Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 8.0 01/02/2020

 
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 >> CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 8.0 01/02/2020 Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 8.0 01... - 12/11/2019 12:01:18 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Play test version 8.0 01/02/2020 (Happy New Year!) Link is now below in thread...


All, I usually play test these a LOT more than this one, before I put them out for player play Testing, but I'm in a FEMA class for the next week and half and don't have too much time. So help play testing it would be appreciated. Please play the scenario without scenario editing things (you can do that later if you want, but need an evaluation on this work).

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 1/2/2020 8:43:26 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!
Post #: 1
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/12/2019 11:50:41 AM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Found and fixed one error last night. The scoring for the PRC +00250 Action was actually toggled to the USN, this showed up with an F-35A loss and is fixed.

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 2
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/12/2019 11:32:42 PM   
ultradave


Posts: 1300
Joined: 8/20/2013
Status: offline
My goodness. Look at all those toys to think about loading up B-1s and B-52s with, not to mention the carrier aircraft. I'm traveling this weekend (alone - wife staying home) so I'll hope to have some time to look at this on the plane and hotel in the evenings.

It's definitely going to take some time to decide how to load out the aircraft, especially the bombers with their long ready times. Looks like fun and adds an element that we usually don't have. Many scenarios the aircraft are ready with set load outs.

_____________________________

----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 3
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/13/2019 1:47:04 AM   
magi

 

Posts: 1522
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline
okdokie......

(in reply to ultradave)
Post #: 4
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/13/2019 11:41:53 AM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Problem with B-52Hs and B-1Bs is you have limited usage of them with a 20 hour turn around and mission time.

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to ultradave)
Post #: 5
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/13/2019 2:31:59 PM   
ultradave


Posts: 1300
Joined: 8/20/2013
Status: offline
Sure. But it will be fun for the one shot, and figuring out how to utilize them - what load outs. Not something we have to do too often in scenarios. It's usually more of figuring out how to use what you've already got. I figure the 20 hours gives you one good strike opportunity. Make it count :-)

_____________________________

----------------
Dave A.
"When the Boogeyman goes to sleep he checks his closet for paratroopers"

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 6
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/14/2019 7:02:49 AM   
magi

 

Posts: 1522
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline
i really like the idea of this scenario a lot.... and although i can accept not having some strikers ready.. however having no basic air defenders..asw.. and isr/patrol assets available is kinda of odd... its not very plausable....

i dont understand the positioning of the Monsoor being off the coast of southern vietnam where it is tactically difficult to support with air assets when it could ingress to its ao from a more beneficial position....

the ohio being a highvalue striker should be in a remote benign low risk location....

by 2021.. many of our surfice and sub surface platforms will have lrasm and nsm missiles... they are starting to put nsm on the lcs now..

there would be probably be some rq 4s up.... the navy uses them a lot... and they will probably have some mq 25s by this time period... which would be cool....

there is only one fa-50 at sangley point ab....

i will start this but i cant make any plans four hours until isrt stuff is up and patrolling around......


< Message edited by magi -- 12/14/2019 7:08:06 AM >

(in reply to ultradave)
Post #: 7
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/18/2019 12:28:43 AM   
Selchu

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 5/7/2017
Status: offline
Hey man,
Interesting scenario so far. I have to agree with Magi. The Monsoor is not in a good position. There's no immediate air support given that none of the fighters on the carrier are armed. My suggestions would be either move the Monsoor closer to the CV or have some of the aircraft prepared for air support or CAP if needed. I understand the wanting to give people an option as to their aircraft load outs I would just have a couple of the aircraft armed and prepared. Another reason would be that the Monsoor only has 32 ESSM aboard. That won't last very long against an airstrike.
I also agree I think the Ohio would probably be kept further away.
Apart from that this is a good one so far.
Thanks BeirutDude

(in reply to magi)
Post #: 8
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/19/2019 9:07:40 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

i dont understand the positioning of the Monsoor being off the coast of southern vietnam where it is tactically difficult to support with air assets when it could ingress to its ao from a more beneficial position....


Monsoor currently Teleports and I can change that.

quote:

There's no immediate air support given that none of the fighters on the carrier are armed. My suggestions would be either move the Monsoor closer to the CV or have some of the aircraft prepared for air support or CAP if needed.


Point taken I will arm the F/A-18F for AAW and will set up an ASW mission for the escort vessels only.

quote:

the ohio being a highvalue striker should be in a remote benign low risk location....


Ohio also currently Teleports and I can also change that.

quote:

there is only one fa-50 at sangley point ab....


That is deliberate, consider it a deployed spare.

quote:

Another reason would be that the Monsoor only has 32 ESSM aboard. That won't last very long against an airstrike.


I just lost her in an airstrike. Painful! That's why she's a High Value Unit.

quote:

Apart from that this is a good one so far.
Thanks BeirutDude


Thanks for he help, Magi and Selchu

BTW I just got Totally crushed by the PRC! I was ahead by 10,000 VPs then BOOM!








Attachment (1)

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 12/20/2019 12:07:40 AM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to Selchu)
Post #: 9
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/19/2019 9:39:43 PM   
Selchu

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 5/7/2017
Status: offline
quote:

I just lost her in an airstrike. Painful! That's why she's a High Value Unit.



So did I twice...........that's why I mentioned the air support. I was deliberately trying not to cause spoilers.......


(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 10
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/19/2019 9:43:34 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Made the changes suggested by Magi and Selchu. Also corrected three (3) scoring issues I found.

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 11
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/19/2019 10:32:24 PM   
Selchu

 

Posts: 73
Joined: 5/7/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

Made the changes suggested by Magi and Selchu. Also corrected three (3) scoring issues I found.


Scary when people listen to me.
Is the updated file uploaded yet?

