Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force

 
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 Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 6/28/2020 12:03:20 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online
Hello. I looked around some more, and only noticed a few more items, some of which have been mentioned already, I think.


More Assorted stuff

The Side Briefing indicates that the patrol zone points are all intended to fire at 12 hour intervals, but the four triggers for PZ Delta are all set for 24 hours.

Two CVN detection triggers, one “CVN Target Detected’ with a zone, other ‘CVN detected’ without a zone. I don’t think the second one gets used at all, so it may not make a difference.

There are two triggers for NATO aircraft losses: ‘NATO Aircraft Loss’ and ‘NATO AC Destroyed’. Not sure if it matters here either.

My shot-down pilots all stayed until the end of the game. I’m not sure if they’re supposed to eventually expire after a time?

Action ‘Lua – Ryk window closed’ has a typo “have not made the widndow”

Action ‘Lua - USNS Northern Lights at Faslane’ has a typo “unloading supplies to the dockyart”

There are two actions which generate minefield RPs: ‘Lua – Minefield coords’ (which has the duplicate RPs) and ‘Lua – Target Minefield’ (which does not)

The ‘Rft 86 Msl Bde’ event, which adds extra SAMs around Bardufoss, happens at 8:30 on the first day of the scenario. Was this supposed to happen later in the game? The INTREP on Mar 21 at 1800Z indicates that the 86th Msl Bde “has or is moving” from Kola three days later. Having the SAMs present from the beginning does make things tougher, but it might also be interesting to catch the player unawares, here or elsewhere, with pop-up SAM replacements (or repairs) after they think they’ve cleared things out.

Pop-up runway repair might be fun too, although it would take a lot of Lua-ing, I expect. Currently the game takes forever to fix a runway, and in a game of this length they should be able to make some measurable progress. Maybe if runway = disabled, start timer. Four hours later, Lua in some trucks named ‘construction equipment’. If they’re in the zone for 2 days, then Lua the runway and a couple of access points to operational. Perhaps only at some of the bigger mainland bases (Bodo, Banak, Bardufoss)? Might make for an interesting surprise. (Although the problem might be that this could ignore the effect of restrikes.)


SAM reloads

I have to admit, I mostly forgot that the TLAM freighters at Reykjavik and Faslane had also brought SAMs, and I certainly made no effort to send any of my escorts there for restocking. I guess once I had decided that trips to Rota or Norfolk were out of the question, I put SAMs out of my mind. I wonder if a “Undertake SAM resupply” order from HQ, maybe a day before the ships are scheduled to arrive, and a minor points event for major SAM ships (Ticos, other CGs, Burkes) arriving at those bases would help make the player more attentive to this replenishing task?


Finding CVs?

I think the biggest difficulty for the Soviets is finding the American carriers, and, having found them, keeping the contact until the bombers can arrive. Submarine detection is a very unreliable method of finding the enemy, especially if they have slowed down to creep speed to do some ASW hunting of their own. You're only likely to get direct-path contacts, which means detection ranges will be ~ 15 miles at most.

I wonder if a dedicated armed reconnaissance mission would be the way to go, rather than hoping for sub detections? Perhaps the Tu-22MR recce planes, on independent support missions with lanes ~ 100 miles apart, with heavy fighter cover (a MiG-23 surge from Bardufoss /Tromso/Andoya, backed up by Su-27s/MiG-31s) against a background of jammers could do it? It would be costly, but if done on day 2-ish, before major reinforcements arrive, it might work to catch a carrier. And the cost may be justified - even spending 50 to 60 to fighters to kill a carrier group with 80+ aircraft and multiple ships is probably a net win.

It might also be worth a dedicated mission to hunt the Arc Royal and Clemenceau, coming in from over Svalbard to do it. (That assumes the Soviets actually know they're in the area. Would they have any indication of that in the scenario setting?)

(Of course, this is all spoken like a micro-managing human. Convincing the AI to do this might be completely impractical.)


Thanks again for the great scenario.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 91
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 6/28/2020 8:31:55 AM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1244
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

Pop-up runway repair might be fun too, although it would take a lot of Lua-ing, I expect.

