New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post new mods and scenarios here.

Moderator: MOD_Flashpoint

Post Reply
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

Here is a new scenario called Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979. A US mixed TF attacking elements of a BTR regiment plus a counterattack force. Since it is set in August 1979, the US lacks thermal imaging and requires different tactics. Smoke is now useful for both sides in attacks, withdrawals and masking movements.

This version of the scenario is designed for Human vs Soviet AI. I will have a rebalanced scenario shortly designed for PBEM human vs human. I am not sure yet whether I will do a Human vs NATO version or not. I suspect the offense may be a little too complicated in this scenario for the AI.

I had a lot of fun playing this scenario against the AI. On defense, it was able to give me a run for my money in a wild battle.

Here is the scenario description:
Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen

Scenario Size: Medium to Large
Best Played as NATO vs AI

Date: 21 July 1979
Time: 0500 Hours, ends 1300. 8 Hours.
Location: Near Gensungen, West Germany
Weather: Clearing with max visibility. Chance of precipitation.
Options: Tested with all options checked except A and F.

US Task Force Hudson's objective is to attack and hold a chokepoint along the A7 autobahn in the Gensungen-Melsungen area. Elements of a BTR regiment are currently in the area. Red tank formations to the north are moving west but could potentially intervene if the Soviet Command realizes the danger to the A7 autobahn. The Soviets will not give up the Gensungen and Melsungen area without a fight.

This is a pre-thermal image scenario in which smoke is very useful for both Red and US forces.

In 1979, modern tank forces were composed of T-64s and T-55s facing American armor of M-60 Pattons and M-48s, The BMP-1 with Sagger supplemented the BTR60 while American infantry made do with the M113. The Sagger/RPG and the TOW/LAW were beginning to challenge the MBT while the Recoiless Rifle continued to find use on the field. Even though A-10 Warthogs, Cobras and Mig-24a's were rightly feared, artillery was still a devastating force on the field. So ready for a trip back to 1979?

Here is the US Briefing:
Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen

Scenario Size: Medium to Large
Best Played as NATO Player

Date: 21 July 1979
Time: 0500 Hours, Ends 1300. 8 hours.
Location: Near Gensungen, West Germany
Weather: Clearing with max visibility. Chance of precipitation.

Options: Tested with all options checked except A and F.

Task Force Hudson is tasked with capturing Gensungen, Melsungen and surrounding areas.

Task Force Hudson is composed of 3 M-60A3 companies and 3 M-113 Mech companies with supporting AA, SPAT and SPA elements. Particularly important are 3 batteries of 155mm SPA. Air support will be made available throughout the day including Cobras, Warthogs and F-105s. Units arrive throughout the day.

Defending Red forces are composed of elements of a BTR regiment. Typically BTR regiments have substantial heavy artillery, AT/AA assets and an organic T-55 formation. An A class armored formation with T-64As and BMP-1s is located north of Gensungen and may intervene. We don't expect much air opposition but certainly a possibility.

Player Notes:

1979 is pre-thermal imaging. Therefore Smoke is now very useful for both Soviet and US forces in assaults, retreats and masking maneuvers.

A 2nd line BTR regiment may not have much offensive capability but can be very stubborn in defense. BTR infantry have a potent AT capability composed of substantial quantities of Recoiless Rifles, Sagger guided missiles and RPG's backed up with a mobile force of T-55s. In addition, the BTR regiment has excellent towed, heavy caliber artillery and mortars which can shred any spotted offensive force which lingers too long in one place.

If the northern formation supports the BTR regiment, expect to face first line equipment such as T-64As and BMP-1s with Saggers. They would be a potent counterattack force.

Player Hints: The US has very little infantry compared to the Soviets. So I recommend first locate and immobilize enemy infantry, then reduce Red infantry formations with your artillery and air assets before assaulting.

Note the US has multiple attack approaches available. The setup is just one possible attack approach. It may or may not be the best line of attack. You decide what approach offers the best possibility of success.

Good luck!

Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

Ok, what is the deal with inserting files? It claims it will upload files up to 5000Kb and accepts zip format. My file is 250kb and is zipped, yet the forum claims the file is too large????
User avatar
cbelva
Posts: 2189
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 8:11 pm
Location: Nevada USA

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by cbelva »

Upload it to the OTS website. That is one of the reasons we set up the sight.
 
http://www.ontargetsimulations.com/
 
Charles Belva
On Target Simulations LLC
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

OK, I am at the 3rd party scenarios page. It claims I should see an add files button to get started. I do not see any "add files" button displayed anywhere. Any hints?
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

I just got a popup for a moment or two. It claimed something like, "my browser does not support the add files function". However I just checked and it appears I have the latest IE9 browser for vista. Any workarounds? If not, I guess I can do a temporary dropbox link.


added.....
Here is the exact popup message: Your browser does not support the File Upload API. Please update.

As far as I can tell, I have the latest IE9 browser for vista.
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »


Here is a dropbox link for the scenario:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/a6lcki4peifto ... 9.zip?dl=0
User avatar
ivanov
Posts: 1111
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:16 pm
Location: European Union
Contact:

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by ivanov »

This looks sweet. I was missing a scenario that would use older equipment, than the top notch T80's or M1's.

One note thought - I think the the F-105's should be replaced by Phantoms ( in 1979 they were already kept in reserve being phased out ). I'm also not sure about the T-55's. I'd say there were not that many in the first line in 1979 and the T-62's would seem more probable.

I'm looking forward for a human vs human version!
Lest we forget.
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

Thanks for the feedback. On the next AI version and the PBEM version, I will substitute Phantoms for the F-105s.

I am assuming the BTR regiment is 2nd line and just happens to have T-55s. Don't worry, they still have a punch and it is fun to see them on the field.

I think the lack of thermal imaging by the US forces makes the scenario very interesting. Smoke tactics are different and both sides can benefit from smoke. Also I think the terrain and VP locations makes for a variety of options for cracking a tough defense. And it is not an easy defense to break but the artillery and air power help considerably. In a PBEM, I think the Soviets are going to have to maximize their use of the T-55 mobile force and their excellent artillery and mortars to slow down the attack until the cavalry arrives. The US will have to break the Red defense and still have the capability of fighting to hold their gains. PBEM should be very challenging for both sides.

Hope you enjoy and I may give you a shout when the PBEM version is ready for testing.
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9254
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by CapnDarwin »

Added to the website now. Jagger2002, not sure what the upload issue is. Thanks for sharing the scenario! [8D]
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

Ok, thanks!
User avatar
ivanov
Posts: 1111
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:16 pm
Location: European Union
Contact:

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by ivanov »

ORIGINAL: Jagger2002

Thanks for the feedback. On the next AI version and the PBEM version, I will substitute Phantoms for the F-105s.

I am assuming the BTR regiment is 2nd line and just happens to have T-55s. Don't worry, they still have a punch and it is fun to see them on the field.

I think the lack of thermal imaging by the US forces makes the scenario very interesting. Smoke tactics are different and both sides can benefit from smoke. Also I think the terrain and VP locations makes for a variety of options for cracking a tough defense. And it is not an easy defense to break but the artillery and air power help considerably. In a PBEM, I think the Soviets are going to have to maximize their use of the T-55 mobile force and their excellent artillery and mortars to slow down the attack until the cavalry arrives. The US will have to break the Red defense and still have the capability of fighting to hold their gains. PBEM should be very challenging for both sides.

Hope you enjoy and I may give you a shout when the PBEM version is ready for testing.


I'm looking forward to the h vs h version and I'd love to see more 70's scenarios or even a campaign. I think this period of time would be more challenging for NATO since it wouldn't poses technological superiority over the WP.
Lest we forget.
User avatar
ivanov
Posts: 1111
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:16 pm
Location: European Union
Contact:

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by ivanov »

Another thing worth rethinking in this scenario, is if the US player should poses the ICM's and FASCAM's. They are major force multipiers for the NATO forces, but I'm under an impression, that those types of munnitions were widely introduced in the 80's. I'm not sure how common they were in 1979...
Lest we forget.
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

ORIGINAL: katukov

Another thing worth rethinking in this scenario, is if the US player should poses the ICM's and FASCAM's. They are major force multipiers for the NATO forces, but I'm under an impression, that those types of munnitions were widely introduced in the 80's. I'm not sure how common they were in 1979...

