New Scenario for Testing - Baltic on Fire 1988 Now version 1.4

[vettim89]

If you like big scenarios with lots of unmitigated action, this one may be for you. It is definitely a work in progress and I would like some feedback.

I am wondering about adding some SARH missile capable fighters for NATO. Perhaps a German F-4F squadron.

I am included the option of port rearming for both sides PBFGs (if you can keep them alive).

Warning the first 90 minutes of this scenario is brutal.

Uploaded v1.4 (see below)

[msc]

I like all scenarios which play in the BALTAP-area, especially with PCFG's involved (as an ex PCFG-crewman) - so I tested this immediately... (NATO-side only; did not try the WP side)

Usually big scenarios are not my favourite. But this one is very nice to play, and I like it that the missions are already predefined in the editor.
The scenario seems very realistic, the historical places for facilities (SAM's, radars, forts) are well investigated.

Perhaps you consider to add the coastal radars of West Germany around island of Fehmarn? And also the ELINT station on the island. I would not add additional Phantom F-4 fighters, I think the air groups are well balanced as they are.
I was able to replenish some PCFG's at Kiel, a nice feature. Please consider to replace the Danish Soloven/Brave-Class-MTB's with Willemoes-Class-PCFG's.

In the end I had tons of destroyed ships, facilities and aircraft... and something between 2000 to 3000 points. But there was no result/debriefing if this would be a victory/average/defeat.

In historical literature I found out, that in the 1970ies West German naval planners considered a Warsaw Pact amphibious operation as failed, when 40% of the amphib ships where destroyed (or damaged so that they did not reach the LZ). Perhaps you want to consider this when defining your victory/defeat thresholds and debriefing? This would add some extra realism to this great scenario.

[vettim89]

Thanks for the input. I will change out the Danish MTB for PBFGs. Thanks for the information on the radars and ELINT I will include them also.

The one thing I did not include in this scenario was mines. Mine clearing can be tedious and this was meant to be a fast pace scenario. Do you agree with that?

I will adjust the Victory levels. Perhaps I might add an Event that either ends the scenario if the AMPH loss exceeds 40% or perhaps institute a withdraw order for the WP if their losses become too grat

[msc]

Yes, I completely agree on the mine-clearing operations. They would not fit to this scenario, because mineclearing takes too long time.

You may try my "BALTAP - Mining Fehmarn Belt" scenario which I posted for testing (there you can export the coastal radars and ELINT station). Mining/Mine-clearing are very slow pace scenarios. Currently I am working on a scenario for mineclearing in Kiel an Eckernfoerde, where Warsaw Pact mined the naval bases to close up the fleet and then starts an air raid on the naval bases. (intended as a possible "prelude" to big WP-amphib-operations taking control of Baltic Approaches)

[vettim89]

V1.2 Added Radar and ELINT station on Fehmarn Island. Change the Danish MTB to PBFG. Add Naval Base Komor so the Danes can replenish their PBFG too. Also added mission/lua script to provide for WP AMPH withdraw if loses get too high

Would really love some one to try the WP side

Edit - file removed as v.1.3 is out now

[magi]

msc.... where is your baltap scenario... want to check it out....

vettim.... going to check this out....

[mikkey]

Magi, here are msc's BALTAP scenarios BALTAP-Repräsentative Schnellbootlage and BALTAP/Mining Fehmarn Belt

[magi]

ORIGINAL: mikkey

Magi, here are msc's BALTAP scenarios BALTAP-Repräsentative Schnellbootlage and BALTAP/Mining Fehmarn Belt

Thank you sir...... I'm having fun with this one too....

[msc]

Hi vettim89

I tried NATO side again, makes fun and is not to difficult. The scoring never went sub zero, in the end I reached triumph with nearly 4000 points. (Lost all my surface units, but killed nearly all amphibs - only two where left). But WP amphib groups did not withdraw when I reached 40% kills. Nice to play around with the different PCFG-types...

Then also tried WP side. It's not really difficult to get the amphibs to LZ, but scoring was alway sub zero and finally I only reached a Disaster with -590 points.
I got all amphibs to LZ, did not loose the big surface units. Of course I lost many PCFG's etc. But I think bringing the HVU's to LZ (and keeping for 4 hours undamaged there) can not be a Disaster. Could you please check the scoring setup for WP side? Perhaps that can be optimized?

