|
Yooper posted:Huh, you were right. I'll keep an eye on it for intel but I'm not sure how useful it will be. Amazing work  KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:look i'm just one of those retarded ground pounders with a 2x4 but if it were me i'd use the MLRS to draw you guys in to a big furball or a poo poo ton of AAA and jump your poo poo while you have a bunch of heavy ordnance under the wings and don't have AA loadouts Dong Quixote posted:I agree and would suggest considering taking it a step further. At this point our assets are effectively irreplaceable because we don't have any money. Hitting 3 different areas spreads is very thin, and especially the MLRS could be a trap like the goon-grunt suggested. If it -is- then we're boned. Maybe we should have a hard think about only hitting 2 sites and employing all our assets for them. I don't think First Impressions+SHORAD Convoy Escort is overextended, if we tried to hit some radars/airbases further up north then we'd likely get into a whole lot of trouble but the 3 objectives here are definitely doable. We're only hitting 2 sites anyways. the MLRS to the North and Tanks to the East. If we send some SHORAD escorts for our convoys then they can protect themselves against any leakers that get through whilst our CAP can concentrate on protecting our 2 strike packages. If you only want to hit 2 sites, then you'll be doing absolutely nothing different? We've got to have a CAP up to cover our tankers/AWACs anyways. All of our Strike package Phantoms carry AMRAAMs, they can defend themselves. The Northern package Phantoms can definitely stay airborne after their strike and provide some additional CAP/catch leakers for our convoys. Once that MLRS gets destroyed we'll have 12 BVR fighters as our CAP. 8 A2A Gripens and 4 phantoms. What else do you want to add to that? Mr Crustacean fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Apr 21, 2017 |
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
Dong Quixote posted:Pretty much the MLRS, which threatens us directly and the tank battalion which threatens the troops. The aid convoys are the least valuable to us because hungry women and children don't fight wars and don't mine lithium (well, at least).. I disagree with this in the strongest terms. It's clear that Von Hoff's primary interest is in the aid convoys. Failure to protect them might well lead to him losing confidence in us and cancelling the contract. And since the primary threat to them is air-to-air, it's entirely possible that the job can be handled by our Gripens (both ones actively dedicated to the job in the "center" of the convoy path, and the two groups we inevitably send up as Top Cover for our strike/CAS groups) and AMRAAM armed Phantoms returning from their strikes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
The aid convoys are an investment. Well fed troops and their families will keep morale up and help the count's forces fight harder. I generally agree with Bacarruda that we should nail all three objectives and anything else is just a bonus but should not be our focus. Better to play it smart and attrit the enemy to death than overextend and get surprised on day one before we know what's stationed where. Of those the radars should be a priority over the airfields - they're orders of magnitude more fragile and if they get knocked out the dictator's SAMs will have to turn on theirs to find us, which lets us shove our ARMs all up in their poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
 Operational plan Kitchen Sink (Draft) I'm wishing we had picked up more Gripens at this point as we are going to be stretched thin for A2A capability. I think we better designate all Gripen as A2A combatants for this mission. We have three tasks and an option to try strike at a target of opportunity. I think we should perform all three and have one opportunistic attack (radar station) as we have enough aircraft to ideally do all at once and with quick turnaround the closer targets can be attacked more than once. MLRS attack: 1x Gripen 1x F4 with A2A loadouts escort. 2x Frogfoot and 2x Hawk with ground strike/SEAD. 1x Tornadoes with SEAD loadout. Maybe the Sk-60 with gunpods or rockets? Convoy defense: 2x Gripen 2x F4 with A2A loadouts patroling over the convoys. 1x Tanker to keep them in the air. Tank column attack: 1x Gripen 1x F4 with A2A loadouts escort. 4x F4 with 2000lb bombs 1x Tornado with SEAD loadout. Opportunity strike: 2x Gripen with A2A loadouts escort. 2x Tornadoes with SEAD/HARM missiles. 1x Prowler with HARM missiles. Reserve: The S-100 orbits close to our base and provides overwatch. 2x Gripen with A2A loadouts on ready 5. They scramble after any enemy air assets spotted. Other options: Drones: Patrol over the front lines and acquire intel for the count. C130: Supply drop humanitarian supplies. Saros fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Apr 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