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 12
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/19/2019 11:00:47 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Most of the suggested changes have been made But also made further adjustments on the morning of 12/20/19 at 13:38 UTC/08:38 EST and posted them in a separate link below.

I agree the USN is adding more ASMs to their magazines but am going to maintain the latest DB version/"year" load outs.

F/A-18F's are now armed and have an AAW Mission
CSG 9 ESCORT VESSELS (Not CVN) MH-60R's are loaded out and have an ASW Patrol set.
One (1) E-3G has an AEW mission flying over the Philippines and the rest are assigned to it. I'd adjust that mission!
Added recon UAVs to both sides (eight (8) USAF/RQ-4 and four (4) PLAN/Sea Eagles)
USS Ohio and USS Monsoor no longer teleport
Scoring errors are fixed


< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 12/20/2019 12:39:36 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 13
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/20/2019 11:40:43 AM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Thinking about loading out the B-1Bs and B-52Hs at Anderson AFB with JASSM due to the LOOOOOOOOOOOONG 20 hour load time. Realistically, in an operation like this, they would have been loaded out for use during the first strike, and it's not realistic to think folks are going to play a day of game time without striking to get them into the mix.

Any other suggestions on load outs for them?

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 14
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/20/2019 12:46:39 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Play test version 8.0 01/02/2020 (Happy New Year!) Link is now below in thread...

Play Test version 2.0 changes (12/19/19)

1. F/A-18F's are now armed and have an AAW Mission
2. CSG 9 ESCORT VESSELS (Not CVN) MH-60R's are loaded out and have an ASW Patrol set.
3. One (1) E-3G has an AEW mission flying over the Philippines and the rest are assigned to it. I'd adjust that mission!
4. Added recon UAVs to both sides (eight (8) USAF/RQ-4 and four (4) PLAN/Sea Eagles)
5. USS Ohio and USS Monsoor no longer teleport
6. Scoring errors are fixed

Play Test version 3.0 changes (12/20/19)

1. Adjusted the number of JASSM/JASSM-ER load outs at Anderson AFB to a more realistic number (before they were really unlimited).
2. Removed AGM-86c/d CALCM from Anderson (they have been withdrawn from service)
3. loaded the B-1Bs & B-52Hs at Anderson with JASSM-ER load outs so they can be used in an initial strike (20 hours was just too long to wait).
4. Adjusted the complexity to 5 and size to 4.

Zip attached

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 1/2/2020 8:44:00 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 15
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/24/2019 1:22:21 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
I'm finding that a significant proportion of the units on Fiery Cross Reef cannot be attacked. I think it may be because a number of them are underwater. I tried moving them around in the editor, to place them on higher elevation. That fixed some of them, but in other cases it didn't seem to make a difference. Perhaps a fresh build with totally new units would be needed in those cases?

Edit: It turns out you need to reload the scenario for all the new depths to be implemented. Once I did that all the moved items were above water.

< Message edited by AndrewJ -- 12/24/2019 1:26:36 AM >

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 16
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/25/2019 2:52:58 AM   
magi

 

Posts: 1522
Joined: 2/1/2014
Status: offline
Wonderful... thank you sir... will check this out....

may you and your family have a wonderful Christmas....

< Message edited by magi -- 12/25/2019 2:56:40 AM >

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 17
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/25/2019 7:07:13 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

I'm finding that a significant proportion of the units on Fiery Cross Reef cannot be attacked. I think it may be because a number of them are underwater. I tried moving them around in the editor, to place them on higher elevation. That fixed some of them, but in other cases it didn't seem to make a difference. Perhaps a fresh build with totally new units would be needed in those cases?

Edit: It turns out you need to reload the scenario for all the new depths to be implemented. Once I did that all the moved items were above water.


THANK YOU!

Yes I'm running into the same issue, and am working to fix it. That said on Version 3.0 I still got a Triumph, so might be a "lets not let the perfect be the enemy of the good" situation, but I'm working on it.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 12/25/2019 9:58:39 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 18
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/25/2019 7:07:50 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

may you and your family have a wonderful Christmas.


Same to you and yours!

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to magi)
Post #: 19
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 Playtest - 12/25/2019 7:27:47 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Play test version 8.0 01/02/2020 (Happy New Year!) Link is now below in thread...

Play Test version 4.0

1. Trying to fix units that can't be struck. I have moved everything within the yellow map borders and locked down all land based mobile units. I think some amphibious units were going offshore. Fiery Cross Reef was the first area I defined and I wasn't as disciplined when setting it up as I should have been.
2. LCS: Replaced USS Fort Worth (Freedom Class) with USS Gabrielle Giffords (Independence Class) with NSM.
3. Added a Scarborough Shoals mission for the LCS worth USN-Allies VPs.

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 1/2/2020 8:44:19 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 20
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 5:11:10 AM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
The holiday's given me a bit of time to sit down with Command, so lets have a fight at Fiery Cross Reef! (This was version 3.)


SITUATION

The world's gone nuts, and fighting is breaking out everywhere. After furious fighting in the Sino-Japanese theatre, I've been tasked to destroy the island holdings in the South China Sea. There are a cluster of 7 occupied reefs in the Spratleys, and Woody Island further north nearer Hainan.

I've got a carrier group based around the Roosevelt approaching from the south near Malaysia, packed full of F-18s, and preceded by a pair of SSNs and an SSGN. Seven airbases scattered along the Philippines hold some Australian F-18s, and nine each of F-22s and F-35s, along with some support units. An LCS loiters off the coast near Manila, and an Australian diesel sub lies further north. Meanwhile, in distant Guam the massive forms of B-52s and B-1s ready for action.

I'm told the Chinese are ready to defend the area fiercely, both with defensive elements on the islands themselves, and aircraft coming in from the mainland, but also with the Liaoning carrier group and supporting elements. On top of this is the ever-present threat of anti-carrier ballistic missiles lurking in the safety of the Chinese mainland. How best to proceed?


