REVISED: Med Conflict

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

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

REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

SCENARIO HAS REVISION RELEASE I [one more possible update intended once I figure out LUA and see if there is any nasty surprises I could add]


US Navy vs. Libya/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 nation of Libya. In two locations within the country, United States interests are attacked and civillians are slain or captured. All requests from the American President for the Libyan government to gain control of the situation are 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.


Orders for Commander United States Forces

DEFCON-2. RULES OF ENGAGEMENT OPTION BETA NOW IN EFFECT. THIS MESSAGE IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD THAT HOSTILITIES BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND NORTH AFRICAN NATIONS HAVE INITIATED. NUCLEAR OPTIONS ARE RESTRICTED UNLESS ORDERS COME FROM COMMAND AUTHORITY. TAKE ALL MEASURES CONSISTENT WITH THE SAFETY OF YOUR COMMAND.

Situation

In two separate, albeit similar events, U.S. interests in Tripoli and Benghazi, Libya have been attacked by what seems to be Islamic extremists. Civilians have been killed and some taken hostage. There are two U.S. Embassies, one in each of these cities, as well as many other business interests that are now threatened. It is reported that many U.S. civilians have taken refuge in the two embassies, but are hard pressed to protect themselves.

President Bush has issued command to Carrier Battle Group-9 and a surface action group centered on the U.S.S. Missouri, along with two Tarawa-class amphibs, to commence actions against this rogue nation. The Tarawas will take up a position off of the coast of each Libyan city and begin rescue operations, while the guns of the Missouri stand overwatch. The U.S. Nimitz battle group will supply any needed air support to protect the insertion and rescues.

Although there are NATO allies in the area, they will not be participating in any of the operations staged by the U.S. Navy.

Enemy Forces

The primary threat to U.S. Forces in the Mediterranean will come from aircraft and patrol vessels off of the coast of Africa. Although Libya is allied to the Soviet Union, there is little chance that the Warsaw Pact will make any aggressive movements towards the U.S. efforts.

Friendly Forces

CVBG-9 [CVN 65-Nimitz (Nimitz), CG 52-Ticonderoga (Bunker Hill), CG 49-Ticonderoga (Vincennes), DD 963-Spruance (Stump), DD 965-Spruance (Kinkaid), FFG 9-O.H. Perry (Wadsworth), FFG 7-O.H. Perry (O.H. Perry), AOR 1-Wichita (Wichita)]

CAW: 12 F-14A, 12 F-14B, 24 F/A-18A, 10 A-6E, 4 EA-6B, 4 E-2C

SAG-386 [BB 63-Iowa (Missouri), DDG 19-C. F. Adams (Tattnail), DDG 37-Farragut (Farragut), LHA 1-Tarawa (Tarawa), LHA 2-Tarawa (Saipan), FFG 8-O.H. Perry (McInerney), FF 1052-Knox (Knox)]

SSN 702 SSN 702-Los Angeles – Flight I (Phoenix)


Primary Objective

1. U.S. SAG_386 is to approach the coast of Libya, at Tripoli and Benghazi. The SAG will remain in each location long enough for the United States Marines to take control of the cities and rescue any American, or NATO, civilians that are being held.

2. CVBG_9 is to transit along with the Missouri surface action group and provide any air cover needed to protect the Marine’s incursions.

Execution

At your discretion; destroy any high-value targets if they should present themselves as hostile. Do not anticipate any assistance from NATO allies.

Command & Signal
Command: USLANTCOM
Signal: EMCON State C, controlled emissions
Rules of Engagement (RoE)
Only nuclear weapons are restricted unless ordered from USLANTCOM.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note

To fulfil the mission at each of the North African cities, the player must transit the SAG to each location and do the following:

1. Launch Sea Stallion helicopters and fly them to each Landing Zone (Referenced LZ-1A-1D, LZ-2A-2D, etc.)

2. The Sea Stallions must stay in each Landing Zone for 10 game minutes each, at Low altitude, to insert the on board Marine Platoon.

3. Once each Marine Platoon is on the ground, they must fight their way into the referenced area around the Tripoli and Benghazi city markers.

4. A Marine Platoon must survive in each city marker area for 1 game hour.

5. If achieved, the city is secured along with the hostages and the player is awarded 100 points (the marker will turn to BLUE).

6. It is NOT necessary to destroy the RED city markers for Tripoli and Benghazi.

7. You will need to support the marines with multiple air assets, as they will be outnumbered at the start.
Attachments
Med Confli..990_revI.zip
(354.31 KiB) Downloaded 58 times
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

If anyone needs help with the requirements for insertions, please feel free to check out this thread:

tm.asp?m=3582051
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

It seems like a never ending task, or it is just the constant need to test and tweak - either way, I have updated the file one more (AND LAST) time. [:D]

The above link is the Revised version C.

Changes Log
-updated aircraft counts for WP
-updated WP missions
-updated WP reference points


Again, the Allies will only join the US forces after a certain amount of Soviet aggression. If you play in Editor mode, you will want to change Allied collective responsibility after they announce their intentions.