I really like this scenario, should definitly be part of Community Pack.

Here is the data for playing the WP-side

SIDE: Warsaw Pact
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
12x 751 Max Reichpietsch [Pr.205 Osa I]
3x 911 [Pr.131.400 Libelle]
4x 43 Artur Becker [Pr.206 Shershen]
41x MiG-23ML Flogger G
3x RK Tarantul III [Pr.1241.1M]
3x MRK Nanuchka III [Pr.1234.1 Ovod]
36x MiG-21bis Fishbed L
48x Su-24M Fencer D
42x Su-17M-3 Fitter H
4x 771 Albin Kobis [Tarantul I, Pr.1241RE]
5x 421 Hel [Pr.205 Osa I]
15x MiG-29S Fulcrum C
1x Mi-14PL Haze A
4x Su-22M-4K Fitter K
4x 241 Wismar [Pr.133.1 Parchim]
6x Su-24MR Fencer E


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
15x SS-N-2a Styx [P-15]
18x SS-N-9 Siren [P-120 Malakhit]
8x SS-N-3a Shaddock [P-6, ASM]
4x SS-N-22 Sunburn [P-80 Zubr]
8x SSC-3 Styx [P-15M]
110x AK-230 30mm/65 Twin Burst [50 rnds]
2x SA-3b Goa [5V27, V-601P]
148x AA-7 Apex C [R-24R, SARH]
101x AA-8 Aphid [R-60TM]
70x RGB-NM-1 [Passive Omni]
32x SS-N-2d Improved Styx [P-20M]
9x SA-2f Guideline Mod 1 [S-75M2 Volkhov, 5YA23 / V-759]
54x AS-13 Kingbolt [Kh-59]
28x 23mm Gsh-23L Burst [40 rnds]
4x AS-11 Kilter [Kh-58, ARM]
6x SA-N-4a Gecko [9M33]
24x PK-10 Chaff [SR-50]
26x PK-16 Chaff [TSP-60U]
19x AK-630M 30mm/65 Gatling Burst [400 rnds]
10x AK-630 30mm/65 Gatling Burst [400 rnds]
39x AK-176 76mm/60 HE Burst [2 rnds]
2x 53-65KE WH
35x AS-14 Kedge [Kh-29T]
16x AS-14 Kedge [Kh-29L]
107x Generic Flare Salvo [2x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
60x AA-8 Aphid [R-60T]
3x S-24B 240mm Rocket
75x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
13x 30mm NR-30 x 2 Burst [20 rnds]
640x S-5K 57mm Rocket
32x FAB-250M-62 GPB
8x AS-10 Karen [Kh-25L]
90x FAB-250M-54 GPB
8x SET-40U [MGT-1, NATO SET-40-62]
49x RBU-6000 Salvo [12 rnds]
2x AT-1M [NATO E45-75A]
1x 23mm Gsh-6-23 [50 rnds]
16x AS-12 Kegler [Kh-25MP, ARM]
36x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
84x AA-10 Alamo A [R-27R, MR SARH]
80x AA-11 Archer [R-73]
43x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
6x 30mm Gsh-30-1 Burst [30 rnds]
16x SA-N-7 Gadfly [9M38]
3x AK-725 57mm/80 Twin HE Burst [6 rnds]
8x SS-N-2c Improved Styx [P-15M]
2x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
2x PLAB-250 Depth Charge
8x SA-N-4b Gecko [9M33M3]
9x SA-N-4a Gecko [9M33M]
4x SA-N-9 Gauntlet [9M330-2 Kinzhal]



