Facinating, looking foward to okaying your mod from both sides.
...if it works, Yom Kippur next!!!!
Iran-Iraq war
-
Simulacra53
- Posts: 641
- Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 2:58 pm
- Contact:
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Simulacra53
Free Julian Assange
Free Julian Assange
-
Auchinleck
- Posts: 174
- Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 3:26 am
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Ayatollah Khomeini versus Saddam Hussein. It's hard to want to commit to playing either side. A War of Bad Guys versus Bad Guys, if there ever was one! One hopes they both lose!
-
ernieschwitz
- Posts: 4245
- Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:46 pm
- Location: Denmark
RE: Iran-Iraq war
ORIGINAL: Auchinleck
Ayatollah Khomeini versus Saddam Hussein. It's hard to want to commit to playing either side. A War of Bad Guys versus Bad Guys, if there ever was one! One hopes they both lose!
From reading the playtests done on page 1, it seems that both lose!
So no worries there mate Creator of High Quality Scenarios for:
- Advanced Tactics Gold
DC: Warsaw to Paris
DC: Community Project.
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Thanks, still a work in progress but coming along. As for the Yom Kippur war scenario, still a ways from being ready but will post on the forum when ready.
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
[:D][:D][:D][:D]
well that is true, but no different than playing WW2 scenarios with one player as Hitler and the other Stalin.[;)]
well that is true, but no different than playing WW2 scenarios with one player as Hitler and the other Stalin.[;)]
-
Templer_12
- Posts: 1707
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 11:29 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Shocking. [X(]
Great work!
Great work!
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
thanks, still a work in progress.
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Downloaded new version from scenario bank.
Here is my initial feedback. More will come after another set of turns will pass.
Trivia
1) bltn as short for battalion - why not btln as in BaTtaLioN ?
2) sometimes dot . in name sometimes not (something like "4th.Basiji.Division" or "4th Basiji.Division"). I would prefer not dots at all, like "4th Basiji Division".
3) _ or - in officers names like Hasan_Aghareb or Majo_General_Fakori but Ruhollah Khomeini and not underscore
War Situation turn 10.
4) Got many BM21 in Iran but no units would use them (40 in turn 9).
5) You can still create more than 1 GHQ (10PP). Of course you can create Corps HQ too (5PP).
6) 9 turns passed and not a single tank replacement as Iran, so cannibalized tank brigade to recover some tank strength.
7) Many troops came as divisions or replacements, so now Iran have a little more troops than Iraq but 50% are recruits (105k of 183k army). Iraq has only 30% recruits as infantrymen (64k of 170k troops).
8) Iran lost Abadan-Ahvaz and surrounding terrain, but stabilized front later, still don't know how to attack, only roads are open to attack. Many mountainous terrain so heavy losses when attacking. Troops have low experience. Artillery makes little losses, even when used artillery regiments with 70 pieces of 122mm guns. Even readiness loss is low.
9) Every airforce attack turns into all scale air battle with all planes from both sides and heavy losses. I mean loosing like 30 airplanes (6 individual plane units) is heavy loss, when you don't have replacements.
10) It looks like a casualty of choice for my artillery or airforce is always enemy truck (not men, not artillery, not tanks, just truck or armoured transporter BTR-150).
11) Anyway why are they called BTR-150? I don't think such equipment exists. BTR-152 would be better name, but it was probably BTR-50 that was widely used there.
12) As Iran I also have many Soviet equipment which did not seem in line with reality. Iran till Chinese help used mostly western equipment (so it's OK with all those M60/M48) but Iranian starting T-55 should be replaced by Chieftain Mk3/5 I think (just a name and picture?). T-55 came from Syria/Libya later in war.
13) Established 4 Iranian Corps but don't have enough PP to attach officers to all (one still need commander).
14) Turn 10. First air and tank replacements (60 individual tanks, 20 planes). Yeah!
Losses after 10 turns (June 1981):
around 36k troops both sides, around 250 guns both sides
Iraq: 10 divebombers, 70 fighters, 90 light tanks, 330 medium tanks
Iran: 65 fighters, 175 light tanks, 250 medium tanks
Here is my initial feedback. More will come after another set of turns will pass.
Trivia
1) bltn as short for battalion - why not btln as in BaTtaLioN ?
2) sometimes dot . in name sometimes not (something like "4th.Basiji.Division" or "4th Basiji.Division"). I would prefer not dots at all, like "4th Basiji Division".
3) _ or - in officers names like Hasan_Aghareb or Majo_General_Fakori but Ruhollah Khomeini and not underscore
War Situation turn 10.
4) Got many BM21 in Iran but no units would use them (40 in turn 9).
