New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

I am playing thru this and tweaking it (my first CMNAO scenario and I have a lot to learn), but I thought I would put it out early for comments and suggestions. Feedback is welcomed!

Kitchens Sink

I realized after posting the file that I forgot to switch the side to Nato, you can use the editor to do that...but by now you know where the enemy is hiding [:D]

Here is a Description of the Scenario so you can decide if you would like to give it a go:



Time Setting: May, 2016

Scenario Duration: 4 Days

It is the Spring of 2016, and tensions between the Russian Federation and NATO are at an all-time high. President Putin is still in power. In late 2014 Russia annexed all of the Ukraine, despite repeated promises to the contrary. Then on May 25, 2016 Russia launched airstrikes against 2 long-range air search radar installations located in eastern Poland....declaring them a "threat to Russian security". Russia has put to sea a powerful Carrier Strike group that has transited from the Black Sea the into the Eastern Med, with the stated intent to enter the Atlantic thru the Strait of Gibraltar. Several of Russia's best submarines cannot be accounted for, and the airfields in Sevastopol and Smolensk are full of the best bombers and fighters in the Russian inventory (including the vaunted T-50 PAK-FA fighter). Russia has also purchased meaningful numbers of Chinese anti-ship and land-attack ballistic missiles, and has deployed them in eastern Ukraine.

The Russian air attack on a NATO ally has caused a rapid response. The UN Security Council has called an emergency meeting in an attempt to de-escalate the situation. Putin himself is attending the UN meeting in Geneva. NATO has assembled it's best air assets into the region, centered around airbases at Rota and Aviano. A powerful NATO Carrier Battle Group and screening force are heading towards Gibraltar from the Atlantic side, and front-line NATO attack submarines are patrolling in the Atlantic and Med.

In case of failure at the UN meeting, NATO has drawn up plans for Operation Blue Storm, which includes the sinking of the majority of the Russian Carrier Strike Group, destroying a majority of the anti-ship ballistic missile sites, and crippling/destroying the bases at Smolensk and Sevastopol.

The best Russian military assets are now squared off against the best NATO has to offer. Can the situation be defused at the UN meeting in Geneva? We will know very soon.
Attachments
Gibralter.zip
(262.17 KiB) Downloaded 108 times
Coiler12
Posts: 1268
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:11 pm
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Coiler12 »

The proper spelling is "Gibraltar".
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

Dang it, I can spell Sevastopol but not Gibraltar....change noted.
Vici Supreme
Posts: 559
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:06 pm
Location: Southern Germany

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Vici Supreme »

Cool Intro! I'll give it a try [;)]
Image
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

I already have a list of about 12 things I need to improve/fix in the scenario (including my spelling). Also, the scenario is rather large and bogs down the computer at times. I find that saving the game and completely exiting/restarting CMANO speeds things up when it gets slow.
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5880
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Gunner98 »

Looks cool, I'll give it a shot. A couple comments from strolling around the ORBAT:
* I suspect that there would be some early warning in the Eastern Med (Greeks, Turks, Brits in Cyprus, and probably the Israelis).
* There is a Norwegian and a German SS in the Med, although not impossible it's improbable. The Italians have 4 Type 212, http://www.military-today.com/navy/u_212a_class.htm which could easily replace the U-Boat. Both the Greeks and Turks have Type 209's which don't quite match the Norgi 210 but their not far off.
* The Air Gp on the CVN seems a tad light. If no F-35's I think it would have 4 squadrons of Hornets, vice 3.
* A second Tyco would be nice, although 4 Burk's is a good escort, going into a high air threat area, I think CINCLANT would spring for more Air Defence
* The Hobart is a good AD ship but its inclusion into a 2nd Fleet CSG is unlikely. In the IO, Gulf, or WestPac, yes, but I think the standard allied grouping in the Atlantic would be limited to Canadian (but the TRUMPs are getting a bit old for this scenario) or perhaps a Brit - the Type 45 is pretty awesome.

