Jump to content

Logo

Photo

AAR: Solving the Spratlys problem: Stennis Compromise, March 2016


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Palex80

Palex80

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 68 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 12:42 PM

I played this scenario as BLUE (USA)
 
This is quite a big scenario! At the beginning your forces are more or less surrounded by RED bases, ships and aircraft. The assets in Thailand can be ignored, I couldn't find any use for them, only 3B2s are available at Guam and quite far off in the beginning. What was a bit frustrating is the fact that many of my Super Hornets on the Stennis were not outfitted with desirable outloads. I only had 4 aircraft fit out in "Intercept" role. 
 
I launched two Hawkeyes and pretty soon dozens of chinese aircraft started coming in from multiple vectors. I immediately readied two dozens of further aircraft with AA-loadout but the first 30 minutes were quite tense.
 
45 minutes into the game, I launched my first airstrike against the reefs in the south with 12 Super Hornets armed with SLAMs. Some Growlers went with them to kill off radars, jam SAMs.
1 hour later I launched a follow-up strike wirh JSOWs. And finally 3 hours into the game I launched my Tomahawks. My B2s were already underway by then, all armed with JDAMs.
 
About 12 hours into the game I had destroyed all 7 bases in the south, but didn't get any MIN-VIC. I also spotted the Chinese carrier battle group, as well as two groups of destroyers, which I also hit with Harpoons.
 
I then quit actually, cause I seemed to have run into the same issue as CV32, not getting MIN-VIC, although I had managed to eradicate the enemy bases. I didn't spot any subs and didn't get attacked by the fearsome carrier-killer ballistic missiles. I had destroyed over 200 aircraft by the time I quit. I had lost 4 aircraft, no ships.
 
 
A few suggestions:
 
1. Fix the MIC-VIC problem, if not already tackled with. Perhaps I had been using an older version of the scenario?
 
2. My B2s had a SIOP loadout in Guam. Was that intentional? I don't see why...
 
3. The aircraft on the carrier should have more proper loadouts at the beginning of the scenario. It would be fullish to start an offensive action in the South China Sea with only 4 aircraft on anti-air loadout.
 
 
Great scenario!!! Thank you!


#2 broncepulido

broncepulido

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 16 July 2017 - 03:49 PM

The erroneous initial loadouts in the aircrafts should be an issue of the Database version employed (Of course no use for B-2A with nukes in this scenario!).

The MIN-VIC should be revised, I'll be on it, but is only a secondary priority, as this scenario is in long term revision to be adapted to HCDB2 (Mostly the painful work of replace Chinese in origin generic international bases, to be asigned to new uses and names in the new Database, with correct Red bases in the new HCDB2 Database), at present times the Database to be employed is HCDB-150928 1980-2015 era Platform Database.

 

Thank you very much by your feedback.



#3 Palex80

Palex80

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 68 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 02:59 PM

How silly of me. I have been using a wrong database version. Thank you!



#4 broncepulido

broncepulido

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 17 July 2017 - 03:34 PM

I fear you don't find submarines because the "submarine stopping problem":

http://harpgamer.com...opid=33#entry33






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users