5) You can still create more than 1 GHQ (10PP). Of course you can create Corps HQ too (5PP).
6) 9 turns passed and not a single tank replacement as Iran, so cannibalized tank brigade to recover some tank strength.
7) Many troops came as divisions or replacements, so now Iran have a little more troops than Iraq but 50% are recruits (105k of 183k army). Iraq has only 30% recruits as infantrymen (64k of 170k troops).
8) Iran lost Abadan-Ahvaz and surrounding terrain, but stabilized front later, still don't know how to attack, only roads are open to attack. Many mountainous terrain so heavy losses when attacking. Troops have low experience. Artillery makes little losses, even when used artillery regiments with 70 pieces of 122mm guns. Even readiness loss is low.
9) Every airforce attack turns into all scale air battle with all planes from both sides and heavy losses. I mean loosing like 30 airplanes (6 individual plane units) is heavy loss, when you don't have replacements.
10) It looks like a casualty of choice for my artillery or airforce is always enemy truck (not men, not artillery, not tanks, just truck or armoured transporter BTR-150).
11) Anyway why are they called BTR-150? I don't think such equipment exists. BTR-152 would be better name, but it was probably BTR-50 that was widely used there.
12) As Iran I also have many Soviet equipment which did not seem in line with reality. Iran till Chinese help used mostly western equipment (so it's OK with all those M60/M48) but Iranian starting T-55 should be replaced by Chieftain Mk3/5 I think (just a name and picture?). T-55 came from Syria/Libya later in war.
13) Established 4 Iranian Corps but don't have enough PP to attach officers to all (one still need commander).
14) Turn 10. First air and tank replacements (60 individual tanks, 20 planes). Yeah!
Losses after 10 turns (June 1981):
around 36k troops both sides, around 250 guns both sides
Iraq: 10 divebombers, 70 fighters, 90 light tanks, 330 medium tanks
Iran: 65 fighters, 175 light tanks, 250 medium tanks
═══
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Report for turn 16. December 1981.
The front is more or less stable. I can't attack it as Iraq-AI has too many units. Iraq sometimes pushes me back a hex or two, but nothing dramatic. Losses are similar, although I won one big air battle.
Iraq losses: 135 fighters, 390 guns, 62k troops, 225 light tanks, 610 medium tanks
Iran losses: 90 fighters, 340 guns, 49k troops, 210 light tanks, 410 medium tanks
Total troops on map: both sides around 400k troops and 750 light tanks
Iraq: 285 divebombers, 385 fighters, 2100 guns, 3000 medium tanks
Iran: 195 divebombers, 150 fighters, 1100 guns, 1900 medium tanks
I have good reserves of:
infantry: 8k troops (for less than 1 division)
conscripts: 36k troops (for around 3 divisions)
staff: 3500
engineers: 20k (!)
airborne: 10k (for around 3 divisions)
BM21: 90 pieces (useless?)
armoured cars: 130 pieces
I lack terribly of: 1650 trucks (they are easily destroyed), 300 M113 APC, fighter planes, M60 tanks.
1. I don't know what engineers are good for. They fight badly and only build / destroy bridges. There are not many bridges around.
2. I don't know why artillery regiment uses 500 trucks for 70 artillery guns. In numbers it only needs around half of it. So for 70 guns (weight 14), it uses 10 individuals trucks (500 trucks) with possibility to carry 50 points of weight.
3. I don't know why Basiji divisions (half of my troops) do not have AA guns and artillery in them. Of course I can create separate battalions, but still ...
4. There are not enough officers, but you know that.
I would like to be able to actually buy / produce equipment, rather than rely on replacements. Where are my trucks!
The front is more or less stable. I can't attack it as Iraq-AI has too many units. Iraq sometimes pushes me back a hex or two, but nothing dramatic. Losses are similar, although I won one big air battle.
Iraq losses: 135 fighters, 390 guns, 62k troops, 225 light tanks, 610 medium tanks
Iran losses: 90 fighters, 340 guns, 49k troops, 210 light tanks, 410 medium tanks
Total troops on map: both sides around 400k troops and 750 light tanks
Iraq: 285 divebombers, 385 fighters, 2100 guns, 3000 medium tanks
Iran: 195 divebombers, 150 fighters, 1100 guns, 1900 medium tanks
I have good reserves of:
infantry: 8k troops (for less than 1 division)
conscripts: 36k troops (for around 3 divisions)
staff: 3500
engineers: 20k (!)
airborne: 10k (for around 3 divisions)
BM21: 90 pieces (useless?)
armoured cars: 130 pieces
I lack terribly of: 1650 trucks (they are easily destroyed), 300 M113 APC, fighter planes, M60 tanks.