Looking forward to giving it a whirl.

B
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

That is great input, thanks! I chose the Hobart because I liked it's AA firepower, but I would rather make the scenario more realistic by switching it out for another Tico. Maybe I will move the Hobart to the screening group to keep it in the game.

I purposely made the carrier air wings slightly weak, because us humans are always better than the game AI and I wanted to try to make things more difficult. I would use F35's, but I did not know which version was carrier-capable. An additional field in the database notating carrier-capable aircraft would be useful.

Be careful of the T-50's....they are apparently made of Kryptonite or something....scary [:D]
NickD
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 8:47 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by NickD »

Australian warships haven't been deployed to the Mediterranean since the Second World War. If tensions were building up with Russia and the Australian Government wanted to make a contribution to US-led efforts, it would send warships to join the US 7th Fleet in the North Pacific.
Currahee
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 11:13 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Currahee »

The carrier capable F-35 version is the F-35C. The F-35B is theoretically big-deck carrier capable, but I don't think that would happen except in special circumstances. I personally would like full-strength Carrier air wings, but its not my scenario. [:)]
Interesting premise, and look forward to giving a shot in the future. F-35s vs. PAK-FAs?[X(] Those poor, poor, NATO pilots...let down by [insert primary cause of JSF program failure here].
Peace Through Superior Firepower.

When I retire, I will find a quite house in the countryside, buy the latest edition of Command, and play until I die of heart failure.
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

Luckily you have some advanced Typhoons (Gen 5.2) and F-15E in Aviano to help out the F-35's. You are gonna need the 6 AMRAAM missile loads they carry. [;)]

I have shot down 2 PAK-FA's so far, but I had to gang up on them and use heavy jamming....and I lost some valuable aircraft in the process.

Enjoy!
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5880
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Gunner98 »

Those PAK-FA's are tough.

Simultaneous to an ineffective ARM strike on the SOV radars etc in west Ukraine, and about a bazillion SSMs coming in[;)] I get into a scrap with these guys.

SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
2x F-15E Strike Eagle
3x F-35A Lightning II


EXPENDITURES:
54x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4

SIDE: Russian Federation
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x Su-24MP Fencer F
3x T-50 PAK-FA

54 Freeking AMRAAM's - 4 hits!!![X(]

BTW - I like it so far [:D]

B
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

LOL, I am a little further along. There is more "stuff" coming your way I think, but I will not spoil it for you. I need to put more AMRAAM at Aviano.

SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
1x F-15E Strike Eagle
3x F-35A Lightning II
2x Patriot M901
4x PLS Truck [THAAD]
1x Radar (AN/TPY-2)
1x Radar (ARSR-4)
1x Rafale B
1x Stinger MANPADS
4x Typhoon T.3
1x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-65)
4x Vehicle (AN/TPY-2 TMD-GBR)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
29x 20mm/85 M61A1 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
5x 20mm/85 M61A2 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
15x 30mm Giat 30/M791B Burst [25 rnds]
4x ADM-160B MALD [Active RF]
6x ADM-160C MALD-J [Stand-In OECM]
8x AGM-158A JASSM [Penetrator]
12x AGM-88C HARM
4x AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM P3I.3
170x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4
14x AIM-132A ASRAAM
26x AIM-9X Sidewinder
14x AN/SSQ-53A DIFAR
68x AN/SSQ-53F DIFAR
92x AN/SSQ-62E DICASS
16x GBU-39/B SDB
1x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
12x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
12x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
25x Meteor
35x MICA EM
13x MICA IR
32x MIM-104E Patriot PAC-2 GEM+
70x MIM-104F Patriot PAC-3 ERINT
3x Mk50 Barracuda Mod 0 ALWT
24x RIM-161B SM-3 NTW Blk IB
8x SCALP EG
4x Storm Shadow
47x TSM 8050B Active RO



