Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

The new Cold War turned hot wargame from On Target Simulations, now expanded with the Player's Edition! Choose the NATO or Soviet forces in one of many scenarios or two linked campaigns. No effort was spared to model modern warfare realistically, including armor, infantry, helicopters, air support, artillery, electronic warfare, chemical and nuclear weapons. An innovative new asynchronous turn order means that OODA loops and various effects on C3 are accurately modeled as never before.

Moderators: WildCatNL, cbelva, IronManBeta, CapnDarwin, IronMikeGolf, Mad Russian

JWW
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by JWW »

I've had a chance now to play through three scenarios, A Time to Dance and Black Horse as the US, and Pied Piper as the West Germans. I chose those because I wanted to play the small scenarios first. I've played each one twice, losing the first time and winning the second time. Of course the second time around I had a general idea of what the Soviets were going to do and what I needed to do, and that helped, but what I've really learned are two important lessons.

1. Line of sight is critical. I know that has been mentioned in other threads, but picking good fighting positions for your units with cover if possible but especially with good line of sight is essential. And don't just eyeball it. Use the line of sight check. That is essential for getting good long range shots and setting up kill zones against the Soviets. Study the terrain carefully at the start.

2. Check your units closely. Know their strengths and weaknesses. The first time I played Pied Piper I kept wondering why the Soviets were killing my wonderful Leopard tanks so easily. Then I checked more closely after the first run-through and found out I had a Leopard 1 company and a Leopard 2 company. Oops. There is a big difference. The info was right there in front of me, but it just didn't register. And when it did, I was really surprised at the difference between the Leopard 1 and 2. I was treating both tanks the same. I got a lot of good virtual tankers killed that way. Actually I lost nearly all my Leopard 1's in the second run-through, but I used them much better, and they took out a lot more Soviets. Another example of how attention to detail is important.

I've learned other lessons and am still learning more, but those are two big ones.
User avatar
jds1978
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 12:03 am

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by jds1978 »

Watch for unit integrity.....use the drag and drop function in the OOB tab to create specific TF's to suit your need. (Hint: your Mech companies would love to have a platoon of tanks attached to it)

Avoid defeat in detail. Often you'll get reinforcements in dribs and drabs. If you can, wait until the majority of the force shows up before throwing them into the fight.

The most dangerous person on the battlefield is the guy with a map, a working radio and a clear LOS.
They are the ones with the ability to call down the arty, airstrikes and to observe the enemy's movements and weakspots. Be that guy.

If possible, try to kill HQ's with arty or direct fire.

Always study the terrain first. Where are the road junctures? Where is the good concealment? What obstacles (man made or natural) will force choke points?

You are likely to burn through men, material and munitions way before the scenario time limit
User avatar
zakblood
Posts: 22722
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:19 am

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by zakblood »

i like it as no matter how many times i play the same scenario, the outcome is nearly always different, which for me is very good to great programming, something we don't see to much of now days in most games, yes games are getting bigger, most just with sounds and cut scenes etc taking up all the space, but AI is something that seems to always get over looked or missed out altogether, not with this game, it just keeps getting better

[&o]

i play to win, i play to enjoy, i play to learn, but always on my own[:D]
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 22621) (22621.ni_release.220506-1250)
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9241
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by CapnDarwin »

Another important factor is recon. Use yours and kill theirs. Recon can see further than regular units and they are harder to spot. He who is seen first usually dies first.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
JWW
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by JWW »

ORIGINAL: zakblood

i like it as no matter how many times i play the same scenario, the outcome is nearly always different, which for me is very good to great programming, something we don't see to much of now days in most games, yes games are getting bigger, most just with sounds and cut scenes etc taking up all the space, but AI is something that seems to always get over looked or missed out altogether, not with this game, it just keeps getting better

[&o]

i play to win, i play to enjoy, i play to learn, but always on my own[:D]


One thing I learned in playing those three scenarios twice is that the AI does NOT do the very same thing each time.

Without giving away any detail, in one instance on the first run, one element of the AI blundered into a minefield in front of an improved position and got decimated in place, even though I lost the scenario. I put more units in position to take advantage of that same avenue of approach the second run, to kill even more Soviets, only to watch the AI feint in that direction and then edge away down a nearby parallel approach. I had to quickly move a couple of units into a new position to counter that approach, losing one when I exposed it to enemy fire.