1. I don't know what engineers are good for. They fight badly and only build / destroy bridges. There are not many bridges around.
2. I don't know why artillery regiment uses 500 trucks for 70 artillery guns. In numbers it only needs around half of it. So for 70 guns (weight 14), it uses 10 individuals trucks (500 trucks) with possibility to carry 50 points of weight.
3. I don't know why Basiji divisions (half of my troops) do not have AA guns and artillery in them. Of course I can create separate battalions, but still ...
4. There are not enough officers, but you know that.
I would like to be able to actually buy / produce equipment, rather than rely on replacements. Where are my trucks!
═══
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Report for turn 20. April 1982.
1. Iran has many T-54/55 in reserves but not a single M-60, so actually can't replenish tank brigades to full strength.
2. I would like to be able to create my own unit structures or replace M60 tanks in brigades with T-54/55.
3. I have many PP but only can buy Basiji divisions (without AA guns and artillery).
4. I lack of M113 and trucks badly.
5. Some replacements come on regular basis, some with random factor. I prefer random factor. Please add random trucks as I get only 250 a turn which is too small.
6. Without trucks many units will not function properly: artillery regiments, engineer regiments, Basiji etc.
Notable reserves: 23k engineers and 8k airborne troops
plus 6 airborne brigades deployed [;)]
Question: why brigade needs the same number of trucks as division?
Infantry Division
13000 troops
30 guns
20 artillery
550 trucks
500 engineers
20 aa guns
Infantry Brigade
4000 troops
20 guns
25 artillery
550 trucks
1. Iran has many T-54/55 in reserves but not a single M-60, so actually can't replenish tank brigades to full strength.
2. I would like to be able to create my own unit structures or replace M60 tanks in brigades with T-54/55.
3. I have many PP but only can buy Basiji divisions (without AA guns and artillery).
4. I lack of M113 and trucks badly.
5. Some replacements come on regular basis, some with random factor. I prefer random factor. Please add random trucks as I get only 250 a turn which is too small.
6. Without trucks many units will not function properly: artillery regiments, engineer regiments, Basiji etc.
Notable reserves: 23k engineers and 8k airborne troops
plus 6 airborne brigades deployed [;)]
Question: why brigade needs the same number of trucks as division?
Infantry Division
13000 troops
30 guns
20 artillery
550 trucks
500 engineers
20 aa guns
Infantry Brigade
4000 troops
20 guns
25 artillery
550 trucks
═══
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Report turn 22. June 1982.
Stable situation on fronts.
Forces:
Iraq: 421k troops, 395 divebombers, 535 fighters, 2300 guns, 865 light tanks, 3300 medium tanks.
Iran: 487k troops, 195 divebombers, 150 fighters, 1400 guns, 770 light tanks, 2100 medium tanks.
Light tanks include mostly amored cars.
Losses.
Irag: 98k troops, 765 medium tanks
Iran: 82k troops, 540 medium tanks
Summary.
It's hard to earn experience in battles. I suggest making some changes in rules.
I looked at the replacement tables. Some equipment uses dates that make it impossible to show in game.
Examples:
Iranian M60 tanks: start 22/5/82, end 9/11/81
Iranian M113: start 22/5/81, end 9/11/81 (only 6 months for replacements by 4 units)
Iranian F-4/F-5: the same as M113
It looks like an omission as many other equipment has end date as 9/11/88
Suggestion: if players can't create their own unit types, maybe it will be better to use generic troop types in units than specific?
Example: Iranian Tank Brigade
It's composed of 10x M60, 10x T-55, 6x AC, I would like to see it as 10x medium tank, 10x medium tank, 6x AC
but I don't know yet if it is possible. When I set it to "medium tank" all brigades just retired all its tanks to HQ
But what is possible is setting 2nd replacement choice for equipment types.
Example M60 tank use M60 as 1st replacement and nothing as 2nd, one can set 2nd as T-54/55 tank, so it will use it when no M60 tanks in reserves would be available.
I tried this pattern:
M60 second replacement is T54
T54 second replacement is T55
T55 second replacement is M60
That solution works, but you must disable master file first (to make it editable or edit master).
Another suggestion: recalculate all replacements for at least 25% random factor
Example:
Iraq infantry gun comes as 4 per turn. Would be set as 3 (-25%) to 5 (+25%) per turn.
There seems to be too many airborne/engineer troops replacements for both sides.
I would like to see equipment cards (like for reservists now) for most equipment. It could be done by cutting 30% of replacement rates and adding equivalent in PP cards (tanks, air crafts, guns, TRUCKS). Cards without cost increase after use!
I will try to test Iraq with some changes maybe.
Stable situation on fronts.
Forces:
Iraq: 421k troops, 395 divebombers, 535 fighters, 2300 guns, 865 light tanks, 3300 medium tanks.