I agree with playing it safe for this first mission. We really don't know whats out there or what we're facing. Do the job we are being paid for, and do it well, without distractions. Yooper said we will get a chance for freeform missions in the future. Lets save our antiradar or antirunway strikes for those, when we can concentrate all our forces. This, opposed to trying to shoehorn a strike into an already spread out and complex mission.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Honestly if anything I'm wondering if we shouldn't put our strikes up semi-sequentially so we can concentrate our CAP better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Mr Crustacean posted:I don't think First Impressions+SHORAD Convoy Escort is overextended, if we tried to hit some radars/airbases further up north then we'd likely get into a whole lot of trouble but the 3 objectives here are definitely doable. I'm reluctant to put AAA and SAMs in the aid convoys because it turns them from noncombatants to legitimate wartime targets. The Count's greatest asset is the moral high ground -- if the aid convoy gets whacked while we've got Shilkas or SA-22s embedded, the story goes from "that bastardy dictator" to "Von Hoff isn't quite the white knight he seems to be." This is a war for public opinion and we can't afford to lose it. Also, we can realistically only cover 1-2 convoys without stripping our based of its SHORAD. I'm still thinking about adding some SHORAD escorts to my plan, but I'm not fully sold on the idea. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Apr 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Loel posted:Lmao this is turning into an ARG. Now Im waiting for a real news site to talk about the influx of mercenaries to Africa. We need to do everything in our power to convince a news site that this is a real conflict and write an article about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:We need to do everything in our power to convince a news site that this is a real conflict and write an article about it. I guarantee we can get a member of congress to comment on this tragic conflict and the plight of the Angolan people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:We need to do everything in our power to convince a news site that this is a real conflict and write an article about it. glynnenstein posted:I guarantee we can get a member of congress to comment on this tragic conflict and the plight of the Angolan people. Please do not do this. The last thing the world needs is a goon game getting mistaken for reality, especially nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
I recall the Glenn Beck moment when we were a front for the CIA or something. Sometimes even I can't make this poo poo up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Is there a post that states the range of those radars north of our airbase? It would be bad if they could just watch us take off or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Is there a post that states the range of those radars north of our airbase? It would be bad if they could just watch us take off or something. I'm still working on the scenario but you guys will get a sneak peek of what the AEW sees.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Yooper posted:I recall the Glenn Beck moment when we were a front for the CIA or something. Sometimes even I can't make this poo poo up. Wasn't there a separate instance for GoonSwarm and Vile Rat being CIA? SA and Goons attract crazy like nothing else, its great. And yes, I know VR was State not CIA. aphid_licker posted:Is there a post that states the range of those radars north of our airbase? It would be bad if they could just watch us take off or something. I know right? Should take them out post haste or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
I don't think it makes sense for us to try and lowkey sneak into an air war. Trying to take us out with a coordinated strike by all they got while we're puttering around chasing MLRS and aid trucks would be an eminently sensible move for the enemy, we have little depth to our lineup and it's not like the redditors have shitloads of air to split the dictator's attention. Move one should be hitting that air base and the radars north of us with all we have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:I don't think it makes sense for us to try and lowkey sneak into an air war. Trying to take us out with a coordinated strike by all they got while we're puttering around chasing MLRS and aid trucks would be an eminently sensible move for the enemy, we have little depth to our lineup and it's not like the redditors have shitloads of air to split the dictator's attention. Move one should be hitting that air base and the radars north of us with all we have. Yeah, but right now the Dictator doesn't take us seriously, or else they would have fallen onto us immediately with everything they had. When we start making more of a big deal, they'll try and counter is. That's basically the purpose of the threat level mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
A point of contention for one of the proposals upthread: home-on-jam is a thing. If you're turning your jammers on, you might as well fire up the radars as well. Any emissions at all will let even a poorly-equipped enemy know where you are. Might as well not be blindfolded when we turn our flashlights on in the dark room. A note to Saros' plan: Single-ship flights are a capital-B Bad idea. Combat aircraft fly in pairs at a minimum, for a reason. If you can't cover all your desired objectives with two-ships, then you need to reevaluate the value of each objective. If I'm reading it correctly, you're proposing to pair a Gripen and a Phantom for each flight, which means that the Gripen isn't going to be as free to maneuver, since he can't abandon his wingman. Essentially, you're watering-down the effectiveness of our best fighters, and trying to spread them too thin. It would be much more effective to assign pairs of AAW Phantoms to the low-intensity objectives, while reserving pairs of Gripens for objectives where we expect high-intensity resistance. Again, if we have too many targets for the assets we possess, we should reevaluate our priorities, and not just try to smear our forces too thin over everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Yeah, but right now the Dictator doesn't take us seriously, or else they would have fallen onto us immediately with everything they had. I think a decent sized MLRS strike and a Mechanized force on a separate axis directed at airfields is anything but "not taking seriously". Like the only way its more serious is "the birds are in the air SCRAMBLE SCRAMBLE SCRAMBLE". The only half measure contract for Angola was taking the Dictator's contract.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