In another scenario, the Soviet attack helos made a long, casual, looping run through the heart of my position and the rear area, pretty much winning the game right there, in the first run. Okay, I had units in the open, but it was the very first scenario I played after the tutorial. I prepared for that tactic much better the second time around, and the attack helos never made that long attack run at all. Instead they stuck close to their ground recon elements the entire game. What they did do was force me to remain immobile under cover. Of course the fact that I had selected better positions under cover with good lines of sight just to avoid the Hinds played a big role in their changed tactics, but the fact that the AI changed tactics like that was impressive.

Bottom line - the AI doesn't do the same thing every time, and it does react to different situations it encounters.
User avatar
Mad Russian
Posts: 13255
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:29 pm
Location: Texas

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by Mad Russian »

The AI actively accesses threat on a regular basis. Where the known enemy units are, what the condition of the victory point locations are, and what the best ROI is will have the AI respond. You can trick the AI short term but not long term. Which I would say is true of playing against humans or in real military situations.

Good Hunting.

MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
JWW
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by JWW »

Watching the Hinds work is quite interesting. I played another scenario that included a large number of Hinds. If they sense weakness, they are merciless. If they see that you have some active air defense, they tend to back off, though they are still deadly. One tactic I used against them in the latest scenario was to call in artillery on a couple of Hind formations that weren't moving. And I got some kills. It was along the lines of, "Let's try artillery; nothing else works." And it got me a couple of kills.
pzgndr
Posts: 3483
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by pzgndr »

ORIGINAL: JW
Watching the Hinds work is quite interesting.

My gripe is watching the AI use Hinds in a recon role, performing movement to contact without any ground unit spottings. And then watching them engage and destroy vehicles in towns and woods at point blank range and get away with it. Using helos in a deliberate attack or counter-attack role against vehicles moving in the open is fair game. I just question some of the other gamey tactics as being a bit unrealistic. That's my opinion.

But who knows? Maybe they could have been more aggressive. It certainly forces players to always consider the threat.
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by Sabre21 »

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: JW
Watching the Hinds work is quite interesting.

My gripe is watching the AI use Hinds in a recon role, performing movement to contact without any ground unit spottings. And then watching them engage and destroy vehicles in towns and woods at point blank range and get away with it. Using helos in a deliberate attack or counter-attack role against vehicles moving in the open is fair game. I just question some of the other gamey tactics as being a bit unrealistic. That's my opinion.

But who knows? Maybe they could have been more aggressive. It certainly forces players to always consider the threat.

It's possible they never spotted the ground units in the hex they over flew until it was too late. I noticed the same tactic but considering each hex is 500m, it's not unusual to get that close to troops in defensive positions.

Soviet helicopter tactics were different than ours too. They tended to fly higher and perform more moving vs stationary firing. They were also better armored than our helicopters and could withstand small arms fire pretty well. .50 cal and stingers could easily take them down though along with a lucky hit in the tail rotor by a rock throwing chimp.

We tended to use more of a bounding overwatch method to scout out where we figure the bad guys are at. We would let the OH-58 go forward while the AH's would overwatch. But on too many occasions you got into a situation where the bad guys were well within small arms range and the only thing you could do is hose them down with rockets and 20mm. It takes a small hat size to stand up and shoot at a chopper when it's unloading a ton of ordinance on you.
Image
pzgndr
Posts: 3483
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by pzgndr »

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
It's possible they never spotted the ground units in the hex they over flew until it was too late.
Soviet helicopter tactics were different than ours too. They tended to fly higher and perform more moving vs stationary firing.

An example is in the tutorial, moving infantry into western Nordheim quickly and going into Hold. Hinds come in over eastern Nordheim and immediately spot/engage the defenders across the river, easily destroying several Warrior vehicles. WTF? I understood Hinds, they don't hover well and need to make gun runs toward their target(s). So this particular example highlights what seems to me to be unrealistic and implausible tactics, especially as the Hinds are moving in a search and destroy mode. Again, if I'm moving in the open and take hits that's one thing, but being stationary and hearing Hinds approach should give me more of an advantage than what I'm seeing. It's something the devs should reconsider (IMHO), else players may need to develop gamey counter-tactics and that isn't right.
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
JWW
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by JWW »

I did a brief search for information on Soviet Cold War era attack helicopter tactics and found a couple of interesting things, including this. Please don't confuse me with someone claiming to be an expert on the subject. But I found that this paper by a US Marine Corps officer, from 1988, sounded a lot like what we are seeing in the game. Here is an excerpt:

Another Soviet officer, who defected to England and
writes under the pen name of Viktor Suvorov, presents an
additional point of view. He states,
The Soviet Army sees the helicopter as a tank, one
which is capable of high speeds and unrestricted
1"From Hind to Havoc," Air Force Magazine, (March
1985), 88.
cross-country performance, but is only lightly
armored. It also has approximately the same
firepower as a tank. The tactics employed in the
use of helicopters and tanks are strikingly simi-
lar.
Here we can see that the Soviets plan to mass their attack
helicopters, use their speed to close with enemy forces, and
deliver the tremendous firepower inherent in Soviet attack
helicopters. These tactics should not come as any surprise
to Marine Corps forces, but should provide us the necessary
forewarning to offset these tactics.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1988/ZMD.htm

It would be interesting to see more discussion of the role the Soviets intended for the Hind, and how that is modeled in the game, especially from the designers.





WABAC
Posts: 490
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 6:40 pm
Location: Where Satan buys hinges

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by WABAC »

ORIGINAL: JW
It would be interesting to see more discussion of the role the Soviets intended for the Hind, and how that is modeled in the game, especially from the designers.

Seems more like scenario design, which all of us are free to do, than game mechanics/AI design. Heck, we are even free to change the numbers on the Soviet helos if we are of a mind to.

Interesting link. Thank you.
User avatar
Sabre21
Posts: 7877
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2001 8:00 am
Location: on a mountain in Idaho

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by Sabre21 »

ORIGINAL: JW

I did a brief search for information on Soviet Cold War era attack helicopter tactics and found a couple of interesting things, including this. Please don't confuse me with someone claiming to be an expert on the subject. But I found that this paper by a US Marine Corps officer, from 1988, sounded a lot like what we are seeing in the game. Here is an excerpt:

Another Soviet officer, who defected to England and
writes under the pen name of Viktor Suvorov, presents an
additional point of view. He states,
The Soviet Army sees the helicopter as a tank, one
which is capable of high speeds and unrestricted
1"From Hind to Havoc," Air Force Magazine, (March
1985), 88.
cross-country performance, but is only lightly
armored. It also has approximately the same
firepower as a tank. The tactics employed in the
use of helicopters and tanks are strikingly simi-
lar.
Here we can see that the Soviets plan to mass their attack
helicopters, use their speed to close with enemy forces, and
deliver the tremendous firepower inherent in Soviet attack
helicopters. These tactics should not come as any surprise
to Marine Corps forces, but should provide us the necessary
forewarning to offset these tactics.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1988/ZMD.htm

It would be interesting to see more discussion of the role the Soviets intended for the Hind, and how that is modeled in the game, especially from the designers.

That's a decent article overall but the author made some mistakes. The Hind never had a 23mm cannon in its chin turret. The Hind D and E models had a 12.7mm with an effective range of 1000m. The Hind-F model had a twin 23mm cannon fixed along the right side of the fuselage which tends to go along with their running fire type tactics. There were very few F models in GSFG in 88-89.

He also doesn't take into account US Army attack aircraft. In GSFG, there were approximately 200 plus or minus a few hinds of all models. The US Army by itself had around 220 Apaches and another 90 or so AH-1F's in theatre. Unless the USMC was deployed to Europe, I doubt they would be facing massive numbers of Soviet attack helicopters.
Image
pzgndr
Posts: 3483
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:51 am
Location: Maryland

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by pzgndr »

ORIGINAL: JW

Here we can see that the Soviets plan to mass their attack
helicopters, use their speed to close with enemy forces, and
deliver the tremendous firepower inherent in Soviet attack
helicopters.

Right. But the Soviets would not have led their attacks with tanks or helos. Recon patrols followed by forward security elements followed by lead battalion main body would be used to find and fix the enemy, and THEN the first echelon regimental main body would hammer them. That was their doctrine. Would it have all applied 100% in this game's premise, with a come-as-you are surprise attack? Who knows. But, I doubt it. Regardless, those Hinds simply would not lead the recon elements to spot enemy vehicles under cover and hover like AH-64 Apaches to engage and kill targets. All I'm getting at is if they do that, then there should be some limit to how many shots they get off at point blank range against stationary defenders under cover before they take return fire, and the results should be more or less equally brutal since the Hinds make for nice big slow targets if they're shooting at you. Thus the Soviet player/AI may want to reconsider such tactics, and maybe stick to doctrine?
Bill Macon
Empires in Arms Developer
Strategic Command Developer
JWW
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Louisiana, USA

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by JWW »

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: JW

Here we can see that the Soviets plan to mass their attack
helicopters, use their speed to close with enemy forces, and
deliver the tremendous firepower inherent in Soviet attack
helicopters.