Some, but maybe less than you think, if you just want to deem it repaired at a particular time. The effort there will be more in managing which one\ones to repair and less the actual 'repair' - unless you want it staggered in increments, which yeah get more involved. The other challenge there is if the ammo depots are actually destroyed they're gone, so you only have what's on planes that are there and aren't blown up right or what lands. Course you can re-generate them but that seems unfair, and adding mags via scripts (without involving delta's) can't be done atm anyway. Though come to think of it this is the second request I've seen for faster repairs options, and while I don't mind the game is slow in repairing runways etc (I think it's rather a good default) I've always wished there was a setting per unit or per side to speed it up even if only slightly like (10-15%), I've always thought it should be maybe tied to proficiency. Maybe I'll work on something in the future that can address that in a reusable way, at least for airbases if not units in general.

quote:

Of course, this is all spoken like a micro-managing human

It's the only way to play this game most of the time frankly if you want to make the most of whatever advantages you have in a scene.
quote:

Convincing the AI to do this might be completely impractical.

Indeed it might.

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 92
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 6/28/2020 10:37:14 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Thanks AndrewJ great stuff to work on.

Your mention of Runway repair reminded me of a interesting discussion I had late one beer soaked evening many years ago.

I had an acquaintance who commanded the Rapid Runway Repair unit (cannot remember its actual title) before we scrapped it. About 150 folks. He told me (beer involved so veracity uncertain) that his unit could repair holes in about 4 hours and have any runway damage fixed and the runway operational within 72hrs.

Interesting - so I googled it and found this: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a467547.pdf

I cannot claim to have read the whole thing in detail (it looks like Engineer porn to me) but it seems that RRR is a 'thing'

Assuming you have a team (Canada had one- we have a lot of runways), the equipment and the supplies on hand there should indeed be a way of fixing runways quicker. Norway in March - I'm thinking within 48-72 hrs.

This capability shouldn't be universal and would depend on how many bombs of what type actually did the dirty work. I think this is where CBs vs Penetraters makes an interesting study - hundreds of small holes vs 1 really big crater.

Hmmm...

A simplistic fix would be on a 12hr repeating trigger - have a random chance and poof the runway is fixed (At my level of Lua skill - I like this)

A more complex fix would be for something on a shorter trigger (4hr?) where it dropped the damage on the runway by a certain percentage (10-15%) allowing smaller AC to operate quicker (this is better I think)

The next question is - how do you figure out how many teams and where they are?

If they are at the Air Base in question with the equipment - no problem. I do see another target at the base though - an undetected vehicle park or something within 20nm- which eliminates the option if its destroyed.

If they are not at the base - do they drive in (Target!)? They presumably cannot fly in unless there is a nearby runway... then why bother. Do they paradrop in - special kit, special training, transports available etc - yes but limited. Do you paradrop the people and use local equipment, doable but slower I think.

So how many? - One team per Wing or only one per numbered Air Force? For the Soviets one per Division or Corps? Smaller Air Forces get one or two maybe? Does that sound right?

So how? - For the player side assigning a RRR team to a base could be a Special Acton or maybe it needs to be flow in before or pre-positioned close or para-dropped. For the AI side it's easier I think.

This is more of a general discussion, but for this Scenario there is no real threat to the player and the Soviets would have one (at Air Corps) or three (at Air Div) and Bardufoss and Bodo are the obvious choices. A delay for driving to the other mainland bases but the island bases would be a non starter I think. The bases on the Kola would have an inherent capacity to do think I think.

Any thoughts on this? Gentlemen! I present you a 'can of worms'!









_____________________________

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/

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 93
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 6/28/2020 11:49:01 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

Interesting - so I googled it and found this: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a467547.pdf


Looking through that document, it makes a lot of references to AIR FORCE PAMPHLET 10-219, VOLUME 4 1 APRIL 1997 RAPID RUNWAY REPAIR OPERATIONS. Fortunately, there is a pdf of it on-line HERE

This is a full-on 227 pages of how to assess damages and make repairs.






< Message edited by AndrewJ -- 6/28/2020 2:18:56 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 94
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 9/4/2020 4:07:41 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

I figure this saves a boat load of time if you want to rework it


KnightHawk75

Finally getting at this scenario and your script saved a bunch of time - worked like a charm and after I figured out a couple bits it was great.