All right reading the above statement means I got to ask. Are the MLRS's in a position where they can launch a bombardment or will they be travelling in convoy to a firing position? So far it sound slike the MLRS's will be travelling and thus mobile until they reach a point where they can fire on us. Is this right Yooper?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
koolkevz666 posted:All right reading the above statement means I got to ask. Are the MLRS's in a position where they can launch a bombardment or will they be travelling in convoy to a firing position? So far it sound slike the MLRS's will be travelling and thus mobile until they reach a point where they can fire on us. Is this right Yooper? Correct. We'll have some time until they arrive in firing positions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
I'm pro First Impressions and pro placing SHORAD somewhere in the vicinity of the convoys. They don't have to be traveling with them, just be close enough. Look, I just want Shilkas to light up the night. Next opportunity that get, we should get our own MLRS assets: the game simulates arty and we could light up any future radars that have the gall to sprout near our AO.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
 Our Saab S100B got this snapshot just prior to landing at Lubango Airport. Near as we can tell there is more radar but they are using a PWM schedule to try and keep it hidden. There might be more. We only picked up a couple of SAM radars in the north. But if they're smart they'd keep them off until they detect a threat. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Ugh, what size are those infantry elements? That's one hell of a thin
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:I'm reluctant to put AAA and SAMs in the aid convoys because it turns them from noncombatants to legitimate wartime targets. Completely understand, definitely want to be the side getting the good press. But we don't have to fully embed the Shorads into the convoys. We can have them tagging a mile or two behind the civilian trucks. Failing that we should definitely have some Shorads batteries roaming around the convoy areas, hostile air will have to close to WVR to ID the convoys in the ground clutter and it'll be a huge loving headache for them to potentially have 2 SA-22 and 2 shilka batteries lurking in their AO. We can keep a single Shorad battery at our airbase, but i really do think they're best used to cover those convoys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
S-300 lol. drat. When the time comes, that's an ideal SDB target. And it's probably mated tracking radar of course. And Prowler jamming for that flight would be extremely wise. 9K33M2 is the SA-8 Gecko, which we can avoid with proper altitude and range discipline. Pretty old. Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Apr 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:S-300 lol. drat. I want to steal it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
The count should really learn to understand that aid shouldn't be distributed till after the area is secure. Right now it is too hazardous to be running aid convoys especially ones that are under his control. at least i think they are under his control, so not sure exactly what their status would be. Either way the plans people have put out are great and I'll get around to picking one to vote for but at a minimum we need to be sure that we achieve the three main goals with 100% success before we go for any additional objectives. Also some of you need to get over your dislike of cluster munitions, we are mercs not peacekeepers we are here to make money not win the hearts and minds. That's the count's job.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
koolkevz666 posted:The count should really learn to understand that aid shouldn't be distributed till after the area is secure. Right now it is too hazardous to be running aid convoys especially ones that are under his control. at least i think they are under his control, so not sure exactly what their status would be. People don't stop needing to eat just because there's a war on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Sending out our base air defense to protect a convoy sounds like a terrible idea because of the travel times involved since the way that most of the plans want is the air defense follow the convoy that means it has to go near the destination and back who knows how long that will take and during this time our airbase is vulnerable to an air attack of any size i say we leave the SAM's at home and just run a cap over the convoy
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
Loel posted:I want to steal it. If we could just steal the radar sites, I wouldn't be advocating blowing them up with stand off weapons where we're like 70 to 180 nm away from the target. But yeah, if we can loot a S300/S400 battery, let's do it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
