Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations >> Mods and Scenarios >> Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/17/2019 1:19:37 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
Build a big gorilla package and destroy 3 strategic SAMs and a C3 bunker over the Baltic and Poland.

Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/18/2019 3:33:09 AM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
Giving it a go, looks interesting.

The recon units can damage the sams, I assume you don't intend that - maybe they should not have any weapons?
one of the Wraiths has a ferry load out instead of recon, not sure if that is part of the randomness of the availability or not.

(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 2
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/18/2019 9:15:27 AM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
I'm less concerned about the SAS Recon guys damaging the SAMs, although I'll keep that in mind. Maybe I need to add some sort of substantial disincentive to doing that (like losing them)?

I need to fix the RQ-170 thing, but there should be enough time to reconfigure them, though. I wouldn't take the default loadouts as necessarily optimal or even suggested. I wanted to have plenty of time to reconfigure any of the aircraft however you desire.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whicker

Giving it a go, looks interesting.

The recon units can damage the sams, I assume you don't intend that - maybe they should not have any weapons?
one of the Wraiths has a ferry load out instead of recon, not sure if that is part of the randomness of the availability or not.


(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 3
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/18/2019 4:38:54 PM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
quote:

should be enough time to reconfigure them, though. I wouldn't take the default loadouts as necessarily optimal or even suggested. I wanted to have plenty of time to reconfigure any of the aircraft however you desire


that's what I figured, plenty of time so it wasn't a problem.

Losing the sas is an interesting idea, they are valuable. I've thought of having roving patrols to counter recon units, also gives a chance of catching them if they move around.

One of the restarts I did I was only given 1 E3/AWACS... that was a bit of a bummer.

(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 4
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/18/2019 6:37:22 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
quote:

One of the restarts I did I was only given 1 E3/AWACS... that was a bit of a bummer.


The real bummer is when you draw no bombers. That's just miserable. My last scenario drew accusations that I'd created an unwinnable scenario (it's not, but people used to decisive wins will probably be disappointed). This one is not as challenging as that one, in that it's easier to get a decent score. Is it still challenging?


(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 5
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/19/2019 4:32:19 PM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
its good - have played a several hours in so far. Lost a few AC to those damn PAK FA's. They are invisible most of the time. The SA21 can't hit the jassms (they are lower than min it can hit) but there is a lot of other stuff that can hit them. Working on cleaning most of that out, think I am mostly there. We'll see.

(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 6
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/20/2019 4:54:43 AM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
ok, I somehow scored a Triumph - I thought I lost too many AC but I had a few to spare. I think I lost 36 fighters and was allowed 42. It felt worse than that.

I thought it was fairly challenging, but about half way thru I had a pretty good handle on it and was just waiting for the second readying of the bombers.

the Pak FA fighters are impossible.

The southernmost sa-21 is fairly easy to kill with a few jassms, the others require quite a bit of prep work. The one up north is a decent challenge, lost a b-52 up there but only just - its support left a minute early and that was all it took.

I enjoyed it, probably could increase the penalty for losing fighters, I thought my losses were pretty high - but I did kill all the stuff and did some major damage to them. Could be a bit shorter but that was nice to be able to rearm stuff differently.
It played nice and quick, 15x was no problem.



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

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
5x EF2000 Eurofighter Typhoon
9x F-22A Raptor
2x RQ-4B Global Hawk Blk 40 UAV
3x F-15C Eagle
14x F-35A Lightning II
2x RQ-170A Wraith [Sentinel] UAV
5x F-15E Strike Eagle
1x B-52H Stratofortress


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
96x ADM-160C MALD-J [Stand-In OECM]
317x AIM-120D AMRAAM P3I.4
96x Meteor
42x Generic Chaff Salvo [8x Cartridges]
56x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
80x AGM-158A JASSM [Penetrator]
4x AN/ALE-70 FOTD
288x GBU-39/B SDB
27x AGM-158B JASSM-ER
2x Generic Flare Salvo [3x Cartridges, Dual Spectral]
44x GBU-31(V)3/B JDAM [BLU-109/B]
8x GBU-57A/B MOP



