RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (Full Version)

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



Message

caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 10:34:15 AM)

In an actual conflict, in terms of long range strike missile usage, if i were the PLA commander, Taiwan island will of course be 1st priority - there PLA has around 1000 DF-11A missiles. Then 2nd priority would be Okinawa, where PLA has 200~400 ballistic missiles (DF15/16) capable of reaching, plus a few hundred cruise missiles. After that, Ryukyu, other home islands of Japan, Iwo Jima or Guam, i think you are right, the PLA does not have enough firepower to suppress any of those airbases for any meaningful period, at the meantime i suppose US/Japan side probably want to spread out their assets to a dozen airbases rather than the closest ones in Ryukyu, just to reduce the risk.

So some major changes i am planning on:
1, reduce B-1 and LRASM (maybe just station them in Guam instead of airborne? less burden managing them for players and less tankers needed)
2, more airbases around Ryukyu and southern Honshu
3, spreading out USN CVBG
4, design a better escorted H-6 strike with lua



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 10:45:04 AM)

Fido81, thanks for the advise! my original intention is to make ISR a problem for the US side. but then i think is it realistic that, with Taiwan ground forces almost intact, they lose the capability of spotting incoming fleets? probably not. So the easiest way to spot those fleets is to bring the F-16s up in the air, instantly you will see the fleets (although in a few minutes they will be shot down).

Selchu, thanks for the advise, those 3 amphibious groups will arrive at different time, i think the earliest one is about 8 hours away, and it takes some time to unload the cargo (after which US side loses points), the second and third group will take longer. realistically, if you manage to sink even just 1 group, that should be a big win for US side, because those ships are needed for many more round trips in weeks to come.



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 6:13:07 PM)

quote:

In an actual conflict, in terms of long range strike missile usage, if i were the PLA commander, Taiwan island will of course be 1st priority - there PLA has around 1000 DF-11A missiles. Then 2nd priority would be Okinawa, where PLA has 200~400 ballistic missiles (DF15/16) capable of reaching, plus a few hundred cruise missiles. After that, Ryukyu, other home islands of Japan, Iwo Jima or Guam,


Agreed.

quote:

i think you are right, the PLA does not have enough firepower to suppress any of those airbases for any meaningful period, at the meantime i suppose US/Japan side probably want to spread out their assets to a dozen airbases rather than the closest ones in Ryukyu, just to reduce the risk.


So I did an experiment. I created a "Sandbox" Okinawa Missile strike scenario (shared in next post) with a single strike by six (6) various PRC Missile Brigades (types: DF-15C, DF-17, DF-21C, DF-26, DF-100) against Okinawa. It assumes the attack was a surprise (all aircraft on the ground) but also assumes a "reasonable" U.S. & Japanese ABM defense of the island, includes one JMSDF Improved Kongo Class destroyer. The THAAD and Patriot batteries aren't beefed up, they are just what is reported to be on the island. The image included is the result of one missile Strike. Which I think you will find to be disappointing for the PRC considering the missiles expended vs.results.

Unfortunately I can't figure out how to add a longer ROF for the PRC missiles I added to the PRC Batteries for a reasonable reload time [about 60 minutes]. Right now the ROF is 1 second???????? So there are no follow on strikes. I suspect follow on strikes might have more success as the Patriots and THAADs are expended.


quote:

So some major changes i am planning on:
1, reduce B-1 and LRASM (maybe just station them in Guam instead of airborne? less burden managing them for players and less tankers needed)
2, more airbases around Ryukyu and southern Honshu
3, spreading out USN CVBG
4, design a better escorted H-6 strike with lua


Those all sound like good changes to me.

[image]local://upfiles/44561/61249E9D027F447A84F0D790527E484F.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 6:14:42 PM)

"Sandbox" Okinawa Missile strike scenario attached...



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 6:33:11 PM)

OK same idea, just slightly different. This allows the equivalent of four ((4), for 4 TEL units) to six ((6), for 1 or 2 TEL weapons) salvos to be fired at Okinawa, but because of game limitation all fire as one (1) salvo, but it's OK as the THAADs and Patriots can keep up. Again, I suspect four to six missile salvos against Okinawa by SIX (6) PRC Missile brigades would be a maximum effort considering how many targets they need to hit. All-in-all the threat of Conventional SRBM/IRBM systems is greatly overblown vs. what they can really do. I believe the PRC commander would be quite displeased! The losses of aircraft are high, but I think you will agree that the airfields are all still in an active status and any damage would be quickly repaired in the real world. And again this was COMPLETE surprise, no aircraft aloft, no emergency Scramble, no patrol operations. This is WORSE than Clark Field December 8th, 1941!

