Playtesters needed for US vs. nearly everybody in IOPG

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

Hi!

I am currently working on a small series of scenarios taking place in 2009/2010. The sceanrios are playable by blue only with IOPG EC2003.

What I need is some feedback.

Are they playable? As the Author, I know what to do. Can a player without prior knowledge play them? Hints for enhancemants? More/Less information in the scenario text?

Some sceanrios have known issues - I would appreciate some hints how to fix them (if possible).

Oh, and English is a second language for me, so a proof reading of the texts will produce some errors.

To the scenarios themselves:

Basic line:
New US Administration pulls out of Iraq, but due to some new information it decides to conduct an air attack on Iran to destroy persumed nuclear weapons facilities - from this point on, *everything* goes wrong.

Scenario 1:
Massive US air and cruise missle attack against Iran. It looks like a shooting gallery, but be warned: You have only 12 hours time and so many targets so that you can't do everything with cruise missles - use air strikes wherever possible.
Known problems:
Minimum victory should happen after 30 destroyed bases. Actually, it happens after 15 destroyed bases (and I did not double, but triplecheck the victory conditions).

Sceanrio 2:
Iran has faked a nuclear detonation. Result is that the whole area is close to a revolution. The scenario concentrates on a small part of the overall picture; The player must protect two retreating US units in southern Iraq from being overrun.

Sceanrio 3:
The situation has furthermore escalated as a revolution has broken out in Pakistan. At the same time, the troops in Afghanistan must be evacuated while Uzbekistan and Tadchikistan refuse to allow US lines of communication.
The player has to
- Destroy a Pakistani complex north of Islamabad (supposedly Pakistanis nuclear weapons, but don't worry, they are not harmed and will appear in future scenarios)
- Send many transport planes over Pakistan into Afghanistan (therefore, the Pakistani air defenses must be suppressed).

Known problems:
The victory condition that 80 or 100 transport planes must make it into Afghanistan. It wasn't triggered until I realised that planes onm the ground are not counted - so, the player has to launch all transport planes in Afghanistan at the same time in order to fire the victory conditions - any suggestions how to evade this?

Remark:
I made experiments with a convoy that would at the same time enter the gulf and would need support from the US carrier group that performs the air strikes against Pakistan, but I felt that this just didn't fit into the scenario, so I removed it.

Scenario 4:
The air strikes against Pakistan have been successful, but the whole region is upset about this. Nearly all US/UK troops have been evacuated from Afghanistan, but parts of the other troops weren't evacuated as the comand situation wasn't clear and some european goverments just discussed the issue of withdrawing the troops while the air bridge was executed.
The evacuation of the troops from Iraq is also completed.
Air force one has arrived in Abu Dhabi and is going to fly to Kuwait international. At the same time, in order to reassure the Kuwaitis, the carrier action group has entered the Gulf. Air Force one is going to fly to Kuwait international, wait one hour and fly back to Abu Dhabi or Diego Garcia.
At the same time, two rescue operations are executed in Iraq; An F117-raid against SAM positions near Baghdad and an A10-raid against enemy tanks near Basra (where the hell do the rebels have tanks from?).
No big business....
And an carrier action group to protect Air Force One for a small flight of 40 minutes or so - what could possibly go wrong?

Known problems:
- The victory condition that Air Force One reaches Kuwait:
I had to make the on-station-rectangle relatively big as in several tests, Air force one just rushed through the rectangle and landed without triggering the condition. Now it triggers too early....
- The condition that Air Force One has to survive doesn't fire.
Howeverer, the scenario is still playable as:
Air Force One reaches Kuwait: Minor blue victory
Air Force One is destroyed: Major red victory.
So, the player has to land Air Force One in Kuwait *and* must prevent the destruction of Air Force One.

Remarks:
This is an experimental scenario. Red side uses nukes after 90 minutes - against itself. This opens the path for some future scenarios.

Basic Idea for continuing the line (time permitting):
5th sceanrio:
- US is accused of having used the nuclear weapons
- Complete revolution in the area => US forces and Kuwaiti Navy/Air force must evacuate the Gulf.
Later scenarios:
Some european troops have been overrun in Afghantistan => Hostage crisis => Weapons against hostages deals => US F-22 vs. Eurofighter Typhoon.....just some wild ideas.

