|
Do you prefer to play NATO, the Soviet Union, or have no preference? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| NATO. |
|
21 | 52.50% |
Soviet communists  |
|
19 | 47.50% |
| No preference. |
|
0 | 0% |
| Total: | 40 votes | ||
|
What's this? Northern Fleet is a war game from a company called Simulations Canada. It was originally published in the late 80s, and is entirely text-based, which is the only reason a blind gamer such as myself can play it. What's the premise? In the alternate history year of 1996, the Soviet Union decides to become aggressive and mount an operation to invade the peaceful NATO nation of Norway. They start by orchestrating a takeover of the Svalbard archipelago. This is followed by an invasion of Northern Norway proper, using Red Army troops supported by he eponymous Northern Fleet. NATO decides to send in a couple of carriers to contest the Soviet presence in the Norwegian Sea, and that's about where the game begins. So how will this work? The game is turn-based, with each turn equal to eight hours of time. It's strictly divided into phases, with taskforce formation, movement, and intelligence gathering conducted in that order. Our role will be either Saclant, for NATO, or the Northern Fleet commander for the Soviets. We have control over both individual submarines and surface task forces. We can tell them where to go, what missions to focus on, and so forth, but have no control over individual units at a finer scale. The game is played out on this map. One of the challenges for me in handling this LP is that I only have access to a spreadsheet of this map. I will try and post it on a regular basis, and give all the text information the game provides. FOr a start, though, let's get to more questions. Will their be audience participation? I certainly hope so. I know very little about naval strategy beyond what I got from reading far too much Tom Clancy as a child. The game setup is such that we can plan moves and decisions in advance, and I hope that any true navy buffs will comment as they see fit. FOr the moment, we need to decide whether we'll play NATO or the USSR. Victory Points Northern Fleet manual posted:10.0 VICTORY: At the end of the game (or when the game is ended) the players will be presented with the final victory point total (unless the game ends in Global Nuclear War, in which both sides, and everyone else as well, lose, thus making a sum up display inappropriate). If the totals are within 100 victory points of one another, the game is a draw. If the difference in scores is greater than 100 points the player earning the most points is the winner. The computer automatically awards victory points to the appropriate player for the following: 1. Damage or destruction of opposing units (variable with unit type and amount of damage to the unit and may be worth up to 100 points for U.S. aircraft carriers); 2. Demonstrating initial hostilities restraint (by recommending conflict level 1), 10 points/turn (NATO player only, since the scenario postulates an aggressive Soviet stance); 3. Demonstrating threshold restraint (by recommending conventional war after nuclear war breaks out), 5 points/turn (either or both players); 4. Sinking Soviet SSBNS, 50 points; 5. Exiting Soviet subs on Anti-SLOC mission, points equal to the value of the sub plus the number of SSMs on board; 6. Successful assault of a NATO airbase by airborne or amphibious troops, 100 points; 7. Soviet control of Norway, points equal to the percentage of Soviet control, with a bonus of 250 points if Norway falls; 8. Each turn that a Soviet bomber base is inoperative, 5 points/base to NATO; 9. Each turn that a Soviet bomber base is operational, 3 points/base to USSR; 10. Conducting shore bombardment and airstrikes against enemy bases (variable with conflict level, turn number, and damage inflicted; in general, one earns more points for bombardment and airstrikes against bases when these occur early in the war). The computer automatically subtracts victory points from the appropriate player for the following: 1. Each time that the player escalates the conflict level above the highest level previously used in the game (50 points for going to Conventional War, 150 points for Tactical Nuclear War, 300 points for Operational Nuclear War); 2. Each turn that the player is above conflict level 2, he loses 10 victory points; 3. Each time that a land base is destroyed by a nuclear weapon, the attacking player loses 25 victory points. We have decided to start with NATO. I'll use this first post to keep updated positions and map links and so forth, since I wasn't smart enough to reserve the second post for it. Ah well… Spreadsheet map as of turn 11 Taskforce Positions as of April 4, 1600, Turn 11 TF1: (CVN Roosevelt and CV Kennedy) S97 TF2: (CVHG Invincible) S10 Submarine Positions SSN Seawolf: No contact. SSn Pittsburgh: No contact. SSN Dallas: J17 (bound for the Barents Sea.) SSN Memphis: No contact, (Already in the Barents?) SSN Helena: No contac, bound for the Barents Sea.) SSN Chicago: No contact. SSN Boston: K9. SSN Louisville: No contact. SSN Grayling: No contact. SSN Bergall: M5 SSN Trepang: No contact. SSN Bluefish: p5 SSN Trafalgar: No contact. SSN Tireless: U11. SSN Churchill: No contact. SSN Spartan: P10. SS Upholder: T5. SS Unseen: K17.. SS Unicorn: O9. SSN Trudeau: No contact. Possible Soviet Positions Two TFs, possibly still in Soviet waters. Large number of SOSUS contacts from previous turn.B BlindGuy fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Oct 5, 2016 |
#
?