THE PLAN

I think the priority in this case is "How Not To Be Seen". The ASBMs really worry me, and if I'm detected I'm essentially defenceless against them. Therefore, I'll keep the carrier as far south as possible, and prioritize the destruction of enemy reconnaissance assets (maritime patrol aircraft, AEW, drones, etc.). I order all aircraft to be fitted with air-to-air loadouts, in order to tackle any surges coming my way. Strikes will have to wait until later tonight, after I've made a good assessment of the air situation.

The carrier will head NW, in the direction of the Vietnamese coast, skirting the islands for the moment. I do have an isolated Zumwalt, with its fancy gun and guided ammunition, and it's tempting to send it up to bombard the islands, but pushing it forward just invites its detection and destruction. Therefore, the Zumwalt is ordered to set aside any dreams of glory, and join up with the carrier group at top speed. My SSNs are much more discrete, and they will advance on each side of the islands, scouting for enemy subs and ships, while the SSGN is ordered to loiter quietly, preserving its missiles for pending strike orders. The only other ship in the south is my oiler, but all my warships are fully loaded and fuelled, so I send the valuable ship south to retire from the theatre.



Up north I have the LCS near Manila, but it's almost useless as a serious combatant. It can tow water-skiers at an impressive 45 knots, but offensively it couldn't fight its way out of a wet paper bag. One of the Chinese coast guard cutters could beat the crap out of it with gunfire. I order it to patrol slowly off Subic Bay, where it's good sonar might be helpful if the Chinese try any submarine Spec Ops tricks. My own sub in the area, the Australian SSK, is ordered to come snorkeling south to get into the theatre, although it will probably take a day or so for it to reach the area where I'm expecting combat.


DAY 1

As operations begin ESM operators start reporting numerous powerful airborne surface-search radars over the Spratleys, and it becomes clear that the Chinese have a large number of Badgers in the air hunting for intruders. These are priority targets, but getting at them means heading three to four hundred miles out to sea, and braving the fighter patrols and modern SAMs that infest the islands. This is where my stealth fighters shine, and (keeping the F-22s in reserve in case of attack) my F-35s are sent out to war. With their excellent long range, low signature, and superb optical systems they are ideal for long-distance discrete interdiction, and they quickly take a steep toll of the ponderous bombers.

Most importantly, F-35s operating between Woody Island and the Spratleys identify the bombers operating there as tankers! This is crucial information, and the F-35s start focusing their patrols in this area, downing multiple tankers in the following hours. Even better, the tankers often arrive with a pair of refueling J-20s in attendance, and my pilots are quick to pounce on those dangerous foes. I'd caught a glimpse or two of the enemy stealth fighters before, but always had to flee from disadvantageous situations. Now, with a reliable way to find them at their most vulnerable moments, I manage to kill a significant number. Tanker activity stops by the end of the day, and hopefully this will restrict the activity of any attack planes or fighters (like the J-20s) based in distant Hainan.

Down south, the non-stealthy F-18s on the carrier were less aggressive to begin with, being reluctant to press in among hostile SAM envelopes where stealth fighters were operating. However, toward mid-day they began getting ESM indications of carrier-borne J-15 radars and helicopter AEW radars to their north, and it became clear that the enemy carrier group was a lot further south than I had anticipated. My initial expectation was for the carrier to be maybe 150 miles south of Woody Island, but it was actually most of the way down to Subi Reef, and getting uncomfortably close to putting me in missile range if it should hurry south.

As the threat of the J-20s was reduced in the afternoon, the F-18s started making determined fighter sweeps towards Liaoning, getting good kills on the carrier's CAP, and darting in under the radar to shoot up the AEW helicopters. Those were gone by mid-afternoon, and a determined effort into the dusk managed to tackle the swarm of ASW helicopters which were accompanying the task group.

My Global Hawks operating out of the Philippines proved to be very effective at monitoring other Chinese naval activity from a distance. In addition to the carrier group, there are two other individual vessels in the central Spratleys (one stopped, presumably anchored, and one on a slow patrol), a strong two-ship formation of modern air-defence vessels north-east of the Spratleys, and a single ship stationary among the cluster of little islets 150 nm west of Subic Bay. (That one had a helicopter in attendance, so a pair of the little Philippine Golden Eagles darted out to shoot it down. Other than that they've stayed safely on the ground.)


UPCOMING OPERATIONS

Dusk is falling, and the air situation seems reasonably well in hand. I don't seem to have been spotted. Bomber and tanker activity has stopped for now. A number of J-20s have been shot down or damaged, and with fewer (no?) tankers they should have less time on station over the islands. The J-10 patrols over the central islands have taken a beating, and the Liaoning group seems to have been stripped of CAP, AEW, and many of its ASW helicopters.

With the reduction in air activity, some fighter units are transitioning to attack loadouts. The B-1s and B-52s on Guam are loaded and ready to lift off. In a few hours, strikes on the Spratleys will commence!

(More to follow tomorrow...)

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 21
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 12:57:55 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Nice write up, I look forward to upcoming operations! I would note you came up with favorable submarine teleporting, my current run, not so much!

So I took a similar strategy on my first two runs through (but really didn't go after the tankers, nice touch), but with Version 4.0 I tried different tactics to maximize use of the assets on Guam, and overwhelm the defense with robotic wave/soak off tactics!