SIDE: Russian Federation
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
24x DF-21D ASBM TEL [CSS-5 Mod-4]
1x Il-78M Midas
1x PLA-885 Severodvinsk [Yasen, Granay]
1x Radar (Tin Trap [22Zh6])
2x SA-23a Gladiator [9A83M] TELAR
1x SA-23a Gladiator [9A84] LLV
1x SA-23b Giant [9A82M] TELAR
1x SA-23b Giant [9A85] LLV
1x SA-24 Grouse [9K338 Igla-S] MANPADS
3x SA-25 [50P6] TEL
2x Su-24MP Fencer F
9x T-50 PAK-FA
3x Tu-160 Blackjack
12x Tu-22M-3M Backfire C
1x Vehicle (Grill Pan [9S32M])
1x Vehicle (Paint Box [SPN-30] Jammer)
1x Vehicle (SA-25 FCR [50N6A])


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
46x AA-13 Arrow [R-37M]
36x DF-25 [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
36x DF-25 RV [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
4x Generic Acoustic Decoy
25x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
52x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
1x Generic Flare Salvo [2x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
12x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
156x Kh-101
64x RGB-41 [Search, Passive Omni]
42x RGB-48 [Search, Passive Directional]
100x RGB-75 [Basic Search, Passive Omni]
38x SA-23a Gladiator [9M83M]
1x SA-23b Giant [9M82M]
17x SA-25 [9M96]


Try tag-teaming the T-50s with 2 planes on diff axis and a jammer nearby. Ya gotta get close to get the PH up and manually pump 5-6 missiles at it. Chances are you will lose one of the attacking planes because you have to keep a radar lock or the T-50 will "ghost" on you and the missiles will veer off course. Wicked! [;)]
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5880
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Gunner98 »

I think more AMRAAMs are a good idea! Talk about stuff on the way!

Aviano - which should be a real base not a Single unit airfield I think:

EXPENDITURES:
36x DF-25 [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
36x DF-25 RV [Conventional, CSS-5 Mod-3]
156x Kh-101

Ouch

AEGIS Ashore (very cool system) EMPTY
Patriot Bty about 17 rounds loaded
6 x Rafale's intercepting at min Alt - EMPTY

Scramble every airframe off the airfield as there are still 36 or so coming in. So my JASSM equipped F-35s, GBU loaded F-15s, and Storm Shadow loaded Typhoons scramble (as well as all the other stuff) and engage knocking down a about 16 with AMRAAMs, Sidewinders, ASRAMs etc (didn't get in for any gun shots)

There are 3 missiles left

The Gepards get 2 and one hits - Holly Cra#$![:D]

I like this scenario! [;)]



Image
Attachments
3left.jpg
3left.jpg (56.31 KiB) Viewed 246 times
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

Using the pre-planned multi-unit airfields available in the import file for all current airfields is one of the things I need to do, as well other things I have noted, and input from you guys.

I guess I should not have posted the Russian expenditures....hope I didn't spoil things.
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5880
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Gunner98 »

Try tag-teaming the T-50s with 2 planes on diff axis and a jammer nearby. Ya gotta get close to get the PH up and manually pump 5-6 missiles at it. Chances are you will lose one of the attacking planes because you have to keep a radar lock or the T-50 will "ghost" on you and the missiles will veer off course. Wicked!

I came at a set of 4 T-50's supported by a Fencer Jammer - with 16 A/C in pairs, on slightly different attack angles, backed up by 2 jammers and an AWACS

Problem was that the Typhoons had to go home and get gas right in the middle of my brilliant plan, leaving me with 6 F-35s and 6 F-15s, with the T-15's heading the wrong way. All my AC were on fumes - and that little distraction at Aviano was going on!!!
[;)]

My attack angles were too close to each other. I didn't manually dump the missiles, and I was too far from home.

Image
Attachments
Localizing.jpg
Localizing.jpg (101.17 KiB) Viewed 246 times
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

Ha Ha...