I was wondering about the ICMs and mines as well. I will have to do some research to find out if they were available in 1979.

However the ICM and FASCAMs came with the pre-90 force selection unit. I just checked and I couldn't find an M-109 without ICMs. So I may not have a choice but to go with ICMs if I want the standard M-109 unless there is some easy way to make a unit without ICMs.

Ok google research done....., according to here: https://books.google.com/books?id=4M_Q6 ... le&f=false

Scatterable mines were first deployed in the 70s. So the FASCAMs are probably good to go.

And here the first ICMs were first used in the 68 in Vietnam. So they should be good to go as well.

https://books.google.com/books?id=Hv7DB ... le&f=false

Seems early but apparently they were in available.
User avatar
ivanov
Posts: 1111
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:16 pm
Location: European Union
Contact:

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by ivanov »

I don't have any concrete data, but I've came upon an info, that the ICM's and FASCAM's for the artillery were developed and tested in the 60's and 70's, so there is a possibility that they were already in use 1979. However it would be interesting to hear an opinion of someone who we serving with US forces during that time.
Lest we forget.
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Tazak »

Just for info, if you want to remove ICM or arty delivered mines you can but its an everything or nothing type of approach

open the xx-USER data xls, on the nation tab look for the section "Artillery Load Out Types"

you'll see the following arty types
Field Guns
Mortars
Rockets

Next to each of these are various special weapons - 'SC' and 'ICM' are the two if you want to remove mines and ICM for arty or rockets

again its a all or nothing approach so this will remove mines and ICM from all arty/rockets not just M109 SPA
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
User avatar
CapnDarwin
Posts: 9254
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:34 pm
Location: Newark, OH
Contact:

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by CapnDarwin »

We are changing the way special ammo is tracked and allocated in Southern Storm. To fix this exact problem.
OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Tazak »

Just giving this a play through and a quick question about bridges, you've only added a bridge at Boddiger (just east of the 2 blown bridges) - is this intention

Nice counter art btw, which one is it
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
Jagger2002
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 9:05 pm

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Jagger2002 »

Tazak, Originally there were 3 bridges along the Ems river from Boddiger and to the west. I blew the 2 to the west of Boddiger and intentionally left the bridge at Boddiger intact. So if the Soviets want to cross the Ems river west of the Eder river, without building a bridge, holding Boddiger is important. And if the US take Boddiger, they can blow the bridge and channel the Soviets to the roads to the east. Possibly important in a PBEM game.

I am using the HeinzBaby_MapMarkers and the colorized unit icons. I just checked the download with the colorized unit icons and it is titled "common". So I can't tell for sure who made them but they certainly look good. I am sure I found them illustrated on one of the mod threads here and followed the links.

BTW, what sort of score did you get against the AI? I just finished another playthrough against the AI and had a 42 or 44% contested result. I did a straight attack up the middle into the woods and had a tough time of it. Fighting in the woods requires different tactics and is basically a meat grinder for both sides. I lost around 1/2 my tanks and probably 2/3 of my infantry. Not much left at the end. In the latest AI version, I have decided to remove one Soviet company and started some additional Soviet companies in the inactivated state. So Soviets are a little weaker and should see a little different AI behavior.

I have a PBEM version ready for testing but waiting for 1.09 release first.
Tazak
Posts: 1461
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:57 am

RE: New Scenario Fight for Gensungen-Melsungen 1979

Post by Tazak »

ORIGINAL: Jagger2002

Tazak, Originally there were 3 bridges along the Ems river from Boddiger and to the west. I blew the 2 to the west of Boddiger and intentionally left the bridge at Boddiger intact. So if the Soviets want to cross the Ems river west of the Eder river, without building a bridge, holding Boddiger is important. And if the US take Boddiger, they can blow the bridge and channel the Soviets to the roads to the east. Possibly important in a PBEM game.

Okay question was more about the rest of the bridges (the missing ones)

Got a marginal victory, went the same route but got a lucky break in the weather and hammered his T64's with airstrikes just as they were about to ruin my day
AUCTO SPLENDORE RESURGO
Post Reply

Return to “Mods and Scenarios”