Oct 2, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:11 |
|
|
NATO Let's take up the challenge, and prevent the conquest of Norway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
USSR It's time to bring Socialism to the already virtually Socialist state of Norway. Down with the Capitalist pig-dog-sheep oppressors!
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
NATO My gut says USSR but I always have to play hard mode when available so NATO it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
On the Map and Nuclear Weapons, Among Other Things I'm happy to see there's at least some interest in this, so I thought I'd post a bit more info about the map and game mechanics while I let the votes come in. The map has a few features worth noting. First are airbases, both for NATO and the USSR. These will provide air cover to task forces within 250 nautical miles or so, as well as be a source of airstrikes to support the battle in Norway, among other things. I don't know if I mention that each map square is approximately 70 NM across. Second are the Soviet bastions. These are the protected waters where the ballistic missile submarines are kept. The NATO objective will be to put enough submarine power in there to sink some of these, while the obvious USSR object will be to prevent that. Note that these submarines are not actually implemented as discrete units in the game, as they're nominally under a different command structure, so we won't be ordering nuclear strikes on, say, London or Bodo. Finally, notice the ice-covered ocean as we traverse north. This is only accessible to nuclear-powered subs, and thus is safe from, say, mine laying and anti-submarine helicopters. More on both when we have our first gameplay update. The final topic I want to cover here is not map-related at all. I mentioned nukes earlier, and yes, both sides have them. As the first phase of every turn, we have the chance to recommend a "conflict level," to our high command. There are four of these, going from "Rising Tensions," to "operational nuclear warfare." We always start at level 1, and there's no guarantee that our requests to escalate will be approved. Moving to tactical or operational nuclear warfare carries pretty hefty victory point penalties, so it's not something we want to do lightly. Rising Tensions is pretty much what the name suggests, and will probably persist for at least the first few turns before actual shots are fired.THat's about it for the moment. Anybody with questions or thoughts please feel free to chime in. This is my first LP, and I want to do a decent job of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
NATO For cold war lp's, goons tend to pick soviets when it's an option, but the NATO campaign generally sounds more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
To be fair, it's possible I undersold the Soviet campaign. I'm sure it's interesting, and probably feels very different from NATO, particularly because we start with a metric ton of submarines at sea. I'm willing to go with whichever the thread decides.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
USSR
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 05:55
|
|
|
If there's a possibility of doing more than one run-through, then USSR, since there's no sense in doing the easier one second. If we're definitely only doing one, then NATO.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
NATO because I read Red Storm Rising too many times. I'd like to play it again as USSR if you run it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
USSR because I want to see them both, and what easier way than a tie vote? Also because most fiction centered around an invasion of Norway focuses on NATO's side of things, and I want to see how the USSR would do it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
Comstar posted:NATO because I read Red Storm Rising too many times. I'd like to play it again as USSR if you run it. Ha! Red Storm Rising is arguably my favorite Clancy novel, so I can at least empathize. I won't commit to a definite second run at this point, it's way too early, but I suppose it's possible down the line. I'll let the votes come in for a few more hours and then call it. Still figuring out how I want to handle individual turns, though I guess once the first couple are done it should be easier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:USSR because I want to see them both, and what easier way than a tie vote? Also because most fiction centered around an invasion of Norway focuses on NATO's side of things, and I want to see how the USSR would do it. Unfortunately, we get very limited details of the ground invasion, since that's not really the game's focus. It's mostly a control percentage and occasional updates along the lines of "Norwegians retreating." That being said, the naval side will have plenty of detail once the shooting starts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
NATO Just as I'm sure it will lead to maximum chaos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