Best regards and many thanks for any answers,
Roland

PS: I do *NOT* want to trigger a political flamewar here. These scenarios should just be fun to play, as the existing scenarios are also fun to play while they describe things like WWIII.

Edit January 20th, 2008:
Removed attachment - the actual version can be found in a later post in this thread.

[Weidi72]

4 subbased sealteams attacked 4 bases but they were shot down. Maybe a bug in the game? The should have a 90% chance to hit?

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

ORIGINAL: Weidi72

4 subbased sealteams attacked 4 bases but they were shot down. Maybe a bug in the game? The should have a 90% chance to hit?

Problem is that the seal teams are treated as missles. If they would be treated as torpedos, they could noit reach land targets. And missles can be shot down.... [:(]

That is game-related. Workaround: Use seal teams only to attack targets that have no air defense.

Best regards,
Roland (who has real difficulties imaginating a seal team killed by a single guy/gal armed only with one little SA-7.....[X(])

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

The fifth scenario.....
Everything has gone wrong and two US carriers must fight their way out from Kuwait into the indian ocean.
It is a monster of more than 60k and at the beginning, the player will have to play in real time.....

Best regards,
Roland

Edit January 20th, 2008:
Removed attachment

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

After some afterthoughts....this is taking place in 2009. I think that I should replace the F14s with super hornets....
Any opinions?

Best regards,
Roland

[TonyE]

Roland, I think using the Super Hornets would be more correct.  The F-14s would probably only come back out and play in an all out World War.

[ryszardsh]

Roland
Generally nice scenario, esp concept wise. Only real problem from where I sit is that it is a bit unrealistic on the red side esp. as to force levels. I do not think that many F15c/d have ever been built, much less active. How did you manage to get the planes unable to land on the close carriers?

RAS

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

Hi!

Many thanks for your feedback.

I am glad that you enjoy the scenario. I think that you are referring to the 5th scenario (Kuwait being evacuated).

Regarding the F-18s in Kuwait that are unable to land on the carriers: I used *Kuwaiti* F-18s - they can't land on carriers.

Regarding the number of Saudi F-15s:
In the scenario, the Saudis have the following F-15s available:
48 F-15 C/D at Jabayl
72 F-15 S at Hufuf
24 F-15 C/D at Riyadh

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Air_Force , the Royal Saudi Air Force has
57 F-15 C
25 F-15 D (together: 82 F-15 Cs and Ds)
71 F-15 S

The numbers given in the Harpoon Data Base are roughly the same.
Now, you are correct, it is still unrealistic as after a forceful change in the goverment, the readniess of the Royal Saudi Air Force would surely not be around 100 % (in case of the F.15S: 102%).
Furthermore, they are not stationed at Hufuf.
I experienced serious problems between playability vs. realism. For example, it is difficult to imagine Air Force One flying into harms way *deliberately* as in the 4th scenario. Yet, it is (or at least, I hope so) fun to clear a path for Air Force One using the two carriers in the gulf.
This is the next unrealistic thing: The USN sending two of their valuable CVNs *into* the gulf......
And the Iranians (Persians) forming an alliance with Arab states.....add to this the problems of different religions (shiites, sunnites)....

What I want to achieve is a series of scenarios which form a kind of storyline that should be fun to play. At the same time, they should not be so unrealistic that one would expect to meet Padme & Anakin Skywalker in the next scenario. (But unrealistic enough that the US player has problems evacuating the forces from Kuwait).

The next things that will happen are:
I have modified the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th scenarios by replacing the F14s with F18 super hornets.
Furthermore, I added a few Intruder Tankers to the Carl Vinson and the Harry S. Truman in the 5th scenario. That way, the player has a new option: Refuel the fleeing aircraft over the US fleet in the gulf (maybe even two times) and let them loiter for a few hours....
That should provide some time for the USN fighters to clear the airspace over the gulf.
I am currently playtesting it, but even with loitering over the carrier battle group I still lost all transport planes.....
I hope to be able to finish playing the modified 5th scenario this weekend. If all goes well, I will publish the modified versions together with the 6th scenario on Sunday. If anything goes wrong, there will be a delay of at least one or two weeks.