I think the scenario has come a long way and is very challenging. The player will have to work with his limited forces within the dangerous confines of the Med.

I look forward to any comments / critiques with this new iteration.

DJ
MrGandi
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 1:56 pm

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by MrGandi »

I'm in the middle of this scenario. So far all good.
Just one thing. One city is named wrong. It's supossed to be Tripoli in Lybia I guess not Annaba.[;)]

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

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by Gunner98 »

About 18 hrs into the scenario but now that 1.04 is out - I'll restart. Things noted:

-The NATO allies side is a bit awkward.
*A Greek P-3 sank an Alpha that I was stalking, thanks, but NATO had not yet declared
*The F4's out of Create have a Patrol Zone directly in line with the Sov SAG. You may want to move the PZ as the SAG shwacked about 8 of them in a row, and that did not trigger any reaction
*When NATO did declare, nothing seemed to happen so I went to Edit mode and ticked the 'Collective defence' and all was good from there.
-The SAG has no Helo's. A bit unrealistic and it allowed my 688 SSN to get close too easily
-The event names are a bit confusing to me. But then again - I shouldn't be watching those anyway [:D]
-I'm sitting at Triumph with 265 pts and the Tarawa's have not yet got to position, so the actual mission has not been completed. May wish to ramp that up a bit.

Really enjoying the scenario, quite complex and it makes you use everything in your toolbox, but not too large and very playable.

Thanks

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

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Hey guys, thanks for the input!

MrGandi, I will take care of that fix.

Gunner98, I am not sure why the allies and WP are engaging prior to the declaration. I am not real happy with the allies either, and I have thought about removing them or changing them to US assets. The game does not allow for an easy posture change via Events.

Noted on the WP SAG, the PZ's, and the scoring. I will look into an edit.

As for the event names - I get creative. [:D] If you'd like a list of the events and what they do, I am happy to post my spreadsheet.
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5880
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by Gunner98 »

No need for the spreadsheet thanks [:D]

Noticed one other thing, there is an S-3 Sea King on an OH Perry Frigate, I think that bird is a bit big for the ship - not sure if they can actually fit one. The O.H.P was built for a single SH-2 Seasprite or the two SH-60 (on the long hull version) as originally designed.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ffg-7.htm

I think that you have the Sea King on FFG 9 Wadsworth which is Short Hull and would more likely have 1x SH-2F

Do you plan on limiting the Ammo in the final version?

I'll give it another shot, life got in the way yesterday[:'(]

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/
User avatar
SSN754planker
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:48 pm

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by SSN754planker »

I remember back in 1.0 days it was possible to put a AV-8 Harrier on a OHP....i dont know if that still holds true, but the aircraft are grouped by sizes...and whatever is that "size" an OHP can take in this sim. Be it realistic or not.
MY BOOK LIST
ST1/SS SSN 754
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

No need for the spreadsheet thanks [:D]

Noticed one other thing, there is an S-3 Sea King on an OH Perry Frigate, I think that bird is a bit big for the ship - not sure if they can actually fit one. The O.H.P was built for a single SH-2 Seasprite or the two SH-60 (on the long hull version) as originally designed.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ffg-7.htm

I think that you have the Sea King on FFG 9 Wadsworth which is Short Hull and would more likely have 1x SH-2F

Do you plan on limiting the Ammo in the final version?

I'll give it another shot, life got in the way yesterday[:'(]

B

Thanks again, Gunner98!

It is funny that you asked the question regarding ammo. I had just started building the magazines on Thursday, so yea, it will have the ammo limits with my update release.
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Updated file to follow (and I will include it in the Community Scenarios thread):

CHANGES
Corrected helicopter on FFG-9 Wadsworth - now a Seasprite
Corrected scoring
Corrected Tripoli city marker to the right name (no longer Annaba)
Added helos to WP SAG and included ASW patrols

I didn't do anything yet with the Allied PZ's. I want to test the scenario once more to see how they are behaving.

Ammo magazines are not done yet. It is a real pain having to go through each unit and add weapons for all the sides, but I know it is the ammo limits that makes the scenario more challenging. So, that update will follow some time this week.
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

It has been a while since my last post and I have yet to finish the magazines for this scenario, but here is the changes made in the post above.

The version is now Rev D
User avatar
djoos5
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm
Location: Ohio

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

UPDATE! REVISION E

I believe this will be the final release of this scenario, unless a new build requires it to be updated with a new database.

CHANGES LOG:
• added Benghazi, Libya Benina AFB
• added aircraft at Benina
• added new missions for aircraft at Benina
• added civilian traffic
• added penalties for sides who catch a civilian by accident in their crosshairs

I am still tinkering with magazines at airbases, but I think the US player has enough to deal with that having to gauge ammo use is just more to contend with. I might finish adding weapon allocations at some point, but for now I want to move on to a new project. I am playtesting this one more time with the final additions and hopefully there will be no need for any tweaks. I look forward to going back to my Red Storm scenarios and getting Vampire! Vampire! completed.