So, I think I'm going to call it for NATO at this point, with 53% of the vote. FOr future issues, I may just use votes in this thread rather than setting up polls. When we get to strategy in particular it might be easier to hash out plans rather than trying to come up with two or three broad options. Guess we'll see as time goes by. I'll post a gameplay update in a few.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
April 1, 1996, 0800 Weather: Clear, forecast: Clear. NATO VPs: 0, Norway Control: 100% The conflict level starts at Rising Tensions. I can guarantee that NATO will reject any attempt to escalate it on the first turn, so I'm going to go ahead and suggest we keep it there. Taskforce Operations Phase Here's the real meat of the game. We have two carrier task forces, TF1 around the nuclear-powered Theodore Roosevelt, and TF2 around the conventional John F. Kennedy. I think I might enclose the full Taskforce makeup in a spoiler tag, in case someone wants to skip it. We give orders at the TF level anyway. If this isn't to taste, please feel free to suggest something else. TF1: Position: t1, SOA: 24 Knots Mission: antisurface Initiative: 90, reliability: 85 (Initiative and reliability are pretty much what they sound like. Each ship tracks these two stats, and the TF's initiative as a whole is assumed to be that of the most valuable ship, carrying the highest-ranking CO. CVN Roosevelt CGN Virginia CG Bunker Hill CG Mobile Bay CG Belknap CG Yarnell DD John Hancock DD Radford AOE Seattle It's worth noting that the auxiliary ships, ((AOE and AOR) are the slowest in both taskforces at the moment, and if we got rid of them we'd be able to make 32 knots. Of course, doing that has potentially nasty consequences, but if somebody really wants to… TF2: Position: P5, SOA: 24 knots Mission: Anti-surface Initiative: 90, reliability: 95 CV Kennedy CGN South Carolina CG Antietam DDG Arleigh Burke CG Josephus Daniels DD Spruance DD Nicholson DDG Lawrence AOR Milwaukee All of these chips are members of specific classes, the details of which elude me for the most part. It's possible for us to pull up status info on any of them, though I think that is most useful in the event one is damaged. Also of note, task forces have an "EmCon," rating, which represents how much radio chatter they're generating. If I contact one, the rating drops by 10% per order. I want to be careful checking on them, in other words. We also have control over nine individual submarines at the moment. I'm a bit more familiar with some of these, if only from my Tom Clancy. SSN Pittsburgh (Los Angeles class): T1 SSN Dallas (Los Angeles class): p5 SSN Memphis (Los Angeles Class): k16 SSN Helena (Los Angeles class): I19 SSN Grayling (Sturgeon class): P5 SSN Bergall (sturgeon class): m5 SSN trafalgar (Trafalgar class): a24 SS Upholder (Upholder class): t5 SS Unseen (upholder class): k17 THat's quite a bit of naval power already. The choices from the taskforce operations menu are:
That's it. Not a lot of gameplay so far, but I don't want to overwhelm everybody with info. Next up, we need to figure out our movement orders for the task forces and submarines. Some suggestions THe manual suggests sending some of the Los Angeles class subs to the bastions, to hunt down and destroy Soviet nuclear boats. There's also the hint that we want to avoid sending our carriers east of the Iceland - Faroe - U.K. axis, for fear of massive Soviet airstrikes. It's probably a good idea to pay attention to this last point, if nothing else. We can move east, but two carriers is a relatively small force. Lastly, we know nothing about Soviet taskforces or submarines yet. Our intel briefing comes after we've given movement orders. The next phase is literally running through every single task force and submarine on the map, and asking us if we want to change its destination, or mission, in the case of subs. Fun times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 3, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
HEre's my spreadsheet map for this first turn. THe most important thing about this is that it's actually cockeyed from the way the grid is set up. We did that because I don't know of a way to decree that letters should run vertically in this particular file. Cells should still match up, even if the orientation is screwy. If anybody is up for filling in the proper squares on the JPEG as we go, that might help folks keep track visually. https://www.dropbox.com/s/533p35f4v1lbf07/SA%20LP%20Turn%201.xls?dl=0
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
I know you said turn 1 was limited to not starting a war....but can we break with tradition and go on the offensive immediately? Assuming it won't lead to the nukes flying immediately either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
I say hold our carriers back, they are the most important and send the subs off to I don't know much about what Russians have, but our goal is probably to ram their carriers!
