New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Taking a break from my second Red Storm scenario, which is in the works but befuddling me at the moment - I decided to take a look at another area of interest for me, the Mediterranean. I introduce a new scenario - Med Conflict. The description is below.

EDIT: 12:42AM EST 3/23/14 updated the scenario file to add scoring and to take away the Syrian goal.

NATO vs. Soviet Union
Date/Time: 12th March 1990
Location: Mediterranean
Playable Sides: United States

In 1990, President Gorbachev's perestroika and glasnost did not appeal enough to the more hardline Communist party members, and so he was deposed. With control of the Soviet power back in conservative hands, the Warsaw Pact’s posture resumed its Cold War stance against NATO. The U.S. President’s efforts in trying to break the Soviets through an arms race had had a significant effect, but had caused an inverse result. The hardline Communist masters deemed it necessary to stave off the Americans through force and initiate a plan to embarrass the United States by crushing one of her vaunted carrier groups – the one within the Med.

Information gathered through KGB agents inferred that the mindset of European and US population was no longer interested in more Cold War build up. In fact, the anti-war rallies across Germany proved that the United States was no longer welcome and that all the U.S. President was doing was creating a wedge. It is assumed that if the Red Army can succeed in such a strong attack, the political ramifications would reverberate through NATO and break their will to back the United States. Once done, NATO would no longer have the unity or strength and the U.S. would be forced to pull its forces out of Europe. With no more foothold near the Soviet Union, America would pose less of a threat.

Though a threat, the nuclear option could not – would not – be taken by the United States, as they would no longer have the political currency with their former NATO allies. If they did decide to use weapons of mass destruction against the Soviet Union, they would be the pariah of civilized nations.

Before the Soviets can make their strike, the United States must be drawn out and seen to be the aggressor. To do this, the Soviet’s use their networks throughout the Muslim nations of Algeria, Libya and Syria. In each country, United States interests are attacked and threats from the American President ignored.

As predicted, the U.S. maritime forces are increased in alert status and the United States Marines are sent to secure the situation.

Note

This scenario provides two action groups for the United States player, along with a lone submarine. Save for course and speed, no other presets have been made. It will be the responsibility of the player to set up the CVBG defenses and air postures.
Attachments
Med Conflict.zip
(267.41 KiB) Downloaded 102 times
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

I just realized scoring has not been added yet. [:D]

I will get that put in with my next upload, but would appreciate any critiques, comments, or suggestions.

Thanks!
Flankerk
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:50 am

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by Flankerk »


I've played this through most of the way, as you mention the scoring needs looking into.
Great fun and something of a mini campaign.
A few things struck me.

there were a few nicely done nasty surprises, one at Annaba one at Dubrovnik.
The Libyan base I did wonder if it didnt need naming? All the others had say Avgas then the name etc, this one didn't so it stood out.

The escort for the Kirov worked well, but the formation is pretty spread out. I lost the LA but sank both the Kirov ansd Slava without having to get through an escort as such.

The trigger for the city takeover bit i dont think worked? I stationed ships off Ananba and nothing happened, i then destroyed the city marker but nothing happened. I assume you have to do this in a specific order?

The Libyan base was laregly knocked out by TLAM, Dubrovnik by Walleye (though this proved costly)

The scoring I know isn't set up, but you'll need to check when US gets a "kill", as things stand this was triggerring every aircraft shot down, even my own!

You run out of Sparrows very quickly due to the jammers, thats an issue for the aircraft on strike missions who need a sparrow. Otherwise the ammunition looked good.

I didn't find I could protect the various NATO ships which I think is intended.

I enjoyed the campaign feel of this one, did wonder if the marines should have some helicopters to allow ground strikes in their imemdiate area?
Image

"Alas poor Yorick,I knew him Horatio"

#1 Quote of the Harpoon Community.
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

ORIGINAL: Flankerk

I've played this through most of the way, as you mention the scoring needs looking into. Great fun and something of a mini campaign. A few things struck me.

There were a few nicely done nasty surprises, one at Annaba one at Dubrovnik. The Libyan base I did wonder if it didnt need naming? All the others had say Avgas then the name etc, this one didn't so it stood out.

The escort for the Kirov worked well, but the formation is pretty spread out. I lost the LA but sank both the Kirov ansd Slava without having to get through an escort as such.

The trigger for the city takeover bit i dont think worked? I stationed ships off Ananba and nothing happened, i then destroyed the city marker but nothing happened. I assume you have to do this in a specific order?

The Libyan base was laregly knocked out by TLAM, Dubrovnik by Walleye (though this proved costly)

The scoring I know isn't set up, but you'll need to check when US gets a "kill", as things stand this was triggerring every aircraft shot down, even my own!

You run out of Sparrows very quickly due to the jammers, thats an issue for the aircraft on strike missions who need a sparrow. Otherwise the ammunition looked good.

I didn't find I could protect the various NATO ships which I think is intended.

I enjoyed the campaign feel of this one, did wonder if the marines should have some helicopters to allow ground strikes in their imemdiate area?


Hey Flankerk! Thanks for the input on the scenario. I appreciate it very much, as it helps me to fix things I miss.