I used the Zumwalt's stealth features to run up to the WSW of Fiery Cross and Subi Reefs and hit them with Tomahawks from the SW. The Ohio hits Curation, Fiery Cross, Johnson South and Mischief Reefs with TLAMs from the south while the B-1Bs and B-52Hs, from Guam, hit Mischief, Johnson South, Graven, Subi Reefs from the east with JASSM-ER load outs (this will maximize their use to three strikes if I time loading right at Anderson AFB). So I launch one massive Time On Target SEAD/Airfield strike on the islands overwhelming the PLAN SAMs. So far 6 hours into to Version 4.0 it looks like the SAMs on the islands are either destroyed or used up their load outs, either way they are neutralized. That will allow my F-35s and F-22s to establish air supremacy over the Spratlys without having to look over my shoulder for the HQ-9/16 SAMs. The PLAN/PRC Johnson South, Graven and Curation Reef positions have been completely eliminated. Tankers are ferried to the Philippines and dispersed for maximum us refueling. As E-3Gs go on station they are rebased to the Philippines as well to maximize on station time without refueling.

So now I can pick apart the remaining PLAN/PRC islands/Units at my leisure. The PLAN Liaoning CVBG is a tough nut to crack and I finally got her in the last run (version 3.0) by loading...

2 F-18E with MALD-160s to jam and lead the attack
8 F-18Es with Heavy AAW loadouts
4 F-18Es with extended range HARMs (mandatory only)
16 F-18Es with Heavy Harpoon load outs (mandatory only)
4 EA-18G with ECM load outs to jam.

of the 48 Harpoons I'd say about 6-8 found their mark, especially after an escort took two HARM hits. I might add that was my SECOND strike on the Battle Group with no hits due to point defenses. The PLAN escorts are impressive and the equal of the Burkes (at least in the game)!

BTW, with 4.0 the LCS is not so useless anymore, check out the orders again with the new version if you play it.

The original had the Task Groups teleporting as well and am going to reinstate that before the release. Honestly, I accidentally hit the start button during set up and messed it up when missions launched. Was too lazy (tired) to fix it earlier but will now.

Thanks for the write up so far, I think a key to any good scenario is multiple strategies can be used and I hope this is one.

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 12/26/2019 3:49:51 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 22
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 3:48:43 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
So I just added, and tested, PLAN SAG/CVBG teleporting to add a bit of randomness to the scenario for PLAN/PRC surface units. So now the only PLAN vessels that don't teleport are the garrison ships.

Unless someone finds something else really wrong with the scenario over the next day or so, I'm going to call this one done. Thanks for your help!

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 23
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 4:34:19 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
The fight continues...


NIGHT 1 - Main Strikes

Night operations are dominated by strike packages flown against the Spratley Islands. During the day, ESM operators reported SAM emissions from the three most heavily fortified islands, Subi Reef, Mischief Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef, and these become the focus of the strikes.



The two northern islands are hit by the heavy bombers from Guam, using modern JASSM-ER missiles which keep the launching aircraft hundreds of miles out of danger. Each strike has eight bombers with 24 missiles each, for a whopping 192 missiles per island, which can overwhelm the defences by volume alone. However, the modern HQ-9 batteries on the islands would probably knock down about 26 missiles each, reducing my strike effectiveness and preventing me from reliably destroying all aimpoints. I have no SEAD assets to tackle the SAMs directly, so the cruise missiles will be escorted by F-35s, releasing a cloud of 32 SDBs just before the missiles arrive. My hope is that these will act as decoys, drawing most of the SAM fire, and allowing the main strike through.

The strikes arrive in the middle of the night, and operations proceed as planned. The SDBs do get shot down en-masse (not a single one makes it to the targets), but that eats up 40 to 60% of the defensive SAMs. The remainder tear up the first waves of cruise missiles (aimed for low-priority targets), but the final waves are unopposed and the runways and taxiways are hit and destroyed. This leaves the islands ruined as locations for offensive activity, but they still have a defensive sting. The HQ-9 SAM sites are battered, and many are missing launchers and sensors, but they have so many aimpoints that some of them remain operational, at least in a limited capacity.

The south-western strike, against Fiery Cross Reef (and the SAM on nearby Cuarteron Reef) comes from the carrier group, which launches 131 of its TLAMs at the island, leaving a comfortable reserve of 125 for later operations. (The SSGN, lurking quietly to the SE, remains in reserve and does not participate.) I have no F-35s to provide SDB support in this area, but I have plenty of F-18s with HARMs and JSOWs, and powerful EF-18 Jammers too. The combination of ARMs and precision guided cluster munitions is much more effective than SDB decoys alone, and the air defences are completely eliminated, and the aviation facilities are ruined at the end of the strike.

In between these major operations, the Australian F-18s come in from the southern Philippines with tanker support, and make JASSM attacks against the central three islands. These are not major bases, and they have no real defences, but they do have capable surveillance radars. The cruise missiles make quick work of those soft targets, and the Australians return home undetected.

This leaves the Chinese without any air facilities in the Spratleys, and any further air activity there will have to fly in from Woody Island in the north, or the more distant mainland. Unless the carrier is holding something in reserve...


NIGHT 1 - Naval Operations

As the night wears on, and dawn approaches, my submarines start to get into action.

In the north, the Australian SSK has arrived near the cluster of islands west of Manila, where a single unidentified ship contact has been loitering since the beginning of the conflict. Poking up a periscope, the sub can see that it's not actually a proper warship. It's one of those big frigate-sized Chinese coast guard cutters, and it's in waters that are too shallow for a reliable torpedo attack. Fortunately, the sub has some Harpoons on board, and one hits the vessel squarely in the side, setting it on fire. Rather than waste more missiles on a target of questionable value, the skipper turns away and heads south again, looking for real targets. A few hours later, radar operators in a nearby E-3 note that the contact has been lost, presumably burning out and sinking.

Further south, the Key West, my late model LA, gets a CZ contact on something running slow and deep SE of Cuarteron Reef. The sonar operator thinks it's a Han-class SSN, but despite the fact that this is a relatively noisy target, it proves elusive and difficult to pin down as it drifts in and out of convergence zones. It takes about eight hours of drifting and cruising to finally get on its tail and torpedo it later in the morning.