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
Edit: It occurs to me that I didn't give any sort of definitions for the abbreviations i used in the first update: CVN, etc. Would a primer be useful? I don't know a lot myself, but the manual at least provides a list, even if it leaves a lot of details out. What do the Russians have? I've already talked a bit about the Russian ballistic missile subs, which tend to cluster in their bastions, protected from air attack, and requiring our brave/foolish submariners to go after them. But what else do they have? The most alarming enemy from our point of view are their attack submarines. These guys will range far and wide, hunting down carriers and harassing our airbases. We can generally track them, thanks to our array of Sosus sensors. These are based a Keflavik. Ideally, the sensors give information to P3C Orion aircraft, which we have no control over but will nevertheless slaughter Soviet subs from time to time. As an alternative, we can of course send our own submarines after them based on the data SOSUS provides, which is part of our intel brief every turn. Needless to say, it's possible for the Russians to disable Keflavik in various ways, taking our sensors with it. If that happens, the sub threat becomes very real. There's also, of course, the Northern Fleet proper. Russians surface ships probably include a mix vaguely similar to ours. They will be trying to track down our subs in the bastions, and possibly land troops amphibiously at our airbases, depending on how bad things get. We have the ability to see the composition of their TFs sometimes, but it's not always guaranteed. There are a couple of surprises in the Russian arsenal as well, but I don't want to spoil them, so think I'll just leave you with the comforting thought that we're currently outmatched, and that's only likely to change with time and effort. BlindGuy fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Oct 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
Comstar posted:I know you said turn 1 was limited to not starting a war....but can we break with tradition and go on the offensive immediately? Assuming it won't lead to the nukes flying immediately either. In theory, definitely. I can certainly start pushing for a conventional war as soon as next turn, though no guarantees on when we'll get one. It will definitely come soon. As for nukes, they fly only when we explicitly move to tactical or operational nuclear warfare, or of course if the Soviets do the same. The main distinction is that"tactical," limits them to use against ships at sea. "Operational," gives permission to attack land targets, and potentially ends the world, if we're unlucky. This isn't [iBalance of Power[/i], so it's not guaranteed, but still. FOr the record, we get bonus points for showing restraint, that is, not escalating as soon as they do. It's a small carrot. I am wondering if I should probably just decide on a move for this first turn, so we at least get some action going. We'll give it a little longer and then do so.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
There's not really a whole lot of options for turn 1, besides "check on the carriers" and "maybe send in the subs to the Bastions". In the interests of putting an offer on the table, I say we put all of our SSNs into one of the Bastions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Fair enough. I went ahead and sent all the los Angeles SSNs into the Barents Sea. Also, it seems one of the British subs was already there–I made a typo in its position. So I decided to keep it on station. I moved the carriers a little, keeping them under land-based air cover. I don't expect a lot to happen yet, but we'll see. Intelligence Phase No reported Soviet forces yet, of any kind. No submarines, no surface ships. This is probably a good thing. I'll just keep playing until we get something interesting. We are informed that the Soviet aircraft carrier Tbilisi is still in port at Polyarny. The intel types estimate that the Soviets have just one SSN at sea. Surely that's a bit optimistic? Soviet airbases are estimated to be fully ready, as are ours. Neither side has done anything airborne yet, so of course they are. April 1, 1996, 1600 Per prompting, I try to escalate to conventional warfare. That request is denied. Otherwise we just keep moving towards our destinations. I've decided that the subs should proceed at medium speed, because if they go too fast their sonar becomes less useful, and they are easier to detect. It's worth noting for future reference that we don't always have contact with our subs. They can even make kills with out reporting them, or, presumably, get killed in turn. Intelligence Phase We have an Akula class sub detected in O11. This is a lot closer than I expected for so early in the game. It's very close to our taskforces, in fact. Sosus is still operational, so we can presumably let them deal with this, if war breaks out. On the other hand, it's possible Keflavik will be put out of a action early one way or another, so it's not guaranteed. Also of note, some Orion search aircraft have spotted a metric ton of ships in K20.. They're lead by the CVHG Baku, but include a few cruisers, guided missile destroyers, and frigates. This has probably just put to sea. On the other hand, i'd point out that the Baku is a helicoper carrier, and ideally suited to attacking any submarines that happen