SIDE: RUS
===========================================================

LOSSES:
-------------------------------
40x Su-27SM/SM3 Flanker B
17x Su-30SM Flanker G
26x MiG-31BM Foxhound
15x T-50 PAK-FA
36x SA-21a/b Growler TEL
9x SA-16 Gimlet [9K310 Igla-1] MANPADS
3x Vehicle (Grave Stone [92N2])
1x Radar (Big Bird B [5N64S])
3x Radar (Tall Rack [55Zh6-1 Nebo UYe])
3x Radar (Tin Shield B [5N59S/36D6])
1x Radar (Tin Trap [22Zh6])
8x SA-22 Greyhound [96K6 Pantsir-S1, KAMAZ-6560 8x8] TELAR
3x Radar (Spoon Rest D [P-18])
8x SA-15e Gauntlet [9A331] TELAR
21x Su-34 Fullback
3x Vehicle (Cheese Board [96L6])
4x SA-11 Gadfly [9A38/9M317] TELAR
28x SA-10b Grumble [5P85S] TEL
4x Vehicle (Flap Lid B [5N63S])
4x Vehicle (Clam Shell [5N66])
1x Radar (Tall King A [P-14])
1x Radar (Back Net [P-80])
1x Radar (Tall Rack [55Zh6M Nebo M, RLM-D L-Band])
1x Building (Transformer)
1x Radar (Squat Eye [P-15M(2)])
1x Radar (Box Spring [1L13-3 Nebo SV])
4x SA-12b Giant [9A82] TELAR
6x SA-12a Gladiator [9A83] TELAR
1x SA-12b Giant [9A85] LLV
3x SA-12a Gladiator [9A84] LLV
2x Vehicle (Grill Pan [9S32-1])
1x Radar (Bar Lock A [P-37])
1x Radar (Tall Rack [55Zh6M Nebo M, RLM-S S-Band])
1x Radar (Tall Rack [55Zh6M Nebo M, RLM-M VHF-Band])
2x SA-11 Gadfly [9A39/9M317] LLV
5x Underground Hardened Bunker (C3M)
4x Structure (Tunnel)
1x Building (Uplink Relay Station)
1x Structure (Tunnel Entrance)
1x A/C Hangar (2x Large Aircraft)
1x A/C Hangar (4x Medium Aircraft)
1x Structure (Generator)
2x Ammo Pad


EXPENDITURES:
------------------
172x Generic Chaff Salvo [4x Cartridges]
2x AA-10 Alamo D [R-27ET, LR IR]
61x AA-13 Arrow [R-37M, RVV-BD]
16x AA-12 Adder B [R-77-1, RVV-SD]
89x AA-12 Adder C [R-77M]
14x AA-9 Amos [R-33S, SARH]
37x 30mm Gsh-30-1 Burst [30 rnds]
43x SA-11 Gadfly [9M38M1]
245x SA-10b Grumble [5V55R]
4x AA-11 Archer [R-74M2]
2x AA-11 Archer [R-73M]
1x AA-11 Archer [R-73]
106x SA-15e Gauntlet [9M338K]
20x AA-10 Alamo C [R-27ER, LR SARH]
59x Generic Chaff Salvo [5x Cartridges]
53x 30mm 2A38M Burst [50 rnds]
44x SA-22 Greyhound [57E6]
27x SA-12a Gladiator [9M83]
6x SA-12b Giant [9M82]
7x SA-21b Growler [40N6]
8x AA-10 Alamo A [R-27R, MR SARH]
2x AA-10 Alamo B [R-27T, MR IR]



(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 7
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/20/2019 12:25:14 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
I thought of the southern most SA-21 as sort of a warm-up.