I have now worn down most of the T-50's and have a B-52/B-1 attack on Sevastopol that is very close to firing range, complete with MALD and MALD-J support. I sent 3 Raptors along with it (they refueled en route). So what happens? The damn Fulcrum D's from the Russian Carrier group decide now is the time to move North towards my attack groups and I have no Aviano fighters in the area.

I wrote this darned scenario and I have no idea what is going to happen [:D] I wanted to see how the Raptors faired against the remaining T-50-s but now I have to use them on the Fulcrums.
Coiler12
Posts: 1268
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:11 pm
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Coiler12 »

ORIGINAL: Kitchens Sink

Using the pre-planned multi-unit airfields available in the import file for all current airfields is one of the things I need to do, as well other things I have noted, and input from you guys.

I guess I should not have posted the Russian expenditures....hope I didn't spoil things.

Be careful how many multi-unit airfields you put in. They're huge unit-count and resource hogs, and you should only put them in if the airbase is under a direct threat. (I only got as far as the initial barrage toward Aviano-that would be a legitimate contender, but some out-of-the-way one probably wouldn't be).
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5880
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Gunner98 »

Couple more thoughts: The Sov carrier AC should probably be the SU-33D.

Also I suspect that with this much USAF airpower that they would send a couple E-3B's or even E-3Cs vice relying on the NATO E-3A's. Perhaps leave the A's at Aviano, that's a regular haunt for them and through some upgraded versions into Rota - let the player decide to forward deploy them or not.

B

Image
Attachments
Su33.jpg
Su33.jpg (72.88 KiB) Viewed 246 times
Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
Flankerk
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:50 am

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Flankerk »


Interesting ORBAT, agree with the adjustmenets mentioned above and look forward to playing any updated version.
Odd bits I found that might be worth a look.
The F-15E as air to air load outs I suspect wouldn't be right?
The one task force is named group 108 so needs altering ideally.
The mobile land attack missiles are on auto detect so the NATO player knows where these are.
I'm not sure about the patrol zone effectively in the bay of Biscay? I assume its Russian federation but as its locked the player side can see it?

I think the strikes are intended to go in on Aviano from Russia, but counter strikes back to the Russian air bases, however all are single unit bases, and need to be built or imported.
Image

"Alas poor Yorick,I knew him Horatio"

#1 Quote of the Harpoon Community.
Kitchens Sink
Posts: 402
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 8:55 pm

RE: New Scenario for Beta Testing: Gibralter

Post by Kitchens Sink »

I have version 2 about ready. I have included most/all of the input received, and added a few ugly surprises. I chose the F-15E because it truly has multi-role capability...carrying both a heavy AA load as well as some standoff ASu weapons. Aviano needs both capabilities to help take out the Ballistic Missile sites...and just in case some bombers and/or missiles show up [;)], and the F-15C only has AAW capability that I can see. Is it unrealistic to have some of the F-15E loaded out AAW Heavy? I did some reading and it's touted as a pretty good fighter variant as well as strike. Also, I think the briefing explains the locked no-nav zone in the Bay of Biscay...there is a Russian SSBN there that NATO is not supposed to provoke....no telling what it could do [:D]. I will double-check the auto detect settings for the ballistic missile units, they should def be hidden.

Other changes I have made:

1. Deleted the Hobart and added a Brit type 45 to the Carrier force, deleted a Arleigh-Burke and added a Tyco also.
2. Made various loadout changes to ships/subs to take advantage of the Tomahawk Multi-Mission instead of TATCOM, and other loadout changes to both NATO and Russian carrier wings, missile loads, etc.
3. Added more AI patrols and "stuff" on the enemy side
4. Imported "real" airbases instead of single-unit ones
5. Switched the positions of Seawolf and Virginia class subs, Seawolf is now carrier support, and Virginia class is in the Med.
5. Changed Norwegian and German subs in the Med for Italian and Greek units
6. Added scoring criteria...this needs more work I think
7. Using E-3C's now instead of E3-A's

Lots of other tweaks...I should have version 2 out in a few days. Thanks for all the input received!


Post Reply

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”