Thanks again.

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/

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 95
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 9/5/2020 5:17:28 AM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1244
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
@Gunner98
Cool. Glad it helped.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 96
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 9/5/2020 5:24:42 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

Murmansk Strike


AndrewJ

You were about 26hrs ahead of where I thought things would be. ....Fixed

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/

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 97
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 9/5/2020 6:08:20 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online
Good thing I played the Beta!

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 98
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 9/5/2020 9:22:04 PM   
stww2

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 5/23/2017
Status: offline
Pretty sure Eisenhower Moves North (don't remember which NF scenario number that is) involved an UNREP of a CVBG-that's a much smaller and more manageable scenario.

(in reply to VileBeggar)
Post #: 99
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 12/30/2020 1:57:46 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK at long last the update for this monster is ready.

Some issues still to be worked on:
- Runway repair
- Triggering bomber strikes is still problematic
- A couple minor tweaks and fiddling

I'd really like to know how the scoring and pace is working now. The line crossing issue has been fixed so the scoring needs a good scrub. As far as pace, you will have things to do almost up to the final hour so that should be 240 game hours of activity - let me know if that is too much or still too little in the end game.

As always please pass on any and all points and thanks for testing.

B

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 1/2/2021 12:34:51 PM >


_____________________________

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/

(in reply to stww2)
Post #: 100
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 12/31/2020 4:03:37 PM   
RSMC

 

Posts: 38
Joined: 2/19/2017
Status: offline
One hour of game time in - initial feedback

Yankee Notch are targeting the neutral facilities on Spitzbergen, may want to either forbid targets of opportunity or let the game run 1 second for WP, to clearly label neutrals as such

Neutral fishing boats are being targeted by coastal SSMs and SAG long range missiles, same potential fixes as above.

Check out the SAG helicopter deployments, I think you have AEW birds in the ASW mission and the ASW birds not assigned to any mission.

Pace for the first hour is frantic - in a good way. Scoring - starting in the expected hole, -350 (-300 tankers, -10 each for 5 fishing boats sunk by WP)

As usual the work you put into these is very impressive.

Keep up the great work.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 101
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/1/2021 11:35:30 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Thank you... fix one thing and it breaks another...

I'll get a quick fix out for this one shortly.

Happy New Year

_____________________________

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/

(in reply to RSMC)
Post #: 102
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 12:34:26 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
OK here is a quick fix which should sort out the issues RSMC mentioned

Thank you

< Message edited by Gunner98 -- 1/2/2021 9:10:10 PM >


_____________________________

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/

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 103
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 4:22:17 PM   
alghblag

 

Posts: 28
Joined: 4/3/2016
Status: offline
@AndrewJ, you are good at this game! A lot of my aviation destroyed during raids that you seemed to handle easily. Wondering how you dealt with the refueling, etc...

@Gunner98, great scenario! I failed miserably at the beta and haven't had time to play the updated version, but serious kudos are due. One thing that I think might be helpful is more reminders for various player tasks -- after a while I lost track of what needed to go where for refueling/rearming.

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 104
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 6:15:48 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online
Hi Alghblag,

The main thing I do is micromanage almost everything, which means I am an excruciatingly slow player. I use missions for things like AEW and ELINT paths, and ASW patrols, but other than that it's usually all by hand, and that gives a lot more flexibility to chose routes, time the arrival of recce assets, manage when and at what range to fire, etc. There's a lot of terrain following, sheltering in the steep Norwegian fjords and valleys, that the AI simply isn't equipped to do, which can often help me get planes in close enough to attack before they are shot down, and escape again afterwards.

For a scenario of this size, I had to do a bunch of 'external' work to keep track of everything.

I had maps for various patrol zones and areas of operation.


I saved all the intel messages and made a little event tracker to keep tabs on the due dates and status of my assignments.


I had a very messy attempt to plan and track my logistics, looking at the different fuel and munitions needs to try and make the proper warships meet the proper replenishment group.


I found UNREP to be a bit clumsy. For example, a carrier would often try to fill its magazines with hundreds of rusty old iron bombs, before getting to the few AAMs it most desperately needed, so I began to use the editor to swap munitions, to simulate control of munitions loading. (Subtract X iron bombs that you hadn't really wanted the carrier to load, add them back to the logistics ship, subtract an equivalent weight of AAMs from the logistics ship and add them to the carrier.) It's not perfect, but it was certainly helpful.