Tythas posted:Sending out our base air defense to protect a convoy sounds like a terrible idea because of the travel times involved since the way that most of the plans want is the air defense follow the convoy that means it has to go near the destination and back who knows how long that will take and during this time our airbase is vulnerable to an air attack of any size i say we leave the SAM's at home and just run a cap over the convoy We are absolutely not leaving our base undefended. In order to hit our base hostile air would have to get through our CAP, which is 8 AWACS supported Meteor Gripens, Plus 4 Amraam Phantoms. If they get through that they've loving won because they shot down all our Gripens and phantoms and killed our awacs. And even then they've gotta saturate a hawk battery plus it's accompanying SA -22 in order to get any bombs on tarmac. Both of them can shoot down incoming missiles as well as planes. That's a tall order for anything less than a fully commited mass strike, i.e worry about that when it's towards the end of the campaign. The SAMs aren't meant to just sit in one place and be a stationary turret. Specifically, those Shorads are mobile, they are meant to accompany armoured columns and protect them from opportunistic air attack. They're supposed to be sprinkled around the AO where we really don't want hostiles air to have free reign striking and they make it a massive pain in the rear end for them to do so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Tythas posted:Sending out our base air defense to protect a convoy sounds like a terrible idea because of the travel times involved since the way that most of the plans want is the air defense follow the convoy that means it has to go near the destination and back who knows how long that will take and during this time our airbase is vulnerable to an air attack of any size i say we leave the SAM's at home and just run a cap over the convoy Yeah, I have to say we should prioritize a safe base over a safe food convoy
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Tythas posted:Sending out our base air defense to protect a convoy sounds like a terrible idea because of the travel times involved since the way that most of the plans want is the air defense follow the convoy that means it has to go near the destination and back who knows how long that will take and during this time our airbase is vulnerable to an air attack of any size i say we leave the SAM's at home and just run a cap over the convoy There are 4 convoy groups, and we have shilkas and SA-22s. SA-22s can hold their own, but our shilkas will be eaten alive by any plane that notices it's getting lit up by the fire control radar and then will just fly up to 20,000 ft and wreck everything with level laydown of bombs. Shilkas are great for close-in defense of our airfield but this isn't the 1960s or 70s - they'll be eaten alive on their own. We'd either have to leave them at home and depend on CAP coverage - in which case we might as well leave the SA-22s also, or pair them up with the SA-22s and launch a CAP anyway. edit: Loel posted:Yeah, I have to say we should prioritize a safe base over a safe food convoy Dong Quixote fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Apr 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
Im infantry, so I dont know a thing about planes, but heres what I picture our priorities being: 1. Base safety from air attacks 2. Base safety from the MLRS 3. Tank column 4. Food column 5. Radar site 6. Enemy airport How fast can those tanks move? Can we hit the radar and airfield before they get anywhere important?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:43
|
|
|
Loel posted:How fast can those tanks move? Can we hit the radar and airfield before they get anywhere important? You've got about 10 hours until the MLRS's and T-55's are in boom-boom positions.  I'm gonna stuff proposals in one post and you guys can vote. So if you've got some crazy proposal in mind, best get it out now!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Ugh, what size are those infantry elements? No NATO size elements on them so you can't tell other than it's a bunch of leg infantry and a couple of missile air defense units.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
Yooper posted:You've got about 10 hours until the MLRS's and T-55's are in boom-boom positions. Wait, are we up against a realtime clock? Like the longer we take on proposals the closer the launchers get to their bombardment point? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Okay, it looks like we'll need all our Tornados on SEAD, because BOTH ground threats are covered by SAMs! And thanks for clarifying that the convoy won't face ground threats. That simplifies things immensely.Zaodai posted:Wait, are we up against a realtime clock? Like the longer we take on proposals the closer the launchers get to their bombardment point?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Yooper posted:You've got about 10 hours until the MLRS's and T-55's are in boom-boom positions. Ignore tanks, ignore food, hammer MLRS, hit radar, air field, fuel depot, thunder run the capital.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Okay, it looks like we'll need all our Tornados on SEAD, because BOTH ground threats are covered by SAMs! And thanks for clarifying that the convoy won't face ground threats. That simplifies things immensely. Correct! I won't ever have a "real world timer" built into the scenario. Ever. This is a forum game and I'm not going to expect, nor be expected, to ever run this stuff in a real world time frame. It's not fun for you guys, and it becomes stressful for me. We do it because we enjoy. Rushing it is no fun. If we start proposal voting today then we wouldn't close it till tomorrow at the earliest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2017 22:20
|
|