I suspect that is one reason why most western nations tend to reserve the Ballistic Missiles for nukes, preferring cruise missiles for conventional attacks...

SIDE: PRC
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
7x DF-100 [Conventional]
96x DF-15C [Penetrator, CSS-6 Mod-3]
96x DF-15C RV [Penetrator, CSS-6 Mod-3]
18x DF-17 [Conventional]
18x DF-17 RV [Conventional]
96x DF-21C [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
96x DF-21C RV [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
13x DF-26C [Conventional]
13x DF-26C RV [Conventional]



SIDE: Japan-US
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x A/C Hangar (2x Medium Aircraft)
1x A/C Hangar (2x Very Large Aircraft)
1x Ammo Revetment
2x B-1B Lancer
3x Building (Airport Terminal)
3x C-17A Globemaster III SOLL
1x E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
19x F-15DJ Eagle J-MSIP
6x F-15J Eagle J-MSIP
1x F-22A Raptor
4x KC-10A Extender
1x KC-135R Stratotanker
4x KC-46A Pegasus
1x MQ-9B Reaper-ER Blk 5 UAV
1x RQ-180 UAV
1x TH-135 [EC.135]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
54x MIM-104C Patriot PAC-2
44x MIM-104E Patriot PAC-2 GEM+
16x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 ERINT
22x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 MSE
20x RIM-161E SM-3 NTW Blk IIA
54x THAAD C-2 CEC






Fido81 -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 7:49:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: caohailiang
Fido81, thanks for the advise! my original intention is to make ISR a problem for the US side. but then i think is it realistic that, with Taiwan ground forces almost intact, they lose the capability of spotting incoming fleets? probably not. So the easiest way to spot those fleets is to bring the F-16s up in the air, instantly you will see the fleets (although in a few minutes they will be shot down).


This goes back, I think, to the question BeirutDude raised on the preceding page - are you trying to construct a scenario or a simulation?

What you're proposing certainly works for a scenario, but I would be shocked if this was considered the ROC's doctrine in a simulation. I have a hard time believing that the reconnaissance of an enemy fleet is worth literally *expending* tactical fighters on, especially after the air force has taken so severe losses. Ordnance or decoys? Sure. UAVs or satellites? Probably, if the target is important enough (and though I'm not a military strategist IRL, I think an invasion fleet is). But to tell a fighter pilot to go on a suicide mission to have a chance (though its a good one) of spotting the enemy fleet sounds like a difficult proposition to me if your goal is a simulation both because that's tantamount to throwing away a trained fighter pilot (which is way more valuable than the aircraft that would also be destroyed) and because all the secondary literature I've seen suggests that F-16 reconnaissance missions had to return to their base to get their data (the sources I've seen say that this was/is mainly wet film) analyzed.

Thanks for sharing your development process with us here on the forums, and engaging with players about the decisions you are making. I'm excited to play the next revision regardless of which path you take.



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 8:32:11 PM)

So tried this another way, did the aircraft absorb missiles or are they collateral damage from explosions???? Lets find out! So I removed all Japanese-American Aircraft and let loose with the 4-6 salvos mentioned before. This was the result although none of theses runs accounted for damaged, not destroyed facilities. So let's look at the expenditures-destroyed facilities and then Naha AFB. Conclusion, aircraft are collateral damage from blast, fire, overpressure, etc...

SIDE: PRC
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
7x DF-100 [Conventional]
96x DF-15C [Penetrator, CSS-6 Mod-3]
96x DF-15C RV [Penetrator, CSS-6 Mod-3]
18x DF-17 [Conventional]
18x DF-17 RV [Conventional]
96x DF-21C [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
96x DF-21C RV [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
13x DF-26C [Conventional]
13x DF-26C RV [Conventional]



SIDE: Japan-US
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
4x A/C Hangar (1x Very Large Aircraft)
1x A/C Hangar (2x Medium Aircraft)
3x A/C Hangar (2x Very Large Aircraft)
1x Ammo Shelter
3x AvGas (150k Liter Tank)
4x Building (Airport Terminal)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
56x MIM-104C Patriot PAC-2
44x MIM-104E Patriot PAC-2 GEM+
10x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 ERINT
16x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 MSE
20x RIM-161E SM-3 NTW Blk IIA
54x THAAD C-2 CEC

Naha AFB, note some of these facilities would be repaired in a scenario...

[image]local://upfiles/44561/591E7B26CF044BBDB15AA9B86003B661.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 8:35:41 PM)

Kadana AFB, hardly out of operation and again many of the damaged facilities will be repaired...