The most exciting submarine operations are reserved for the Mississippi, my Virginia class SSN. This has been proceeding NE, along the north side of the Spratley chain, pausing now and then to stick up a radio mast and get position updates on the enemy carrier group. The Liaoning and friends are proceeding SE at a cautious 7 knots, and it looks like the two sides will meet about 50 nm north of Fiery Cross Reef. After receiving a final update (including the reassuring news that the F-18s had made concentrated efforts to shoot down the ASW helicopters), the Mississippi lowers its mast and heads in. (Post-war analysis shows that the Chinese actually had briefly detected the Mississippi using a towed array, at a range of about 16 miles, but only as a yellow goblin with an uncertainty area. Since their ASW helicopters were destroyed, they were unable to investigate.)

Approaching the formation from the south, the Mississippi comes up shallow to get sonar contact on the surface ships, and fires four torpedoes at a range of ten miles. Two are aimed at the Liaoning, and one each at the closest frigates. The Mississippi goes deep again, but stays slow to keep the wires, tracking the torps in until they get good signal acquisition, and then four good hits! The two frigates break up and begin sinking immediately, and the carrier slows. Turning back, my sub engages again, hitting the settling Liaoning repeatedly, and sinking another destroyer. As the carrier stops and rolls over to capsize, my captain orders his celebrating crew to turn away and leave the area. He only has two torpedoes left, and although he could continue to engage that would leave him defenceless if he meets another submarine. Better to prudently leave now, and preserve his combat capability for later.


DAY 2

The second day is largely devoted to follow-up operations in the Spratleys. P-8s with SLAM-ERs get rid of the two lone ships in the center of the islands (one little frigate on patrol, and one big LPD, apparently doing some work at Johnson South Reef). SEAD work by the carrier's F-18s shuts down the last of the SAM radars on Subi and Mischief Reefs, and F-22s beat up on some older J-11s operating out of Woody Island.

The Chinese aren't completely passive, and my carrier group has an alarming encounter shortly after 0800 hrs. The carrier had been proceeding NW during the night, before turning NE to launch and land the strikes against Fiery Cross Reef. Now, I order it to turn SE, and head back towards Malaysia. Partway through the turn, sonar operators started yelling "Goblin! Direct path, it's behind us!" There on the screens, a bright yellow sonar strobe pointed directly at my carrier. Now my ships and subs had already seen a few goblins that turned out to be biologicals, but those were usually spotted ahead of us, during constant course cruising. For this one to pop up exactly at the moment I turned? That seems more like a sub kicking in throttles to try and keep up.

The two closest ships at the back of the formation immediately fire torpedoes, bearing only, in the general direction of the threat, and a Vertical Launch ASROC roars out of the cell, arcing over to land in the middle of the uncertainty zone. Quick response helicopters are ordered to scramble, and the task group pushes the throttles to flank speed to run away. Are torpedoes already in the water, headed our way? The helicopters push on all power and race down the bearing to the enemy, dropping sonobuoys until one gets a hard contact. It's a sub all right, and fortunately it's far enough away that it's torps (if any), probably can't catch us. Mark 46s rain down, and soon the Kilo takes a hit, implodes, and dies.

The question is, did it identify us? Are the DF-21 anti-shipping ballistic missiles already headed our way? It turns out the answer is no, but it's an anxious wait to see... (Postwar analysis shows the sub had not spotted my carrier group. The sub was on constant course, and it was the improvement in sonar performance as my ships slowed to rearrange the formation that allowed us to make the detection.)

As well as their subs, it turns out that some of the Chinese stealth fighters are still operational. An RQ-4 gets a brief glimpse of a pair of them headed towards the Spratleys in the morning, and I scramble F-18s and F-22s to try and catch them. I keep the F-18s low, in the cloud, to prevent the J-20s from seeing me on IRST, in the hope that this will force them to turn on their radar and reveal themselves. It doesn't work, and they get away. It's not until later in the afternoon that some F-22s catch them up near Woody Island, killing one and damaging one. After that, I spot no more of them.

The biggest event during the day is the attack on the remaining ships of the Chinese carrier group. These have tightened up into a four-ship task group, still headed into the Spratleys, and three of them have modern VLS loadouts stuffed with SAMs. The carrier group prepares a heavy strike, with F-18Fs carrying 20 LRASMs (six for each big ship, two for the frigate in the back of the formation), accompanied by numerous F-18s with HARMs, and Growlers with AARGMs, and all seems to be going well. The Chinese ships have their radars off, but I can usually count on some BOL HARMS to provoke them to turn their radars on, and then the mass HARM salvo can soak up the SAMs while the LRASMs come in to attack.

Except there's a low cloud deck. The ships don't see the HARMs. Therefore they don't turn on their radars. My anti-shipping missiles get closer, more BOL HARMs fly uselessly overhead, and the Chinese still don't light up. It's not until my anti-shipping missiles turn on their radars that the Chinese respond in kind, and then it's too late! A colossal swarm of SAMs erupts from the enemy ships, knocking my anti-shipping missiles out of the sky, and my HARM counter-barrage can't get there in time to save them. Most of those get shot down too, and all four of the enemy ships emerge from the storm, a little scuffed, and with empty magazines, but essentially intact.

The raid commander stares at this failure in some dismay. How's he going to explain this to command? But remember those last two LRASMs, aimed at the frigate in back? Those had been sent looping around the back of the formation to try and hit the frigate from the rear, and they finally arrive, flying in and neatly hitting the frigate and a destroyer. The other ships, missiles expended, can only watch in frustration as their comrades sink into the seas. The sad denoument follows some hours later, as another ship, probably gashed below the waterline by the body of a HARM floods and sinks. The last lone ship is finally torpedoed around dusk by the SSN Key West.