The reason I made it so long was that I wanted people to have the opportunity to experiment with loadouts on everything, including the bombers. I feel like there's always a compromise between wanting to put some time pressure on the player, and wanting them to be able to experiment with different tactics, which are sometimes driven by weapons. Do you think it would be better if I shortened it? I would hate to pretend that all the aircraft are initially configured in a reasonable way for this scenario. 25% is a lot of airplanes to lose when you have a lot of airplanes. Maybe I should make it to 15% or 20%?

How did you get the SA-21 in the far north?

< Message edited by SeaQueen -- 2/20/2019 1:16:58 PM >

(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 8
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/20/2019 4:43:27 PM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
I think it would be better if the points for losing fighters were a sliding scale? 5% for triumph? probably unattainable the but more in line with a triumph to me, then a victory could be at 25% but maybe minor? i was surprised by the triumph so I went and checked your code to make sure it worked as I felt I did not do that well.

SA-21 up north was 2 loads of jassms from b52s -but prior to that it had taken 4-5 other random ones from F-15s trying to get lucky. I did not use the SAS guys to shoot anything up.

Time is fine, but maybe after the last target is destroyed you end it? I sped up time and let it go in the background to see if anything else was going to happen but I had already killed all the targets. If I hadn't then the extra time would be good.

(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 9
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/20/2019 6:22:30 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
I'm confused. Right now, if you lose 25% of the tactical aircraft and nothing else, you should lose 20 points, which would put you at 100 - 20 = 80. That means if you destroyed everything (+100 points) you'd still get only a "Minor Victory." That doesn't strike me as a problem.

(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 10
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/20/2019 6:31:17 PM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
25% is a lot - I lost 36 which was pretty bad in my opinion - 42 would have been 25%. Just saying I feel like losing 36 should have had some sort of penalty but it didn't.

(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 11
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/20/2019 8:12:21 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
I see what you're saying. Yeah, that's the hard thing about writing "victory conditions" versus "scoring." I tend to start from the perspective of "What would victory look like?" So, losing less than a quarter of the tactical aircraft, no more than one or two bombers, etc. It doesn't mean that 25% losses are a good thing, it just means that they're within what's considered acceptable.

Interestingly, when I play it, I don't usually lose that much, but I usually actually only spend ~12 hours of game time actually flying. The rest is spent re-configuring aircraft and waiting for them all to become available. Did you try to slowly draw down the SAMs over the 2 days or did you strike in one big surge of combat power?


(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 12
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/21/2019 1:08:26 AM   
Whicker

 

Posts: 459
Joined: 6/20/2018
Status: offline
in my defense I am not all that good - there was a lot of on the job training. I did the first sa21 in the south with one b52, then started working on the mess in the middle with lots of SDBs - which while cool are really just SAM bait. Then I used some GBU31s to see how they would do on the bunkers, they did ok if you hit them with enough. Then the B2's. Then B52s - not sure where all those JASSMs went - I think most were shot down. Then reloaded and did it again, but by then the enemy was more or less done.

(in reply to SeaQueen)
Post #: 13
RE: Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe - 2/21/2019 8:12:57 PM   
SeaQueen


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/14/2007
From: Washington D.C.
Status: offline
You did well enough. I'm thinking that maybe I should re-add the time pressure, so there's no time for re-attacks, even if it means limiting experimentation with the bomber's loadouts.

Would you prefer F-16CJs to F-35s? Or maybe a mix?

I usually have a lot of luck with JASSM, but I also mix them in with MALD-J which in turn helps the F-35s and SDBs

quote:

in my defense I am not all that good - there was a lot of on the job training. I did the first sa21 in the south with one b52, then started working on the mess in the middle with lots of SDBs - which while cool are really just SAM bait. Then I used some GBU31s to see how they would do on the bunkers, they did ok if you hit them with enough. Then the B2's. Then B52s - not sure where all those JASSMs went - I think most were shot down. Then reloaded and did it again, but by then the enemy was more or less done.

(in reply to Whicker)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations >> Mods and Scenarios >> Scenario for Testing: Strategic SEAD Eastern Europe Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.113