SIDE: NATO
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
6x Radar (Coastal)
1x Bunker (ELINT Station)
8x P 6141 S 41 Tiger [Type 148]
3x F 354 Niels Juel
8x P 6121 S 71 Gepard [Type 143A]
4x 40mm/56 Mk1 Twin Bofors
4x P 540 Willemoes
91x Tornado IDS
1x Radar (S-244 HF)
1x Radar (RV-377)
6x P 6111 Albatros [Type 143]
3x Lynx Mk80
1x S 192 U 13 [Type 206]
20x F-35XD Draken
6x BR.1150 Atlantic 1
1x Radar (THD-1955 MPR)
2x Radar (AN/FPS-6A HF)
16x F-16A Falcon
3x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-51 ROR)
3x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-55 ICWAR)
6x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-57 HPI [TAS Camera])
3x Vehicle (AN/MPQ-50 PAR)
2x 150mm/55 SK C/28 Coastal Gun [Twin Turret]
18x M192 I-HAWK
1x Building (Generic Coastal Surveilance Radar)
1x S 192 U 13 [Type 206A]
1x S 320 Narhvalen [Modified Type 205]
2x Structure (Pier [Extra Large, 200-500m])
1x Structure (Pier [Medium, 17.1-25m])
2x Building (Medium)
2x Building (Large)


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
26x MM.38 Exocet Blk I
2x RGM-84A Harpoon IP
447x 76mm/62 Compact HE Burst [4 rnds]
63x 40mm/70 Single Breda Burst [4 rnds]
158x MIM-23C I-HAWK
24x RIM-7M Sea Sparrow
285x AIM-9L Sidewinder
10x 27mm Mauser BK-27 x 2 Burst [60 rnds]
114x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
160x Generic Flare Salvo [4x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
37x AIM-9N Sidewinder
52x AS.34 Kormoran 1
14x 30mm ADEN M/55 x 2 Burst [40 rnds]
4x DM2A1 Seeaal
22x Hot Dog Flare
35x Mk82 500lb AIR [Ballute]
30x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Single Spectral]
5x 20mm/85 M61A1 Vulcan Burst [100 rnds]
16x 40mm/56 Mk1 Twin Bofors DP Burst [4 rnds]
4x DM2A1 Seeaal
17x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]

[vettim89]

MSC

Quick look at your screen shows you lost 5405 points worth of units and destroyed 3800 points of NATO units. You get 100 points per amphib you get into the LZ. So, yeah, you should be in the negative here.

I think I will increase the points for getting amphibs into the landing zone. Also I think the scoring needs some more granularity.

Looking at your results I can say this, yes, you did get your HVT to the objective but you sacrificed nearly the entire Baltic Fleet's air striking power plus half a regiment of PVO fighters to do it. I feel that should be reflected in the scoring

[vettim89]

Took another look at the scoring and it was really out of whack. NATO had a potential loss of about 6000 while a potential point gain of 12000.

So adjusted a number of things:
* Increased the WP points for getting the AMPH TF into the LZ to 500 per LST/LSM/LCC

* Increased the NATO points loss for letting the AMPH TF get into the LZ to 500 per ship

* Subdivided the WP AA/C into 1st and second line. First line (SU-24, MiG-23, and MiG-29) are still worth 20 points. Second line are now worth 10 points

* Changed Triumph Victory Threshold to 3500 points for both sides (WP can now get 5000 LZ points vice 1200 plus about 1000 fewer potential loss points from A/C)

Also discover a naming error in the Lua script that triggered the WP AMPH withdraw. Corrected, tested and working

MSC (if you are listening), how did you lose so many MiG 29s? Their patrol area should have made them as a deterrent to NATO deep strikes but well behind the FEBA. Surprised they got into much trouble

[magi]

+this is pretty good.... need to try the up date....

[msc]

Hi Vettim!

Yes I did not use my aircraft with caution...
Think the adjustment of scoring you made are good.

The MIG-29:
I tried to get air superiority over Denmark impatiently, pushed to hard, had to many losses. (And I did not use them careful enough around the HAWK's). Then I needed perfect air cover to get my amphibs save to the LZ, prevening them from the Tornados attacking them with Kormoran missiles. So I transfered the MIGs to CAP-west mission.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: msc

Hi Vettim!

Yes I did not use my aircraft with caution...
Think the adjustment of scoring you made are good.

The MIG-29:
I tried to get air superiority over Denmark impatiently, pushed to hard, had to many losses. (And I did not use them careful enough around the HAWK's). Then I needed perfect air cover to get my amphibs save to the LZ, prevening them from the Tornados attacking them with Kormoran missiles. So I transfered the MIGs to CAP-west mission.