NIGHT 2

Activity during the second night begins around 8:00, when another anti-shipping strike launches from my carrier, to deal with the two-ship task group that is now east of the Spratleys. This is another powerful pair, composed of a modern destroyer and cruiser, with a staggering number of SAMs. However, these guys have their radar on, and the massed HARM/AARGM salvo works perfectly, staggering the vessels with a rain of fragmentation warheads before the anti-shipping missiles arrive to finish the job.

The bombers make another appearance pre-dawn, with the B-52s directing their JASSM-ER attack at the facilities on Woody Reef. Eight of the F-35s support with 64 SDBs, and a pair of Growlers come up from the carrier with tanker assistance, in order to provide SEAD support. This attack goes very well, and Woody Island is reduced to smoking rubble without any opposition.

The B-1s also come back to the Spratleys, this time carrying numerous 2,000 lb JDAMs. Those with penetrator warheads target the ammunition bunkers, while those with blast warheads target any remaining facilities like docks, buildings, and airport facilities.

DAY 3

By dawn there are no facilities remaining on any of the islands, except for a few buried fuel tanks. The carrier group, now patrolling 160 nm south of the Spratleys has reloaded many of the F-18s with cluster munitions and Mavericks, for mop-up work against any troop formations which might be left. I do not expect high intensity operations at this time, so the tempo will slow down, and the pilots will have a chance to rest. (At this time, with no significant operations envisioned, I ended the game with 1 day 1 hour left to go.)

< Message edited by AndrewJ -- 12/26/2019 4:46:43 PM >

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 24
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 8:29:22 PM   
Maromak


Posts: 1023
Joined: 12/26/2007
From: Australia
Status: offline
Thanks for the great AAR. Making it look easy as usual!

_____________________________

Certa Cito

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 25
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 9:00:40 PM   
Excroat3

 

Posts: 434
Joined: 1/24/2015
Status: offline
Working on my playthrough now. I would consider lowering the amount of tomahawks that the US starts with, as it stands at scenario start I fired all of my missiles from the CVBG and Ohio and was able to easily overwhelm all the air defenses on the Spratleys, shutting down all 3 airfields and taking out a number of barracks and hangars. Afterwards, without the threat of SAMs, I was able to use my F-35s as recon planes, spotting the remaining targets which were destroyed with missiles from my B-52s and B-1s, which also were able to overwhelm and destroy the facilities on Woody Island. The fact that I was able to essentially take out all of China's land-based air at the very beginning of the scenario meant that it was significantly easier than I think you intended. If I really wanted to play it safe, I can now wait the 20 hours for my bombers to reload with LRASMs and overwhelm the Chinese CVBG with missiles, without even using my F/A-18s. You can probably add the excuse that 3 weeks into WW3, the US stock of cruise missiles has a big dent in it, and they would probably be hoarding the remaining missiles for important strategic targets. Anyways, during this playthrough I'm going to continue to use F-22 + F-35 pairs to hunt down the remaining J-20s, and will be organizing an Alpha Strike of the US and Australian F/A-18s to finish off the Liaoning.

(in reply to Maromak)
Post #: 26
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 10:47:15 PM   
AndrewJ

 

Posts: 2012
Joined: 1/5/2014
Status: offline
Here's a few miscellaneous thoughts about the scenario. It was interesting to operate in this theatre, with all the new tech at hand, and see the disadvantages that the isolated island bunkers have when faced with a mobile opponent. Thanks for taking the time to write it.


Balance

The scenario balance is strongly in the US favour, as they have overwhelming PGM and sensor advantage. The US has an enormous quantity of cruise missiles (over 2,000 JASSM-ERs, JASSMs, and TLAMs), which can simply drown the enemy in quantity, without a hope of being found before launch. There are nearly 500 air-delivered anti-shipping missiles (Harpoon, SLAM, LRASM), 350 precision glide bombs (JSOWs), almost 200 ARMs (HARM / AARGM), and uncountable JDAMs and LGBs. So (barring misadventures, like running the carrier over an SSK by accident) the player should be able to apply hammer-blows and simply crush the foe.

I'm not sure if things would be quite this weapon rich in reality, particularly in terms of what could be stuffed into the carrier magazines, and quantities of modern cruise missiles. As an example, consider that you have 576 JASSMs on Guam, along with another 576 JASSM-ERs, 384 JASSM-ERs with various EMP warheads, and another 112 JASSMs for the Australians. That's a total of 1,648 missiles. As of 2017, Lockheed announced they had produced "over 2150" JASSMs of all types. Eventual production goal is just over 5,000 of all types, and they'll probably be in the low 3,000s by 2021. So about half the JASSMs in the world are here in this scenario.

Similarly, the scenario has 192 LRASMs on Guam and 48 on the carrier, for a total of 240. In reality, first integration on B-1s was only in Dec 2018, for "early operational capability", according to Lockheed. The Lot 2 production contract, expected complete by the end of 2021, was only for 50 of them, and Lot 1 was only 23. That's a total of 73 in the world (minus any used for tests). This means the quantities in the scenario are somewhat optimistic.

So if the intention is to provide a target array sandbox, in which the player can test different hypothetical strike weapons configurations, then this works. Alternatively, if you had intended to represent what is going to be available in-theatre in mid 2021, then a significant cut in PGM quantities is probably warranted.


Aircraft Behaviour:

I had several cases where J-20s en route to their southern patrol station over the Spratleys didn't engage targets they met en-route. Would turning Engage Opportunities on help in those circumstances?

One thing I was able to do was operate tankers, E-3s, RQ-4s, and the like a couple of hundred miles out from the Philippine coast in perfect safety. Could a pair of J-20s on a long-range PL-15 intercept (not CAP) mission reach that area? Adding one more pair specifically for this mission only (maybe basing them in Woody Island) might catch the player off guard. Although how you would limit the intercept mission to only one area, and not have them go chasing off down into the Spratleys, I have no idea. Is there a Lua way?