[image]local://upfiles/44561/B4D34E91467B42BBA73290D3BC09E6E8.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 9:30:58 PM)

OK NEW "Sandbox" Experiment. This time the Missile Strike was restricted to only the three airbase runways and Runway access points. In theory destroying (or severely damaging) either will render the airbase unusable. The results, none were destroyed but many were damaged (but again, remember we were going to fight the USSR on the Central Front in Germany, we know how to quickly repair tarmac/runway! Also again a look at the damage to Naha AFB as well...

SIDE: PRC
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
7x DF-100 [Conventional]
96x DF-15C [Penetrator, CSS-6 Mod-3]
96x DF-15C RV [Penetrator, CSS-6 Mod-3]
18x DF-17 [Conventional]
18x DF-17 RV [Conventional]
96x DF-21C [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
96x DF-21C RV [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
13x DF-26C [Conventional]
13x DF-26C RV [Conventional]



SIDE: Japan-US
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Building (Control Tower)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
58x MIM-104C Patriot PAC-2
48x MIM-104E Patriot PAC-2 GEM+
32x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 ERINT
36x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 MSE
20x RIM-161E SM-3 NTW Blk IIA
54x THAAD C-2 CEC


[image]local://upfiles/44561/5F9507092445442BB61BEA4250BB9AEF.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 9:36:23 PM)

MCAS Futenma...

[image]local://upfiles/44561/01D93BE68297459EA1CE945B697DBD69.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/23/2020 9:59:50 PM)

So Kadana AFB is the only one with Runway Damage and it is Severe. I don't think it would be quickly brought back into operations. So I would say Kadana is out of the fight! But that is one of three with a massive effort.

Edit: Sorry the family was rushing me for dinner, now that I look closer Kadana has two (2) 4,000m runways and the second is fine. Kadana is still in the fight! So this experiment as even worse than just going after the bases in general.

Anyway you cut is a massive SRBM/IRBM strike has not rendered one base inoperable and I believe that reflects the real situation. If they could people would use them for that role in general and they really don't. The Iranians hit a base to prove a point but not to take out the base.

[image]local://upfiles/44561/5FB54987D7CE4C5596F44FD0CC894CF8.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 11:24:46 AM)

BTW, didn't do this to be an Ahole or anything. This is how I test scenario assumptions, do a quick, simple "Sandbox" scenario. I'm doing one right now with B-2A Spirits going well inland to take on DF-26 brigade and the PRC ADA system (from what I know of it). Can a flight of B-2As make it into Central China, engage a DF-26 Brigade and get out alive? I don't know!!!!

[image]local://upfiles/44561/337132EEAA5E4A45AA8802D73F8355A2.jpg[/image]



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 12:14:49 PM)

i gave it a try too, but by first targeting the air defense, then at the runways.
i add a pair of ESM a/c and a J-20 with its AESA, in order to locate the air defense
admittedly, the result could fluctuate quite a bit, and this is one of the good ones.
but you can see half of the air defense is destroyed and 3 airbases are shutdown for the moment. The next step would be using cruise missile to hit the hangers.

SIDE: PRC
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
72x DF-16B [Penetrator]
60x DF-16B [Submunitions]
72x DF-16B RV [Penetrator]
60x DF-16B RV [Submunitions]



SIDE: Japan-US
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x Patriot M901 [Cargo]
7x Patriot M901 [Cargo]
15x Patriot M901 [Cargo]
2x Patriot M901 [Cargo]
2x Stinger MANPADS [Cargo]
3x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-53) [Cargo]
2x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-65) [Cargo]


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
10x MIM-104C Patriot PAC-2
35x MIM-104E Patriot PAC-2 GEM+
15x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 ERINT
2x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 MSE
20x RIM-161E SM-3 NTW Blk IIA
54x THAAD C-2 CEC



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 12:30:29 PM)

quote:

i gave it a try too, but by first targeting the air defense, then at the runways.
i add a pair of ESM a/c and a J-20 with its AESA, in order to locate the air defense
admittedly, the result could fluctuate quite a bit, and this is one of the good ones.
but you can see half of the air defense is destroyed and 3 airbases are shutdown for the moment. The next step would be using cruise missile to hit the hangers.


OK, so now we're getting more complicated. Add an active AAW-CAP and some F-35s going after he J-20s and maybe you don't get a solid targeting lock on the ADA. Also remember this is very simplified in that in this Sandbox the radars are operating continuously (and there is a nice Lau Script to randomly turn them on and off) but in the real world I would have the AN/TPY-2 Radars well removed from the actual SAM sites and E-2C Sentry's up for detection. So I wouldn't have the actual radar co located with the SAMs (something I hate about Command). Now on the negative side, the Patriot takes too long to relocate, something the S-300/400 series has a leg up on the U.S. system.