to be detected in the Barents Sea. April 1, 1996, 2400 (Hey, shouldn't this just be April 2 at 0000?) THe weather is forecast to cloud over. I don't know what kind of effects this actually has, other than that aircraft are unable to fly in stormy weather. This is a mixed blessing. I try to escalate to conventional war again, and am once again denied. I move the carriers a bit, just getting them a little closer to air cover. It probably doesn't matter much, but I want to be safe. THe submarines are still moving, in some cases with quite a long ways to go. Intelligence Phase The Akula has slipped away from the SOSUS listening posts, so I have no idea where it is. I'm becoming worried that there are probably more subs we aren't detecting. There has to be more than just one SSN out there. NATO intelligence estimates that there are 3 SSGN (guided missile), subs at sea, and 6 SSNs. Where are the other five? There are supposedly 2 conventional subs out there as well, but I'm not as worried about them. The Orion still see that mass of ships in K20. So here we come to a decent decision point, is it worth diverting some of our subs to start searching for these possible targets? The game manual suggests building an "anti-submarine barrier," in the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap, but I confess I've never been very good at figuring out how to do it. Our SSNs are en rout to the Barents, but we have a few other subs, mostly from the UK, which aren't doing much. Is it worth keeping a submarine escort on our carriers, or do we want to trust air cover to keep them safe for now? The alternative is probably just letting SOSUS do its job, but their performance hasn't been great so far.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
I'd debate combining the two existing TFs into a single murderball, then splitting off two DDs as an ASW TF (preferably destroyers with helicopters, if the game tracks that). This should also let you keep two subs with the new murderball while sending another sub or two out to hunt Soviet subs.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
The Sandman posted:I'd debate combining the two existing TFs into a single murderball, then splitting off two DDs as an ASW TF (preferably destroyers with helicopters, if the game tracks that). This should also let you keep two subs with the new murderball while sending another sub or two out to hunt Soviet subs. Interesting idea. THe game does actually track ASW helos. I checked, and at least the Spruance class boats have one a piece. They also have torpedoes for close-in ASW work. The guided missile DDGs, on the other hand, don't have helos at all. Part of the problem is that I have a limited familiarity with naval weapon systems. THe Spruances have 18 conventional ASROCs, and 2 nuclear ASROC (n). Thankfully, at least, I don't have to make the call on which weapon to use, as that's below operational scale. So theoretically the murderball is possible. it's also probably safe to assume that the game tracks a lot behind the scenes, even if the actual mechanics seem simple on the surface. BlindGuy fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Shouldn't there be more Royal Navy vessels present? Also, you'd expect Norwegian navy units to contribute to the defense of their homeland, the Ula-class submarines at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Kopijeger posted:Shouldn't there be more Royal Navy vessels present? Also, you'd expect Norwegian navy units to contribute to the defense of their homeland, the Ula-class submarines at the very least. Good points. The manual suggests that the Norwegian forces will defend their coastal waters, principally with submarines. I can't actually see them, presumably because they aren't directly under my command. I should have done a better job of keeping everybody updated on reinforcements. THere's a big Royal Navy contingent which will be ready in a couple of days, HMS Invincible, along with frigates and destroyers. The submarine picture looks more pleasant, USS Chicago will be here in a couple turns, and we'll get a couple Swiftsure class boats over the next few turns as well. Aside: I love the Royal Navy method for naming ships, it's alliteratively appealing. Basically, as soon as the ships are available, I can add them to a task force. THe submarines will report to me automatically, but the game isn't as good as it could be about indicating, "Hey, you have new ships." I'll have to check every turn. Edit; new Uk taskforces start in U11, while US and Canadian forces are a little more variable, locationally speaking. Right now, the two TFs previously listed are all I have. I've decided to use the OP for reasonably current positioning. I just need to remember to update the spreadsheet every once in a while, for my own sanity if nothing else. BlindGuy fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Oct 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