As I thought. I just wanted to verify

[vettim89]

v.1.3

* Discovered a scoring problem where only the first LST/LSM was triggering the scoring event - fixed

* Discovered a scoring error where an aggressive WP commander could get double points for AMPH if the units were there for 8 hours - fixed

* Made the points for a successful AMPH entry into the LZ 300 per ship

* Altered the initial load out for the SU-17s to have fewer ARM and more AS-14 armed planes

* Assigned DDR TBs base of Rostock to see if the will RTB for fuel (they were going dead in the water)

With the altered scoring system, MSC's result above would give the WarPac player a major victory. It would be just short of Triumph due to the high losses. Still getting all 27 LST/LSM into the LZ is an accomplishment

Edit: attachment removed as v 1.4 is now up (see below)

[vettim89]

Took a step back away from this scenario as I was not happy with it. Basically the Human player has a pretty easy go of it no matter which side he/she is playing. So I went back to work and hope this is better (though I am still not sure it is as hard as I would like)

Change Log Warsaw Pact

* Moved DDR MiG-23 RGT to new base Peenemunde as that was historical. This base is slightly closer to the FEBA

* Added a DDR MiG-21 RGT at Trollenberg to augment the WP WestCAP

* Changed the SU-24s with the LGB load out as game gives a message indicating low clouds will prevent LGB from launching. The now have 500 kg dumb bombs

* added 10 BN of SSMs to WP side if the Human player is NATO. They will fire a single barrage at some of the NATO facilities

* I considered adding a third air base near Kalingrad with a RGT of MiG-29s if the Human Player is NATO but this seemed a bt much

Change Log NATO

* Added two Danish air bases with an additional sq of F-16 (Total of 54) and changed the Drakens to an ASuW load out

* Moved all but the Helos out of Verloose AB

* Increased the Magazines for the I-Hawk batteries to 48 per battery (they were running out of missiles in the first 90 minutes)

* Added two addition I-Hawk batteries near Odensk (these will likely not be relevant but will provide some deterrence to an aggressive WP player

* Altered the two FRG SSKs loadout to 5 anti-ship TT and 3 ASW TT (vice 4 and 4)

* added Aalford AB with 24 USAF F-4E if Human Player is Warsaw Pact

I have play tested this myself and it seems to be a bit more difficult.

I would like some opinions on a couple of things:

* I toyed with changing the Type 206/206a to 6 Anti-ship TT and only 2 ASW. Thoughts?

* I was thinking about having the PCFG groups from each side moved away from the FEBA for the human player. They are located at their present positions because the AI tends to get them "stuck" in all the small islands and inlets if I don't push them right up to the FEBA. Would you like to see that added to this scenario?

[JPFisher55]

I played this scenario yesterday. I liked it. I played NATO and lost my surface ships, but I sank all the WP ships except for the last invasion SAG. At the end, I was dominating the air, so I called it a win.
IMO, WP has too few aircraft for historical accuracy. Also, the AI can't change missions on its AC. But if you like balance, then the scenario was well balanced.

[vettim89]

ORIGINAL: JPFisher55

I played this scenario yesterday. I liked it. I played NATO and lost my surface ships, but I sank all the WP ships except for the last invasion SAG. At the end, I was dominating the air, so I called it a win.
IMO, WP has too few aircraft for historical accuracy. Also, the AI can't change missions on its AC. But if you like balance, then the scenario was well balanced.

Not sure about the aircraft balance. The Warsaw Pact player has the entirety of the historical attack aircraft assigned to the Baltic Fleet (not the ASW assets), a RGT of MiG-29s from the PVO, the Polish MiG-21 RGT dedicated to naval support, the DDR naval attack squadron, and both the fighter RGTs from the DDR Northern Air Corps. Any additional air units would have to be stripped from either Soviet Frontal Aviation in the DDR, the DDR Southern Air Corps, or the Polish Air Force which are mostly positioned 150 NM or more from the coast (Warsaw, Wroclaw, and Bresnau). My feeling is that those forces would be concentrating on the air battle of central and northern Germany during the time period of this scenario.

Other sources for Warsaw Pact air units would be the Baltic Military District, the Belarus Military District and the Leningrad Military District. The latter is least likely as that district has the Kola Peninsula in its AO. As this scenario represents the first 12 hours of WWIII, it is likely that if those follow on forces were being committed to the battle, they would most likely be dedicated to contesting air superiority over the inter-German border and supporting the initial assault. That is my thinking as far as the set-up.