Looking at replays, I also notice that the CAP (both J-20s and Spratley CAP) are confined to a fairly small box, and won't leave it even to engage lucrative targets. I had brought RQ-4s just close enough to see the outer islands on radar, which happened to leave them in perfect safety a few miles outside the box. Perhaps adding a prosecution area out to 200 miles (RQ-4 radar range) from the islands would help catch that sort of vulnerable target?

Similarly, it looks like the prosecution zone for the Liaoning's CAP isn't big enough to protect the AEW and ASW helicopters from AMRAAM attack. As a result, my fighters were able to beat up on those vulnerable aircraft from long range, which directly lead to the loss of the carrier. Extending the prosecution zone out to AMRAAM range from the patrolled area might help a bit.

Speaking of those ASW helicopters, I was able to shoot down all the ones that came up on patrol, which left the carrier vulnerable when they finally spotted my incoming sub. it might be worth reserving a pair of ASW helicopters on a short ranged ASW Strike mission. These would stay safely on deck until an actual submarine showed up, so they couldn't be shot down in advance.


Ship Sonars: Currently, the Chinese surface ships have their active sonars turned off, but it might be worth considering turning some of them on. The ships with 15 nm range hull sonars in particular would benefit, and in my case they would have spotted me reliably before I was close enough to launch torpedoes. Since the US side has so much powerful long-range airborne radar, the location of the ships in the Spratley area will almost certainly be known already, so they won't be giving away much by having their sonars on.


Starting doctrine: The US side has a general ROE of Weapons Free and Engage Opportunities of Yes. This means that when you press Start the units instantly start firing TLAMs at auto-spotted ground targets. The only reason this didn't happen to me is that the first thing I do in any game is set all weapons to Hold. (Did anyone else see this?)


US Sub depths: When the game starts the US subs, which are all at shallow depth (-40m) all rise to periscope depth (-20m). This can be a problem if they stick up a mast immediately adjacent to an enemy ship, where they may be as a result of the initial teleport. The diesel would also start snorting, raising its noise level. Is there any way to enforce a hold at shallow until the player decides otherwise?


Anchored Ships: Are the LPD and the coast guard cutter supposed to have speed zero? (Being anchored on-station for some specific duty or other?)


Task Group Speed: I'm not sure if this was intentional, but the two Chinese task groups were moving quite slowly (only ~ 7 knots). This is good for listening, but also makes them fairly easy to intercept by submarine.


Chinese Oiler: The Chinese oiler has a fuel capacity of only 5 hours at cruise speed, presumably due to a database problem, so it quickly becomes a motionless target. There's nothing you can do about that, but maybe there's another Chinese oiler which would work better?


American Oiler: Was the American oiler intended to have any munitions on board? At the moment it's an empty ship with no role in the scenario.

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 27
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 11:25:45 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

Working on my playthrough now. I would consider lowering the amount of tomahawks that the US starts with, as it stands at scenario start I fired all of my missiles from the CVBG and Ohio and was able to easily overwhelm all the air defenses on the Spratleys, shutting down all 3 airfields and taking out a number of barracks and hangars. Afterwards, without the threat of SAMs, I was able to use my F-35s as recon planes, spotting the remaining targets which were destroyed with missiles from my B-52s and B-1s, which also were able to overwhelm and destroy the facilities on Woody Island. The fact that I was able to essentially take out all of China's land-based air at the very beginning of the scenario meant that it was significantly easier than I think you intended. If I really wanted to play it safe, I can now wait the 20 hours for my bombers to reload with LRASMs and overwhelm the Chinese CVBG with missiles, without even using my F/A-18s. You can probably add the excuse that 3 weeks into WW3, the US stock of cruise missiles has a big dent in it, and they would probably be hoarding the remaining missiles for important strategic targets. Anyways, during this playthrough I'm going to continue to use F-22 + F-35 pairs to hunt down the remaining J-20s, and will be organizing an Alpha Strike of the US and Australian F/A-18s to finish off the Liaoning.


Points taken!

_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to Excroat3)
Post #: 28
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/26/2019 11:52:34 PM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
quote:

I'm not sure if things would be quite this weapon rich in reality, particularly in terms of what could be stuffed into the carrier magazines, and quantities of modern cruise missiles. As an example, consider that you have 576 JASSMs on Guam, along with another 576 JASSM-ERs, 384 JASSM-ERs with various EMP warheads, and another 112 JASSMs for the Australians. That's a total of 1,648 missiles. As of 2017, Lockheed announced they had produced "over 2150" JASSMs of all types. Eventual production goal is just over 5,000 of all types, and they'll probably be in the low 3,000s by 2021. So about half the JASSMs in the world are here in this scenario.


Agreed going to lower the PGM numbers significantly.

quote:

Similarly, the scenario has 192 LRASMs on Guam and 48 on the carrier, for a total of 240. In reality, first integration on B-1s was only in Dec 2018, for "early operational capability", according to Lockheed. The Lot 2 production contract, expected complete by the end of 2021, was only for 50 of them, and Lot 1 was only 23. That's a total of 73 in the world (minus any used for tests). This means the quantities in the scenario are somewhat optimistic.


I was researching I was coming to much the same conclusions. I am never sure how many load outs to place in magazines, especially carrier magazines, but after my last play through came to the same conclusion.

quote:

Alternatively, if you had intended to represent what is going to be available in-theatre in mid 2021, then a significant cut in PGM quantities is probably warranted.


That is what I am shooting for.

quote:

Aircraft Behaviour:

I had several cases where J-20s en route to their southern patrol station over the Spratleys didn't engage targets they met en-route. Would turning Engage Opportunities on help in those circumstances?