I would keep your best ASW assets with your CTFs since your CTFs will naturally draw attention from subs. If you want to hunt subs actively, use your own subs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I would keep your best ASW assets with your CTFs since your CTFs will naturally draw attention from subs. If you want to hunt subs actively, use your own subs. I guess there's no obvious right answer. The Barents seems adequately covered with subs, or will be in a day or two once all of them arrive on station. I'm thinking I might send Dallas out actively looking for that Akula. There's no specific "hunt enemy subs," order, but maybe if I order him to go to O10 or whatever he'll catch up automagically. Also, the Barents isn't the only bastion. We're going to be hearing about he others pretty soon. I guess I can wait until I have a few more subs to play with before sending anything into the Arctic ocean or what have you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
I figured I can push forward until we at least get to an actual shooting war. Opting to send the SSN Grayling away from its escort duties, since the carriers are probably relatively safe from air attack as it stands now. April 2, 1996, 0800 Weather: Clear Forecast: Cloudy Still at Rising Tensions. No new reinforcements this turn. I send the Grayling off to O10 as mentioned, but make no other changes. We really are just playing a waiting game for the moment. Intelligence Phase SOSUS locates four subs, a Tango at M18, another Tango at L19, an Akula (the same one?) at N13, and an Oscar, our first guided missile sub, also at M18. These subs are within Soviet territory, for the most part, and don't worry me overly much. I'm a bit concerned with the Akula, but I can't do anything to it until I'm given permission to shoot. The Orions located that big Soviet taskforce again, this time in J21. I bet it's running ASW intended for the Barents Sea. The only sub that's actually in the bastion is still alive, thankfully. Nothing else of note. April 2, 1996, 1600 Weather: cloudy Forecas: Overcast Still at Rising tensions. We are given the third Upholder class submarine, SS Unicorn, this turn. She starts in U11, as do all British forces. I'm also able to get in touch with the Memphis, which seems to be heading for the Barents as expected. I'm moving the Unicorn up a ways, so she might actually be useful. Also going to route the Grayling to N13, based on that SOSUS report. The sub has probably left he sector already, but it never hurts to keep chasing, I suppose. I'm tempted to bring the Unseen, another Royal Navy conventional sub, up from k17, where it is arguably not doing much good. On the other hand it might be nice to have a unit relatively close to Soviet territory to watch what happens there. I'll leave her where she is for now. Message coming in from the Memphis: enemy sub detected in K20. No specifics on type, but hopefully Sosus will be able to ID it. Intelligence Phase SOSUS does not ID it, and in fact only tracks two sub contacts this turn. An Alpha class attack sub in J18, and a Victor in M19. As a minor point, it's worth noting that the designations we have for Soviet subs are "reporting names," and I don't know what the actual Russian project numbers were. I suppose I can look it up if I'm ever interested. That Soviet TF under the Baku is in L21 now, probably preparing to sweep the Barents. April 2, 1996, 2400 Weather: Cloudy Forecast; overcast Still at Rising Tensions. We are given the SSN Chicago, of Red Storm Rising fame, and the British Swiftsure class Churchill. The Chicago starts at P1, and Churchill at U11. I order the Chicago into the Barents, because it seems to fit there, and the Churchill to S9, just because. Intelligence Phase Something new this turn, Washington estimates eight Soviet SSBNs are on station or in transit to the Arctic. So I'll want to get some submarines out there posthaste. Sosus reports a Tango in M17, a Yankee-class guided missile sub in L19, and two Charley class missile subs, one each in m18 and m19. The ASW task force is in J21 now, and seems to have shrunk considerably, losing its frigates. I wonder where they went? This is all I can manage for the moment, as it's dinnertime around here. Sorry for the lack of excitement, so to speak. I expected hostilities to commence after confirming that the SSBNs were on station, but I guess that's not quite enough. More soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
If it hasn't been done already, Combine the CV's into one task force, including the Invincible when it shows up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 09:50
|
|
|
Comstar posted:If it hasn't been done already, Combine the CV's into one task force, including the Invincible when it shows up. Including all the other ships which accompany them? I can do that, but it's a lot of ships in one spot. I suppose it comes out to about 4,900 nm square, and that's quite a bit of ocean to work with. Will update a bit later today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
April 3, 1996, 1600 Weather: overcast Forecast; scatter showers Still at Rising Tensions. I order the two existing carrier Tfs to the same sector, in preparation for combining them. Invincible is still a day away. I decide to send one submarine to the Arctic Bastion, just because we've heard that there are SSBNs on station there, and it never hurts to be careful. Intelligence Phase I don't remember whether it was this turn or last, but intel has stopped mentioning the carrier Tbilisi at Polyarny. I interpret this to mean she has set sail, though have no idea for where. National technical means, aka satellites and related technology, locate the Baku and her escorts in J22, while P3C search aircraft find the Tbilisi and a considerable number of escorts in K23. Sosus reports N17: SS Tango K14: SS Tango L16: SS Tango O16: SS Tango K17: SSGN Yankee K18: SSGN