Now, *any* feedback is welcome. If someone doesn't like the scenarios, please tell me what I can do better. If someone has real fun, please tell me why so that I know what to do in the following scenarios.

Best regards,
Roland

PS: One question regarding a *very* wild idea: How about a substoryline providing the player in later scenarios with additional information about dangerous SAM sites, important transport planes that must be shot down e.t.c. and then, some scenarios later, with a rescue mission to get the agent out of Saudi Arabia - too unrealistic or funny enough to be implemented?

PSS: I have one *BIG* private issue (relocation) that could surface at any moment and that could make me stopping the work on these scenarios, so please do not count that there will be later scenarios.

[CV32]

ORIGINAL: RolandRahn
This is the next unrealistic thing: The USN sending two of their valuable CVNs *into* the gulf......

It wouldn't be the first time that has happened.[;)]

That said, I think scenario designers (especially new ones) should be careful not to get too hung up on 'realism'. Unless you're aiming to accurately reproduce a historical event, realism is very much a subjective thing. Never say 'never' in the world of armed conflict. Many real life events have transpired in recent years that you probably never would have guessed in a million years could have happened. Scenario design is about producing a "scenario" (by its very nature, often a hypothetical) that is enjoyable to the player. You're far better off spending your time working toward that goal.

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

Hi everyone,

here comes the new version....
I modified the existing scenarios (Super Hornets in place for F14s) and added a 6th scenario (which takes place in the Atlantic).

Enjoy!

Any feedback is eagerly welcomed.

Best regards,
Roland

[CV32]

RolandRahn, I had a look at your scenarios and I can tell you put a lot of work into these. The storyline is great and there's potential here for some really fun and challenging scenarios.

That said, I think maybe they're a bit too large and ambitious. Too many units to control, and too many objectives to achieve, in the time allotted. It'll probably overwhelm many players. My best suggestion is to try and trim each scenario down as far down as you think you can without endangering your overall intentions, and try that.

I hope you will take this as constructive criticism. New scenario designers should never be driven away by opinions that their work doesn't make the grade, or such nonsense. I think you have built a good foundation here, and with some tweaking, an enjoyable 'campaign' of sorts.

Feel free to continue posting your thoughts and scenarios here, but you're also welcome to do so at HarpGamer, where you'll find many other experienced scenario writers and players who will have helpful advice.

[RolandRahn_MatrixForum]

CV32,

many thanks for your feedback. Yes, I fear that I was a little bit too ambitious starting with such a campaign...

Regarding scenarios 5 & 6:
I think that I will split them in the way of providing a 'downsized' version.
I am not sure if you are familiar with SPWAW and the mega campaigns.
There were many nodes where the player could choose between different scenarios he could play at that node - a smaller scenario where he would command a platoon, or a larger scenario where he would command something that was more like a battalion [X(]

Regarding scenario 5:
I think that I can remove that moronic speed boat attack on the CVBG in the indian ocean. Apart from that, I would like to leave it as it is - for the 'monster' [;)] variant of this node.
A downsized version could exist without the fleeing-air-units-from-Kuwait storyline.
So, I would remove
- the airfields in Kuwait
- Diego Garcia
- the CVBG in the indian ocean
Furthermore, I would combine several of the smaller refugee task forces to fewer, larger forces.
That would be the 'playable' variant of node 5.

Regarding node 6, I wanted to put the player in a position where he has to identify which task forces are attacking New York/Boston out of a huge number of red task forces.
For a more playable 'b'-variant, I would remove these units so that the player has to attack everything that is red.

Number 7 and 8 are in a very early stage, I will have to reduce number 8 a little.

Regarding harpgamer: Yes, I will most likely register there, but currently I have little time for anything that isn't RL-related.

I have stopped the whole work and I don't know when (or even if) I will restart it. (I received an immigration visa [greencard] for the US and will make a 12-day-trip to NY in march and I am currently sending CVs like a madman. If I find a job there, I will give up my job/appartment/life here and relocate. If I fail, I will repeat that action later in 2008. This is in addition to my normal job here. I just tell this here so that it is clear that I didn't lost interest in Harpoon, but because my RL is currently a little more interesting [:D])

Best regards and many thanks for your feedback,

Roland