RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> After Action Report >> RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question - 12/20/2014 3:55:48 PM

Varangian

Posts: 32
Joined: 12/9/2007
Status: offline

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

(in reply to MR_BURNS2)

Post #: 31

RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question - 12/20/2014 5:02:38 PM

MR_BURNS2

Posts: 974
Joined: 7/18/2013
From: Austria
Status: offline

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.

< Message edited by MR_BURNS2 -- 12/20/2014 6:07:17 PM >

_____________________________

Windows 7 64; Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (8 CPUs), ~2.7GHz; 6144MB RAM; NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970;

(in reply to Varangian)

Post #: 32

RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question - 1/12/2015 3:33:30 AM

magi

Posts: 1529
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline

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�

(in reply to MR_BURNS2)

Post #: 33

RE: AAR-STANAVFORLANT and question - 1/12/2015 10:48:24 AM

CV60

Posts: 992
Joined: 10/1/2012
Status: offline

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�

(in reply to magi)

Post #: 34