Charlie N17: SSGN Charlie O16: SSGN Charlie O15: SSN Victor N16: SSN Victor This is the largest number of subs we've seen since game start. I'm glad most of them are a ways away from the CVs, but they're close enough to shoot missiles at Bodo, and that isn't something to be taken lightly. April 3, 1996, 1600 Weather: Scatter showers Forecast: Actually missed it for this turn. I've been in the habit of saving the game every turn, but forgot to last time around, so screw it. I order the two CV task forces to combine, the larger TF1 is now in S9. We are also given the SSN Spartan, the second Swiftsure class sub. Message from SSN Grayling: Enemy sub detected in M13. Intelligence Phase The Baku and her escorts are in J21, while we find the Tbilisi and Kirov, among others, in M24. Sosus reports M19: SS Tango M15: SS Tango L15: SS Tango L19: SS Tango L14: SS Tango N14: SS Tango J15: SSGN Yankee K15: SSGN Charlie O16: SSGN Charlie M18: SSGN Charlie April 3, 1996, 2400 Weather: stormy Forecast: stormy Well, that answers the weather question. We won't get any flights this turn, intel or otherwise, which is on the whole a bad thing. I try to push for a start to hostilities, but NATO refuses. What do they want, Bodo to be wiped off the map first? The good news is that we will get Invincible and a bunch of Royal Navy escorts next turn. FOr the moment, the single TF stays put in S9. We are given the SSN Bluefish, the fourth Sturgeon class sub. She starts in R1, but I order her closer to the center, around M10. Intelligence Phase Washington estimates that 12 SSBNs are on station or in transit to the Kara Sea. Sosus reports K13: SSGN Yankee M19: SSGN Charlie L14: SSGN Charlie P15: SSGN Charlie L17: SSGN CHarlie O13: SSGn Charlie Q10: SSN Victor L17: SSN Victor L16: SSN Victor III K14: SSN Alpha L15: SSN Mike K18: SSGN Oscar M19: SSGN Oscar I worry my subs are woefully out of position to deal with things, particularly the missile threat. I hope the Norwegians get their act together as soon as things blow up. If we were allowed to escalate we could have started winnowing down these numbers, but as it is, I anticipate much fun. April 4, 1996, 0800 Weather: Stormy Forecast: Scattered showers Huzzah! NATO finally agrees to escalate to conventional warfare. I was honestly expecting this a lot earlier, but am gratified that it's finally happened, I suppose. If nothing else, things will become a lot more deadly. With the outbreak of war, we get a couple new options. We can now lay minefields. Basic minefields have a 2.5% chance of detonating, and can only impact submarines. We can theoretically lay minefields in any ocean sector. They are presumed to be dropped by off-map assets, such as aircraft, and hence can't be laid in stormy weather or under enemy fighter cover. Thankfully, if we add more mines to an existing minefield, that chance of detonation increases. It's also worth noting that the base chance for Soviet minefields is 5%. Also of note, we can now launch airstrikes, either to support the land battle in Norway, or against detected task forces. This won't be a factor this turn, because we are still in stormy weather, but for future reference it's definitely something to think about. We are finally given the Invincible, and two guided missile destroyers and four frigates. They continue the fine Royal Navy tradition of naming ships starting with the same letter. I decide to move them to S9, to join up with our existing huge TF. The Canadians also send us the SSN Trudeau, which starts in O1. We also get the SSN Seawolf, which starts in U3. FInally, we get the SSN Louisville, starting in P1. I will do a position and map update after this turn, in honor of war being declared. We begin with a Soviet torpedo attack on our giant task force, one ship hit, but I don't think sunk. I suspect that there were multiple submarines involved, but both seem to have been sunk. One of the downsides of the way my screen reader works is that sometimes identical messages are repeated, so it is difficult to get a sense of the situation. I'll check in after this turn. Also, the SSN Memphis launched harpoons and hit a Soviet cruiser, which is about equal to our losses, I believe. Intelligence Phase No task forces detected this turn, and no flights due to weather. Sosus Reports M16: SS Tango O13: SS Tango L15: SS Tango N17: SS Tango L15: SS Tango P12: SS Tango K10: SSGN Yankee M18: SSGN Charlie L16: SSGN Charlie Q14: SSGN CHarlie K16: SSGN CHarlie P11: SSGN CHarlie L19: SSN Victor S9: SSN Victor O13; SSN Victor N15; SSN Victor L15: SSN Victor III L16: SSN Victor III K15: SSN Siera K15: SSN Alpha an SSBN was destroyed by our forces in the Barents, I'm told. Soviet ground forces are advancing in Northern Norway. Norwegian forces are holding. Surprise! Spetsnaz special forces have attacked our over the horizon radar site in the UK. It was a successful attack, meaning that Soviet airstrikes coming down from the Kola Peninsula will be a lot harder to spot. So, all in all, I think we have our work cut out for us. i wish I had a better way to work with the map, but it'll have to do. I'll update that after lunch here. Please feel free to suggest strategies, I think we're pretty much starting from square one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