If you have played it in the past, I ask if you try it again and tell me what you think. If you have never played it, I hope you give it a try and tell me what you think. If you have no desire at all to play it, well thanks for at least visiting this thread. [;)]

The new file is attached in the original post.
Flankerk
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:50 am

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by Flankerk »

Am a fair way into this, probably about two days to go. Most things going well with the scenario. Only a couple of issues so far. I'd agree on the scoring, I,m at a major victory already but haven't taken either target yet. The other oddity is the postures which don't I'm afraid work with the declaration. The ROE I think allows you to respond to aggressors. However from the game start all are showing as hostile plus they are prepared to fire too. I think we'd been fighting for six hours or so when the declaration bit came through.

The Phoenix in particular is having a lot of fun. I spent some time logging that a hostile Alfa wasn't behaving I thought as intended. It came in to the LA sub at high speed, at times at 21 knots. I got a decent fix, fired at about five miles, then watched the torpedo get outrun. Still I should be able to kep track on an Alfa? No such luck, the Alfa headed back, steadily reduced speed and varied depth at which point we both lost each other. Hunted for a while but after a few hours left the area at cruise. The AI got that one right. Still a bit nervous each time Phoenix fires off a missile.
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: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Major victory and no objective yet? Have you lost any HVU's? Probably not - that is kind of the counter balance to the small kills that rack up fast for the US.

The ROE stuff for NATO is not working as I want it to. Without an Action to change postures the NATO forces declare and the Soviets will attack them, but they only respond if they see they are being attacked.

Might go back to the drawing board and just re-structure the sides again.
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by mikmykWS »

FYI: Used your scenario to test our newest builds.

We owe you an ECM pod loadout fix and I'll add a couple more Libyan naval units.

Fun scenario all around. Nicely done.

Suggestion and probably shameless plug.

Check out our patrol zone behaviors.They do help keep fighters from straying too far and you can also use them to allocate SAM fires where you want.

I think you do want to update the scenario with the one of the later databases if you haven't already. I think we made some adjustments for certain missiles at some point that required it.

Thanks!

Mike

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

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Thanks, Mike!

I will do that tonight. I never thought about using them for SAM fire. Looks like I will be going back for one more revision.
mikmykWS
Posts: 7185
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:34 pm

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by mikmykWS »

Yeah its neat enhancement. Thought up by some of the player's too!

Ah almost forgot this one too.

If you want reloads for you SAM batteries just group them with a ammo facility. Add the right records to ammo facilities magazine and they will transfer weapons.

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

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by Flankerk »


completed the scenario successfully. Effectively TLAM strikes mostly overwhelmed Benghazi, though that stayed partially operational for a long time. Tripoli was mostly hit by aircraft then gunfire.
The landings I thought went very well indeed, all triggered as explained in orders.
I scored something like 1688 as a triumph so the scoring is probably set pretty high. I don't think that's a great issue though to be truthful.
I did think it would be nice to have the scenario end, I captured both cities, again this worked well, but had about twelve hours to go.

Postures definitely need a look. I think at game start everyone unfriendly is detected as hostile to US, so I launched strikes pretty quickly. The NATO allies act as recon for US, but don't detect any side as hostile as far as I could see. I don't think they opened fire at all in my game.

I eventually lost the Phoenix to the Russian SAG, I suspect things would have been slightly easier for her if there'd been weather? Not sure.
In the absence of the sub, i think HARM followed by Walleye ended the SAG.

I think the US SAG has a generic name iirc, something like SAG then a number?

Thought the city capture section was dealt with extremely nicely.
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: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by djoos5 »

Hey Flankerk, thanks for the scenario review!

Question - with the assets at your disposal, were you challenged? By the score, I can see that you did not take any of HVU losses. Did you ever feel any concern due to loss of assets (i.e. did the carrier's deck become a little empty)? Did the two Soviet Backfire strikes engage - should have been once a day?

Otherwise, I will take your comments into account while I do my last update to the scenario. It's so hard to step away from these things. I like the idea of a game end on fulfilling the two objectives - I should have thought of that to begin with. I think I will add some events that trigger with each other event that say stuff like, "Command, this is blah blah blah, Tripoli has been captured and all hostages reported safe."

As for the Postures, I don't know what to do. I think the Med is too confined an area not to have some allied presence, but I don't want the US player to have more control over these assets. Nor do I want NATO forces to be hostile to WP forces from the onset.

Oh well, food for thought and I appreciate the input. Thanks!
Flankerk
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 8:50 am

RE: REVISED: Med Conflict

Post by Flankerk »


I think overall my main threat and concern were subs, the backfire strikes came in, initially I think against mostly the NATO allies. I did get some harassing shots at both groups, but never in numbers to really cause a problem. This didn't worry me though!
Bear in mind, by then the backfires were often taking some losses from Tomcats etc, so these were of diminishing intensity.
The Fencers got in an attack which was a nice surprise. It didn't work to be fair as there were then lots of CAP up.

Probably the biggest threat really was to the ground forces, often I struggled to locate the opposition, and once located didn't always have a good lock for a strike.

The SAG would have been a big threat, but became a priority target to hit with the air strikes and some TASM.

Image

"Alas poor Yorick,I knew him Horatio"

#1 Quote of the Harpoon Community.
Post Reply

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”