Right. But the Soviets would not have led their attacks with tanks or helos. Recon patrols followed by forward security elements followed by lead battalion main body would be used to find and fix the enemy, and THEN the first echelon regimental main body would hammer them. That was their doctrine. Would it have all applied 100% in this game's premise, with a come-as-you are surprise attack? Who knows. But, I doubt it. Regardless, those Hinds simply would not lead the recon elements to spot enemy vehicles under cover and hover like AH-64 Apaches to engage and kill targets. All I'm getting at is if they do that, then there should be some limit to how many shots they get off at point blank range against stationary defenders under cover before they take return fire, and the results should be more or less equally brutal since the Hinds make for nice big slow targets if they're shooting at you. Thus the Soviet player/AI may want to reconsider such tactics, and maybe stick to doctrine?

Which is why comments on this subject by the developers would be illuminating.
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9241
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by CapnDarwin »

A lot of what "would be a normal attack" is a matter of how a scenario is put together. The AI does use attack helo's to hunt enemies. They will usually setup a flanking sweep on the map (not all the time) and shoot up what they find. They will also at times do scouting and sweep objective areas. They also are more or less aggressive based on the spotted AD units (air radar).

I won't say they are 100% perfect, but we are still tweaking in a number of parameters across the board and hopefully the AI play is getting better after each update. We do read the forums and we are interested in what people see and how the game plays. It is such a dynamic system that playing scenarios a number of time on our end does not reveal all the actions (good or bad) the AI does. SO keep on pointing out what is off and also what is on. It helps. [8D]
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
jenrick
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:51 pm

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by jenrick »

I believe it's John Tillers Squad Battles Vietnam that had an interesting mechanic for the helicopters. They had to move a certain number of hexes every turn (I believe they are 50m hexes, been a while since I fired it up), or be considered hovering. Additionally fire more then once without moving put the helo back into hovering status. Certain weapons were more accurate fired from a hover, others from inflight. Helo's that were considered hovering were much easier to hit then those in flight.

I have no clue how difficult it would be to add to the code, but if helo's don't move at least 1 hex per X attacks they are considered hovering and are easier to hit. Obviously this would take a bit of coding, but I think the "shoot and scoot" mechanics of artillery could work to have the helo's move after they fire without too much extra work. Have the helo attempt to return to it's previous hex, or to the next way point should keep them from haring off around the map as well.

-Jenrick
ijozic
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:09 am

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by ijozic »

ORIGINAL: Sabre21
That's a decent article overall but the author made some mistakes. The Hind never had a 23mm cannon in its chin turret. The Hind D and E models had a 12.7mm with an effective range of 1000m. The Hind-F model had a twin 23mm cannon fixed along the right side of the fuselage which tends to go along with their running fire type tactics. There were very few F models in GSFG in 88-89.

It would seem you've got some things mixed up here. Mi-24P (Hind-F) had a fixed twin 30 mm cannon on its side and it was built in large enough numbers (600+ since 1981-96 compared to the 1600 of the Mi-24V Hind-E which is the most common variant IIRC).

To get to the main point, there was also a Mi-24VP variant with a twin 23mm cannon in a chin turret (with 450 rounds of ammo), but it was produced in small numbers (like two dozen) since the production started in 1989 only. Though the article is from 1988, perhaps the author had some intel on the upcoming variant and was referring to it (the caliber, location and ammo numbers roughly match).
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9241
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by CapnDarwin »

I am reviewing and updating all of the data files for the 2.04 update. So if you see any errors let me know.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
ijozic
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:09 am

RE: Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm for Dummies, or Lessons Learned

Post by ijozic »

Not sure about the Hind variants in game, I only saw Mi-24V variants in the few scenarios I've played and didn't check what variants were in game database (I guess I could see this in the editor).

But I did play some WP small scenario and was surprised that my air support unit was MiG-23M and it took out quite a number of Abrams tanks. AFAIK, this variant was used as a pure interceptor by the Soviets and also it doesn't fit the 1989 timeframe (ML/MLA/MLD or some PVO variant like P/bis would be used). For ground support, some MiG-27 variant (M or K) would be appropriate instead (as the MiG-23BN was not used anymore by the Soviet side).
Post Reply

Return to “Flashpoint Campaigns Classic”