I have no idea where anything is in relation to anything else, but it sounds like we need to degrade the soviet submarine threat. Can we deploy our Fleet to do that? Or should we move to strike a enemy task force?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Comstar posted:I have no idea where anything is in relation to anything else, but it sounds like we need to degrade the soviet submarine threat. Can we deploy our Fleet to do that? Or should we move to strike a enemy task force? Yeah… This is a problem I'm still not sure of the best way to solve. I have a spreadsheet which represents the map grid, but that's totally unfriendly for sighted gamers. I posted a link to the latest one in the OP, and here is a link to the actual map scan. If I could use a paint program or something to update this, I totally would. THe good thing, I guess, is that SOSUS is still operational. So theoretically P3s from Keflavik will start attacking Soviet subs as soon as the weather clears. In case it wasn't obvious to anybody, I am totally blind, and have been since birth. THe overwhelmingly text-basednature of this game is the only reason I'm able to play it at all, but I lack the ability to get a quick visual overview of given situations. BlindGuy fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
It's probably self-explanatory, but what are the actual effects of directing air strikes towards Norway? If I had to guess, it helps us push back the Red Army/make it less likely that the Norwegians will be defeated? Is it possible to help the Norwegians defeat the Red Army without necessarily defeating the Northern Fleet in its entirety? How is the current state of Norway measured (is it vague like "The Norwegians are advancing/holding/retreating" or more like a percentage, for example)? And lastly, is there any way to repair that over the horizon radar? (If you've already answered these queries then please ignore me  )
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:It's probably self-explanatory, but what are the actual effects of directing air strikes towards Norway? If I had to guess, it helps us push back the Red Army/make it less likely that the Norwegians will be defeated? Is it possible to help the Norwegians defeat the Red Army without necessarily defeating the Northern Fleet in its entirety? How is the current state of Norway measured (is it vague like "The Norwegians are advancing/holding/retreating" or more like a percentage, for example)? And lastly, is there any way to repair that over the horizon radar? I didn't really make all this explicit, but now's as good a time as any. Directing airstrikes at Norway has the effect of temporarily halting the Soviet advance. Note that we also potentially lose aircraft to SAMs, presumably, so we can't afford to keep it up forever. Norway control is tracked both as a percentage and via more vague messages. We get an update on the percentage every turn, along with a NATO victory point total, which I'll try to remember to include with every update. It's theoretically possible to sop the offensive without defeating the nOrthern Fleet in detail. THe manual suggests that "some time after the 35th turn," a ceasefire will be imposed. As for he OTH radar, its possible it will be repaired in a few days, as happens if SOSUS is attacked. But I haven't seen this confirmed first hand. THe manual's info on victory point values is in the OP, but basically, we really don't want Norway to fall. BlindGuy fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
I'm curious as to why defeating the Northern Fleet would stop the invasion. I know it's necessary to get that island, but I don't see how the fleet would do anything more than just protect the soldiers being ferried in from America/Europe
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Lord Windy posted:I'm curious as to why defeating the Northern Fleet would stop the invasion. I know it's necessary to get that island, but I don't see how the fleet would do anything more than just protect the soldiers being ferried in from America/Europe It seems as if you're equating the Northern Fleet with the various task forces under our command? If that's not happening, apologies. The term "Northern Fleet," in this case is referring to the Soviet fleet we're fighting. Defeating it would certainly help protect Norway. Of course, as far as the game's concerned, our operational responsibility ends at the map edge. There are no troops arriving from America or Europe within the timeframe of the scenario, as far as I know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:11 |
|
|
BlindGuy posted:It seems as if you're equating the Northern Fleet with the various task forces under our command? If that's not happening, apologies. The term "Northern Fleet," in this case is referring to the Soviet fleet we're fighting. Defeating it would certainly help protect Norway. Yeah, Northern Fleet = Russian Fleet. What I mean is how does defeating that help the Norwegians outside of Svalberg. Since Russia has a land connection with Norway and they can bring more equipment to bear (planes, tanks and whatnot) I'm not sure how defeating the Northern Fleet helps Norway other than securing the ships that ferry reinforcements. I don't really understand military tactics though. I'm just thinking of this as if I was playing a game, the only part of the northern fleet that would matter to me are the submarines. EDIT: This is purely meta-commentary of this game. Lord Windy fucked around with this message at 02:17 on Oct 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 01:34
|
|