All of this was far more involved than a normal scenario, but that's what made it such a vivid game experience.




(in reply to alghblag)
Post #: 105
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 9:03:32 PM   
CHM


Posts: 61
Joined: 9/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewJ

I found UNREP to be a bit clumsy. For example, a carrier would often try to fill its magazines with hundreds of rusty old iron bombs, before getting to the few AAMs it most desperately needed...



I too find this annoying. I wonder how complex a priority system would be to add? Similar to the reload priority system for weapon stations (telling a sub to load torpedoes over TLAMs, for example). Split down into weapon types, for simplicity (Guided Weapons, iron bombs, etc).

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 106
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 9:05:05 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Thanks alghblag

As Andrew describes, you're going to need notes and tools. There is a Special Action timer to help as well.

I almost always have a spreadsheet and word document open when I play larger scenarios, for planning and just simple calculations. You'll want to build checklists and schedules, take notes, assign tasks etc. This helps keep it organized.

You're doing the job of hundreds when managing a scenario this large so think it through hierarchically. Try to look at it this way:

-Your orders come from CTF 20 every 24 hours. You get an Intelligence Report @0600 (I think), a FRAGO at 1200Z daily, ISTAR orders @ 1800. You will notice a pattern developing (which is why I did it this way) - the FRAGO will tell you to do things that are related to the ISTAR tasks the previous day and tomorrow mornings INTRP will give you some clues of where your going next.

-You are acting as Comd TF20, so you've got a staff of about 80 on the USS Mount Whitney. In this role you cannot look after everything all the time so set yourself a schedule - every 4 hrs or maybe 6 hrs. Here is what you want to do:
*Decide how you will do your major tasks - task resources, provide additional help if needed etc
*Check on progress of your major TGs and the tasks you have given them.
*Check the general situation for ships arriving/departing, routine air patrols etc
*Check logistics

-You have about a dozen or so major TGs but only one or two will be in action at any one time. Set yourself a schedule - put yourself in the position of the commander of that TG
*You will want to check on them all at least once between your TF20 review
*For the backwater TGs or bases set up to check a few every hour
*For your 'in action' TGs you will want to keep more of an eye on them, every 20 min or so
*Review their tasks, review their status. Make adjustments, set a time to check again and move on.

-Your major tasks and some popup issues will require min-min coordination. I use many more missions than Andrew describes but he seems to have more success than I do --this is the tactical fight and each one is almost a scenario in itself

The trick is to be organized, and try and for each of your checks at each level try and put yourself in the shoes of the nasty enemy (or scenario designer) and what just might be in store for that group.

Hope that helps.


_____________________________

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/

(in reply to alghblag)
Post #: 107
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 9:07:41 PM   
pjb1

 

Posts: 675
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
When I download latest update to this scenario it shows NF 44 "into the bastion" as the scenario in the zip file

< Message edited by pjb1 -- 1/2/2021 9:08:03 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 108
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 9:11:07 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Crap

OK here is the proper one. Sorry bout that

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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/

(in reply to pjb1)
Post #: 109
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/2/2021 9:13:00 PM   
pjb1

 

Posts: 675
Joined: 7/10/2013
Status: offline
Yeah we are all human here!!

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 110
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 6:23:22 AM   
morphin

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Hi
I manage ASW, AEW and AAW Patrol with Missions (like AndrewJ). All other i micromanage

I have a few issues:

In the log i see a lot of this messages:

"3/18/1994 12:08:00 PM - [WP] Shotgun weapon state has been set to Beyond Visual Range (BVR) exhaustion, however aircraft 892nd IAP #12 (Su-15TM Flagon E/F) is only armed with Within Visual Range (WVR) weapons. The aircraft will therefore return to base immediately. Change the Shotgun weapon state to Guns or WVR, or use Winchester weapon state."