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 12:30:32 PM)

what i wanted to convey is, i believe there are many ways for Taiwan side to spot the incoming fleet, maybe a fishing boat with military intelligence personnel on board, maybe just a soldier with a good pair of binocular in a coastal bunker, but i cannot simulate those, so a f-16 with a long range radar would be a good solution, maintaining my goal of "realistic simulation" while saving the designer/players lots of troubles.
i dont think this a moral issue, if that was what you were implying.



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 12:40:35 PM)

quote:

"...but you can see half of the air defense is destroyed and 3 airbases are shutdown for the moment..."



I'm sorry what am I missing here. I just looked over the file you sent me and not one runway or Runway access point is damaged???? So all are fully operational and not shutdown. So you used SRBMs/IRBMs for a SEAD Mission but now the U.S. and Japanese Air units on Okinawa are fully alert and functional. I don't think those J-20s are getting that close again! [8D]

MCAS Futenma...

[image]local://upfiles/44561/A8B7BFF2795542B08D876B2F037E9C42.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 12:41:06 PM)

Kadana AFB...

[image]local://upfiles/44561/2A47DA43FEBF4C0E9BC9168129F61C02.jpg[/image]



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 12:42:36 PM)

NAHA JASDF AFB Runway...

[image]local://upfiles/44561/DEDE1D490C7B43639A31A35A84110FBD.jpg[/image]



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 1:15:25 PM)

quote:

OK, so now we're getting more complicated. Add an active AAW-CAP and some F-35s going after he J-20s and maybe you don't get a solid targeting lock on the ADA. Also remember this is very simplified in that in this Sandbox the radars are operating continuously (and there is a nice Lau Script to randomly turn them on and off) but in the real world I would have the AN/TPY-2 Radars well removed from the actual SAM sites and E-2C Sentry's up for detection. So I wouldn't have the actual radar co located with the SAMs (something I hate about Command). Now on the negative side, the Patriot takes too long to relocate, something the S-300/400 series has a leg up on the U.S. system.


i see your point, but i didnt mean in reality a j20 plus 2 esm a/c will be able to spot all the air defense. There are various ways to figure out where those batteries are, satellites, spies, and check out this new WZ-8 UAV, its a bit like SR-71 (i hope to be introduced to CMO soon). More over to block out a stealth fighter will take very heavy patrol, probably not sustainable even in war time. that is my lesson from designing this scenario.
and let me check out the B2 thing, look so much fun! care to share your sandbox?




caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 1:21:38 PM)

oh, the one i sent you earlier is the starting point of my test, you can see i have not fired any missile yet. Here is the result i was talking about



KungPao -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 2:48:49 PM)

Thank you caohailiang
This scenario looks awesome ! I hope I can have time and energy to try this gigantic scenario

quote:

ORIGINAL: caohailiang

do you think it is a good idea to simply remove all satellites from both sides, the reason being in reality there are many ways to counter satellite recon but it is difficult to simulate any in the game.


If satellites removed, AI China side will have a hard time to detect USN CVBG. I guess you will need more complex Maritime Surv missions, invest more A/C into recon. Maybe adding some escort to Maritime Surv mission is a good idea.

I would agree Fido81's idea, pickup as many relevant satellites as you like for each side.

or , I don't know if this is possible as I have very little experience in scenario editing:
at certain time, adding a satelittle and the player got a message " Sir, we failed to disable a Chinese SAR satellite , it is going to pass your position at XYZ. Time to prepare your OECM device." Then delete this satellite after it left West Pacific area.

quote:

currently i am deploying them 1000nm away of Chinese coast, so it is out of df-21d range but not df-26d, this will reduce the exposure to some degree, and its up the player whether to move closer or not.

I would just leave them there if I am the TF commander, but as you mentioned, I will need alot of Tankers (plus protection) in forward position. That's the reason why USN put MQ-25 CBARS as a high priorty project :)




KnightHawk75 -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 10:42:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KungPao
Thank you caohailiang
This scenario looks awesome ! I hope I can have time and energy to try this gigantic scenario

quote:

ORIGINAL: caohailiang

do you think it is a good idea to simply remove all satellites from both sides, the reason being in reality there are many ways to counter satellite recon but it is difficult to simulate any in the game.


If satellites removed, AI China side will have a hard time to detect USN CVBG. I guess you will need more complex Maritime Surv missions, invest more A/C into recon. Maybe adding some escort to Maritime Surv mission is a good idea.