Will give it a try.

quote:

One thing I was able to do was operate tankers, E-3s, RQ-4s, and the like a couple of hundred miles out from the Philippine coast in perfect safety. Could a pair of J-20s on a long-range PL-15 intercept (not CAP) mission reach that area? Adding one more pair specifically for this mission only (maybe basing them in Woody Island) might catch the player off guard. Although how you would limit the intercept mission to only one area, and not have them go chasing off down into the Spratleys, I have no idea. Is there a Lua way?


I had AEW missions run along the Philippines OK but had the J-20s go after my forward deployed tankers in one play test. That said, will tweak a bit.

quote:

Looking at replays, I also notice that the CAP (both J-20s and Spratley CAP) are confined to a fairly small box, and won't leave it even to engage lucrative targets. I had brought RQ-4s just close enough to see the outer islands on radar, which happened to leave them in perfect safety a few miles outside the box. Perhaps adding a prosecution area out to 200 miles (RQ-4 radar range) from the islands would help catch that sort of vulnerable target?


Will take a look at their prosecution area

quote:

Similarly, it looks like the prosecution zone for the Liaoning's CAP isn't big enough to protect the AEW and ASW helicopters from AMRAAM attack. As a result, my fighters were able to beat up on those vulnerable aircraft from long range, which directly lead to the loss of the carrier. Extending the prosecution zone out to AMRAAM range from the patrolled area might help a bit.


AMRAAM ranges seem to be too far in CMO! Not sure this is the scenario or the game. That said, will extend the prosecution area range there

quote:

Speaking of those ASW helicopters, I was able to shoot down all the ones that came up on patrol, which left the carrier vulnerable when they finally spotted my incoming sub. it might be worth reserving a pair of ASW helicopters on a short ranged ASW Strike mission. These would stay safely on deck until an actual submarine showed up, so they couldn't be shot down in advance.


Not sure how this would work? Let me look at it and see if I can figure it out.

quote:

Ship Sonars: Currently, the Chinese surface ships have their active sonars turned off, but it might be worth considering turning some of them on. The ships with 15 nm range hull sonars in particular would benefit, and in my case they would have spotted me reliably before I was close enough to launch torpedoes. Since the US side has so much powerful long-range airborne radar, the location of the ships in the Spratley area will almost certainly be known already, so they won't be giving away much by having their sonars on.


Reasonable! I'm very much drilled with the USN's "DO NOT USE ACTIVE SONAR!" doctrine of the 1980s.


quote:

Starting doctrine: The US side has a general ROE of Weapons Free and Engage Opportunities of Yes. This means that when you press Start the units instantly start firing TLAMs at auto-spotted ground targets. The only reason this didn't happen to me is that the first thing I do in any game is set all weapons to Hold. (Did anyone else see this?)


Already fixed this for 4.0. It was miss set in for 3.0

quote:

US Sub depths: When the game starts the US subs, which are all at shallow depth (-40m) all rise to periscope depth (-20m). This can be a problem if they stick up a mast immediately adjacent to an enemy ship, where they may be as a result of the initial teleport. The diesel would also start snorting, raising its noise level. Is there any way to enforce a hold at shallow until the player decides otherwise?


Sure, I originally had them there and then tried to make them more "automatic." I was originally intending the scenario to go both ways, but decided against it later on. So yes.

quote:

Anchored Ships: Are the LPD and the coast guard cutter supposed to have speed zero? (Being anchored on-station for some specific duty or other?)


Yes the Coast Guard Cutter is almost always on station in Scarborough Shoals to enforce the PRC's claim on the islands/reefs. The LPD is just the normal Amphibious vessel that would be supporting Marines. USA does it as well, ask the "Gator Sailors" who floated up and down the Lebanon coast supporting the MAU ashore!


quote:

Task Group Speed: I'm not sure if this was intentional, but the two Chinese task groups were moving quite slowly (only ~ 7 knots). This is good for listening, but also makes them fairly easy to intercept by submarine.


Set them to avoid cavitation.


quote:

Chinese Oiler: The Chinese oiler has a fuel capacity of only 5 hours at cruise speed, presumably due to a database problem, so it quickly becomes a motionless target. There's nothing you can do about that, but maybe there's another Chinese oiler which would work better?


I have about given up on oilers in Command, I am likely taking both out.


quote:

American Oiler: Was the American oiler intended to have any munitions on board? At the moment it's an empty ship with no role in the scenario.


See above.

Thanks for the through AAR and suggestions. I really appreciate it!

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 12/26/2019 11:53:48 PM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to AndrewJ)
Post #: 29
RE: CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 4.... - 12/27/2019 12:49:21 AM   
BeirutDude


Posts: 1986
Joined: 4/27/2013
From: Jacksonville, FL, USA
Status: offline
Ok, SO FAR, Have

1. significantly pared down support aircraft at Anderson AFB by 1/2 for each category.
2. reduced PGMs! JASSMs down to 1 to 2 strikes depending upon if loaded on a B-1B or B-52H and LRASM have 2 load outs.
3. Eliminated both USS Ohio and USS Monsoor which takes 226 TLAMs out of the mix. So that leaves the TLAMs with CSG 9 which is fresh, so should have full load outs in the scenario.
4. Went back to unready B-1B and B-52H aircraft at Anderson AFB to let the player choose the load out and slow things down.

Still working...

< Message edited by BeirutDude -- 12/27/2019 12:51:28 AM >


_____________________________

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem."
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN, 1985

I was Navy, but Assigned TAD to the 24th MAU Hq in Beirut. By far the finest period of my service!

(in reply to BeirutDude)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Mods and Scenarios >> CMO: Fiery Cross Reef, 2021 updated to Play test 8.0 01/02/2020 Page: [1] 2 3 4   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

0.230