016 12:28:42 AM)
OK..back home...will look at these issues and see if I can get an update out this weekend.

Jorm -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/3/2016 1:05:12 AM)
hey I really liked the idea of this scenario I cant get the crusaders to do anything , i cant get them to fire their aim-9s any thoughts ? Ill give it another go, but ive lost the carrier twice now as my CAP wont fire and keeps resetting to HOLD fire. Im sure its something silly im doing wrong. Yo havnt set up some sort of global HOLD WRA have you that im perhaps missing ? Cheers

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/3/2016 1:59:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jorm hey I really liked the idea of this scenario I cant get the crusaders to do anything , i cant get them to fire their aim-9s any thoughts ? Ill give it another go, but ive lost the carrier twice now as my CAP wont fire and keeps resetting to HOLD fire. Im sure its something silly im doing wrong. Yo havnt set up some sort of global HOLD WRA have you that im perhaps missing ? Cheers Unknown...will check that out as well..

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/3/2016 4:16:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jorm hey I really liked the idea of this scenario I cant get the crusaders to do anything , i cant get them to fire their aim-9s any thoughts ? Ill give it another go, but ive lost the carrier twice now as my CAP wont fire and keeps resetting to HOLD fire. Im sure its something silly im doing wrong. Yo havnt set up some sort of global HOLD WRA have you that im perhaps missing ? Cheers Ya..... I had the same issue.... I didn't notice it being an problem in the first day approximately of game time.... What I did so I could keep playing was.... In the side bar.... I keep the ROE box open... If units showed HOLD.... I would select a bunch and reset their ROE..... Not ideal... But I wanted to keep playing as I had many hours into it.... I lost 8-10 aircraft as a result of this... I play in editor mode so replaced some of them....

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/3/2016 10:59:57 PM)
I had the same problem, here is the fix: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4138082 Seems specific to this scenario only.

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/4/2016 4:15:56 AM)
thank you sir....

TheOriginalOverlord -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/4/2016 3:04:15 PM)
Ok..need a little more info Excroat... UNREP works fine in my game. v1.11 B839.5 What ships weren't UNREPing and I'll take a look. Fixed the RoE...not sure what happened but individual ships had "hold" while side was set for "tight". Replaced Valiants with Victors. Working on some more tweaks. Working on scoring Mines should be available on the AE for UNREP and loading on the strike aircraft. F-8 Crusaders AIM-9s are rear aspect heat seekers like most of the IR missles in this scenario. It does have some AIM-9C SARH versions available. Fixed BE-12 access point What else?

magi -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/4/2016 5:16:01 PM)
In the magazine... I saw only one mine..... I'm not sure why we are mining the harbor when we can take it.... If I had som Royal Marines... I would land them... I'm actually saving key facilities at the NAS so they can be used by the allies...

Excroat3 -> RE: New Scenario for testing - Reserves to the Rescue, 1981 (9/4/2016 6:16:44 PM)
Here is a save. When you do to UNREP and select "Select tanker manually" it does seem to work for a second, the ships change bearing and slow down, but then they just forget that they were going to UNREP and break off. When you try to select a tanker automatically, you get the message "No suitable UNREP location within 100nm".

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.328125