And a lot of smashed into the ground missiles (To many i suppose. I know there was an error on earlier version of the game and i fear this bug is here again)
"3/18/1994 12:10:34 PM - [WP] Weapon: SS-N-19 Shipwreck [P-700 Granit] #10980 has smashed into the ground"

Also both torpedos fired against my british ship denotated suddendly and unexpecpted hortly after firing

"3/18/1994 12:10:12 PM - Weapon: 65-76A Kit WH #11013 has detonated, 0m from intended target point.
3/18/1994 12:10:12 PM - [NATO] Contact TORPEDO #910 has been lost."

->Really strange behaviour of the game....(Lucky for me!)

Also i have strange path changes (see https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4933666)
and outofmemory Messages (first in the logs and then the game crashes). Do you see also errors in the logs?

I strongly think that the game has problems with string and INT Data Types handling. (on big scenarios)

(-> I made a lot of ASW Missions with quite a lot of Reference Points also.)

PLease have a look in the log Directory. It is often helpfull to sea errors you don't notice while gaming

Andy



(in reply to pjb1)
Post #: 111
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 9:30:12 AM   
morphin

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
AndrewJ

May you share your excel files?
Thank's
Andy

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 112
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 12:09:41 PM   
morphin

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Hi Gunner98

I have the following while playing 4 houres:

"3/18/1994 12:02:30 PM - [WP] Svalbard Cargo #1 (An-26 Curl A) departed Severomorsk-1.
3/18/1994 12:02:35 PM - [WP] Aircraft Svalbard Cargo #1 (An-26 Curl A) is assigned to a ferry mission but it cannot land at the desired destination. Unassigning aircraft and returning to nearest base."

"3/18/1994 12:08:00 PM - [WP] Shotgun weapon state has been set to Beyond Visual Range (BVR) exhaustion, however aircraft 892nd IAP #12 (Su-15TM Flagon E/F) is only armed with Within Visual Range (WVR) weapons. The aircraft will therefore return to base immediately. Change the Shotgun weapon state to Guns or WVR, or use Winchester weapon state."

It is a great scenario. I would even include amphibious invasion force for the last days....

Andy

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 113
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 1:05:34 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: morphin

AndrewJ

May you share your excel files?
Thank's
Andy



Sure. It's just a list and a handy place to store screen-shots, and doesn't do any automatic calculations or anything like that, so it probably won't be much use to someone else, but you're welcome to have a look. The list of events on the second page may be spoilers if you haven't played the whole scenario yet.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 114
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 1:07:41 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5379
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Thanks for the tip on the log, I'll take a look.

The Su-15 issue and the An-26 are easy to fix, thanks for picking them up.

Ohh and for Amphib.... wait for it!!

_____________________________

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/

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 115
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 1:32:32 PM   
morphin

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Thank's

Main reason is that i don't have to type all the names for creating own excel-file and i'm interested in the assignment for the replenisment ships

->yes. i will delete the second page :-)

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 116
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 2:12:34 PM   
morphin

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewJ


quote:

ORIGINAL: morphin

AndrewJ

May you share your excel files?
Thank's
Andy



Sure. It's just a list and a handy place to store screen-shots, and doesn't do any automatic calculations or anything like that, so it probably won't be much use to someone else, but you're welcome to have a look. The list of events on the second page may be spoilers if you haven't played the whole scenario yet.



What's the meaning of "D,O,G,Sp"?
Thank's
Andy

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 117
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/3/2021 6:52:25 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: morphin

What's the meaning of "D,O,G,Sp"?
Thank's
Andy



Types of fuel: Diesel, Oil, Gas.
(The T-AOs have their diesel crossed out to remind me not to give it to other ships, because they use it themselves.)


Ph = Phoenix, Am = AMRAAM, Sp = Sparrow

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 118
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/6/2021 5:37:26 PM   
morphin

 

Posts: 534
Joined: 4/26/2002
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
Hi
I have inserted new page in the Excel-File from AndrewJ with all Units, Weapons and Weapons Amount. Maybe useful for somebody for Planning

AndrewJ: I hope this is ok for you.Otherwise tell me please and i can remove it again



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by morphin -- 1/6/2021 5:38:41 PM >

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 119
RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force - 1/6/2021 8:41:30 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2268
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: online
No problem at all. I'm glad it was useful.

(in reply to morphin)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: New Scenario for Testing NF #41 Tour de Force Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
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

0.244