To your points:

1) Scoring - yea, I know it is broken bad. I have to look at my triggers and see why points are being scored to the US player when the Soviets are doing the killing.
2) Libya airbase (Tripoli) - I didn't notice this before. I used the Libya Tripoli import under the 1986 grouping, and looking at it now, I see the airbase is not named. I will update these items.
3) Kirov SAG - I will tighten up the formation. Thanks!
4) Annaba/Benghazi takeover - this should work, as it did when I ran the scenario. The red city marker should teleport out and a blue one in, after either Tarawa-class landing ship sits within the locked reference points for 2 'game hours'. I know this is a lame way of simulating the marine forces moving in to the city, but I didn't want to have too many units on the map that might bog things down. I may look at changing how this part of the engagement works by adding helos and marine land units to the scenario. As for any order, the need to kill missile launchers and radars are helpful, but there is no need to actually 'attack' the red city markers.
5) NATO surface allies - no, they are pretty much on their own unless you task some fighters out east of Sicily.

Now that someone has played it, my own problems that I had with building it - and maybe some scenario-builders know some work arounds.

1) Ally status - I know this is being worked on and may be part of a new release, but what is a good work around for a Friendly side to switch their status to Hostile. What I mean is, in my scenario there are three sides - US (Player), NATO (Ally), WAARSAW PACT (HOSTILE TO US, NEUTRAL TO NATO). I do not have a good resource to have the NATO allies commit to war against the Soviet Union. Their status at the onset of the scenario is Neutral. All of this said, once the US side makes a hostile action against the WP, the allies all commence their attacks. It doesn't make sense to me. This then creates a massive furball over the middle Mediterranean between Greeks/Italians/Libyans/Croatians, and finally the Israelis and the Syrians.
2) Here is one challenge I faced with the build - I made the enemy CAP missions so that they wouldn't investigate beyond their referenced area. When war is committed, I want those patrols to be allowed to move out and engage unknowns. Is there a way to have Enemy and Allied Missions change their rules of engagement?

Yokes
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:27 pm

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by Yokes »

ORIGINAL: djoos5

1) Ally status - I know this is being worked on and may be part of a new release, but what is a good work around for a Friendly side to switch their status to Hostile. What I mean is, in my scenario there are three sides - US (Player), NATO (Ally), WAARSAW PACT (HOSTILE TO US, NEUTRAL TO NATO). I do not have a good resource to have the NATO allies commit to war against the Soviet Union. Their status at the onset of the scenario is Neutral. All of this said, once the US side makes a hostile action against the WP, the allies all commence their attacks. It doesn't make sense to me. This then creates a massive furball over the middle Mediterranean between Greeks/Italians/Libyans/Croatians, and finally the Israelis and the Syrians.

I have run into this as well. I tried all sorts of different ideas, but none of them worked as I had hoped. I believe the devs are planning to add the ability to change postures via the event editor at some point in the future.

In one of my scenarios I made the ally hostile to the common enemy and kept all their fighters on the ground until a trigger set their missions active. This won't work for every situation, but it worked (mostly) for me.

2) Here is one challenge I faced with the build - I made the enemy CAP missions so that they wouldn't investigate beyond their referenced area. When war is committed, I want those patrols to be allowed to move out and engage unknowns. Is there a way to have Enemy and Allied Missions change their rules of engagement?

Nope. I am hoping that someday we can set multiple missions for units and have them assigned and unassigned via events. That will enable all kinds of devious AI...

Yokes
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Thanks for the input, Yokes!

I have been reading through the boards to see if a series of Exclusion Zones would work, or the idea of teleporting in the sailboat, etc. I think I will follow your lead about activating, or having timed activation missions. That way I don't have to have so many AI on patrol at the onset. The number of planes in the air will escalate as the tensions do. We'll see how it works out. [;)]

I look forward to the speculated changes. It will definitely give us more room to work with in scenario design so that the AI can be as potentially deceiving as a human opponent.
dillonkbase
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 2:30 am

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by dillonkbase »

started this mission and almost immediately the rest of the med is at war and I am miles and miles from the action... I was sort of expecting my Nato allies to ditch me or something when I read the description... As it is I am not sure what the point of having the AI duke it out on the far side of the sea is? I guess when I get to that end I will find out?
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

I know what you are saying regarding the allies.

I am trying to find a work around on this regarding posture. The idea is to have the allies declare war on the Warsaw Pact at a later time, after the US ships have been openly attacked by the Soviet bombers. It will play into the scenario background with pop up messages. There is no way to do that right now with no posture change Event, but I am testing other ideas people have posted. I'll see how they work out.

I appreciate the comments/critiques. I am happy to make suggested changes and give a future revised scenario file to Meroka37 for upload.
dillonkbase
Posts: 177
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 2:30 am

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by dillonkbase »

maybe a telleport later in the game... warp out the fake allies with new allies(fake posture vs real posture?)
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5879
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: New scenario for testing: Med Conflict

Post by Gunner98 »

There is a bit of an error in your point scores - I noticed that the event 'US Scores' was happening quite a bit so went into the editor. The event has a couple problems:
1) The triggers are US air, US Vessel, US Sub and US Allies, and for actions you have points for Air, Vessel and Ally - when any of these go off all of the actions will trigger so if the US shoots down an A/C it gets points for an A/C, a Vessel and, a US Ally. They need to be broken out into the individual events I think
2) The US Ally trigger does not specify any target type - result, points are scored when missiles are destroyed. The target type needs to be specified or the points go through the roof.

I did not get the 'NATO declares war' message but I did get an event NATO Allis hostile - can't figure out why.

One other observations - You have very few ASW Helo's in the US groups - none in the SAG. Unlikely that these ships would be without their Helo's. You may also want to put an RQ-2 Pioneer or two on the BB just for fun.

BG
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/
Post Reply

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”