Iran: 487k troops, 195 divebombers, 150 fighters, 1400 guns, 770 light tanks, 2100 medium tanks.
Light tanks include mostly amored cars.
Losses.
Irag: 98k troops, 765 medium tanks
Iran: 82k troops, 540 medium tanks
Summary.
It's hard to earn experience in battles. I suggest making some changes in rules.
I looked at the replacement tables. Some equipment uses dates that make it impossible to show in game.
Examples:
Iranian M60 tanks: start 22/5/82, end 9/11/81
Iranian M113: start 22/5/81, end 9/11/81 (only 6 months for replacements by 4 units)
Iranian F-4/F-5: the same as M113
It looks like an omission as many other equipment has end date as 9/11/88
Suggestion: if players can't create their own unit types, maybe it will be better to use generic troop types in units than specific?
Example: Iranian Tank Brigade
It's composed of 10x M60, 10x T-55, 6x AC, I would like to see it as 10x medium tank, 10x medium tank, 6x AC
but I don't know yet if it is possible. When I set it to "medium tank" all brigades just retired all its tanks to HQ
But what is possible is setting 2nd replacement choice for equipment types.
Example M60 tank use M60 as 1st replacement and nothing as 2nd, one can set 2nd as T-54/55 tank, so it will use it when no M60 tanks in reserves would be available.
I tried this pattern:
M60 second replacement is T54
T54 second replacement is T55
T55 second replacement is M60
That solution works, but you must disable master file first (to make it editable or edit master).
Another suggestion: recalculate all replacements for at least 25% random factor
Example:
Iraq infantry gun comes as 4 per turn. Would be set as 3 (-25%) to 5 (+25%) per turn.
There seems to be too many airborne/engineer troops replacements for both sides.
I would like to see equipment cards (like for reservists now) for most equipment. It could be done by cutting 30% of replacement rates and adding equivalent in PP cards (tanks, air crafts, guns, TRUCKS). Cards without cost increase after use!
I will try to test Iraq with some changes maybe.
═══
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
liking what you have done.
RE: Iran-Iraq war
I've tried changing scenario mechanism to 1:1 proportions (1 tank unit = 1 tank exactly, so battalion has e.g. 40 individual units instead of 8, as for now).
Very enjoyable!
Loosing 1 tank is just that: one piece of equipment is dead. And loses are like 3 guns, 7 tanks etc.
Only infantry comes in squads of 20 soldiers and trucks as 10 (still not decided to make it 1:1).
Very enjoyable!
Loosing 1 tank is just that: one piece of equipment is dead. And loses are like 3 guns, 7 tanks etc.
Only infantry comes in squads of 20 soldiers and trucks as 10 (still not decided to make it 1:1).
═══
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
There is no such thing as a historically accurate strategy game. Every game stops being historically accurate from the very first move player do. First unit that moves ahistorically, first battle with non-historical results, mean we ride in unknown.
RE: Iran-Iraq war
ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah
Thanks. I'm running into a problem though regarding how many days for each turn. If I go with 7 day turns, then the game will be 400 turns, if I go with 30 day turns then the length of the game will be reduced significantly but this may cause weird stats so I'm debating on what to do. Realistically though who wants to sit and play 400 turns.
If I can figure out the logic events work, then I could do events where after certain objectives are taken, there is a chance of a UN ceasefire or something along these lines which would reduce the time on this.
This is on a much larger scale and if done right will work, but if I screw up, then not so much.
I'm fairly certain that we're the sort of group of folks willing to play 400 turns.
[:D]
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Fantastic work. Can't wait for the AI compatible version. [:)]
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
Is this still being worked on?
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
It is, but as I've started a new job so I do not have a lot of time. The plan is to finish it, but it will be a while as I have no time table yet.
-
lion_of_judah
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 6:36 pm
- Location: somewhere over the rainbow
RE: Iran-Iraq war
I'm currently working on a complete rework of this scenario as we speak. Replacements will only become available when the replacement card is played. It will cost a certain amount of PP points in order to play this card. The cost of playing the card will increase by 25% each time. Iraqi tanks will only be replaced by a replacement card as well. I'm hoping the new way replacements are given will decrease the huge amounts of troops sitting in the HQ, which in my opinion is unrealistic.
The Iranian side will have the same limitations on it and all US and British made equipment will only have a finite amount of replacements and will end after a certain time, after this The Iranian's will be able to play a new card symbolizing Soviet military assistance.
The Iranian side will have the same limitations on it and all US and British made equipment will only have a finite amount of replacements and will end after a certain time, after this The Iranian's will be able to play a new card symbolizing Soviet military assistance.