Maybe not too much, because I removed all but a couple sats from my 2 sessions and they were still found by the existing j-20 scouting missions, don't recall if they were able to classified as hostile though, but when popping into the Chinese side at one point I saw they were getting tagged by the j-20's radars on the existing surveillance missions, though they had not been flagged hostile yet (pretty sure they would if the commander didn't change course from what was originally set).

I've given up on the playing it for now though since the MALD-J's and actually any decoys identified above level 1 cause the game to repeatedly generate cast exceptions to the log to the tune of like a couple hundred or more per second which just brings the game to a absolute crawl. I've reported the defect so hopefully it gets fixed in the next update, along with the missile direction problem.



BeirutDude -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/24/2020 11:51:03 PM)

Found what I believe to be a DF-26C Convntional Brigade at 36.5999°, 118.4835°
https://fas.org/blogs/security/2020/01/df-26deployment/

Also the conventional training site looks to be near 39.702137º, 105.731469 in some pretty harsh desert. An it would appear a DF-26 ASBM Brigade was moved here at some point.
https://fas.org/blogs/security/2019/01/df-26/



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/25/2020 11:01:06 PM)

thanks Dude, those are candidate locations for my brigades[:D]



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/25/2020 11:04:47 PM)

KnightHawk and KungPao, yes, i know for a fact in reality PLA has invested probably 10 times more on the maritime surveillance systems (including satellites, MPA, hyper-sonic UAV, etc) than on the several naval strike missiles we see.
For the survival of the US CVBG, finding a way to evade the surveillance is crucial, which is something i intend to portrait in the scenario. Unfortunately, in the game, the hyper-sonic UAV is not available, and i dont see too many player-controllable options in countering satellite, so we end up using mainly J20 as scouts (although only with fixed routes), and see how can the CVBG counter them.
but a problem i have been puzzling is, i think in the game, unless you can force a ship to turn on its FCR, you wont be able to classify them at distance (100 nm+). I end up ordering the AI to fire at skunks. I dont know in reality how does that work, like in the cold war, what was the experience there.



Fido81 -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/26/2020 4:16:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: caohailiang

KnightHawk and KungPao, yes, i know for a fact in reality PLA has invested probably 10 times more on the maritime surveillance systems (including satellites, MPA, hyper-sonic UAV, etc) than on the several naval strike missiles we see.
For the survival of the US CVBG, finding a way to evade the surveillance is crucial, which is something i intend to portrait in the scenario. Unfortunately, in the game, the hyper-sonic UAV is not available, and i dont see too many player-controllable options in countering satellite, so we end up using mainly J20 as scouts (although only with fixed routes), and see how can the CVBG counter them.
but a problem i have been puzzling is, i think in the game, unless you can force a ship to turn on its FCR, you wont be able to classify them at distance (100 nm+). I end up ordering the AI to fire at skunks. I dont know in reality how does that work, like in the cold war, what was the experience there.


I recommend taking a look at this article about Soviet Naval Aviation's approach to your problem. I've only gotten through the first part, but it's really fascinating. It has some incredible information about the Soviet approach to killing carriers.

The invulnerability of satellites is also a problem I think I can help with (or at least propose half-baked ideas about! :) ). The USN has an ASAT capability, at least for satellites in low orbits. If the PRC uses the right kinds of satellites, the CVBG(s) have got the right kind of missile loadouts aboard their Aegis-equipped cruisers and destroyers, and the player is intelligent about their approach to the satellites (which may well involve an automatic shot, not a manual one), it might be possible to kill the satellites.

Of course, then the PRC would probably figure out quite quickly that somebody just splashed one of their satellites, and there's not a whole lot of countries with that sort of capability. How would the PRC react? Would they send an aircraft to investigate? Move a SAG towards that position? The intended kill-chain has been affected, which should have consequences for both sides.



KnightHawk75 -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/26/2020 8:33:40 AM)

Has anyone actually successfully taken out a sat in CMO with a rim-161c or e? Let alone even gotten one to leave the ship (automatic or manual)?



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/27/2020 1:47:10 PM)

these are very interesting literature, thanks
this visual identification thing, is really tricky. Both sides in my scenario will have this problem.



caohailiang -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/27/2020 1:48:06 PM)

Folks, i have uploaded the new revision, check it out, i hope you like it.



magi -> RE: beta release for testing: Taiwan A2AD, 2022 (6/28/2020 2:16:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: caohailiang

Folks, i have uploaded the new revision, check it out, i hope you like it.

okidokie......



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

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75