Simple Multiplayer FoF Campaign?

[Molon Labe]

Now that we've finished LWAMI 3.11 and I released my China single-player campaign (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/downloads.php?do=file&id=3297), I'm hoping to go back to actually playing DW instead of just working on it.

But rather than getting into duels again, I was thinking about making a Force-on-Force campaign, one which would hopefully be much simpler than the GDT experiment (http://www.commanders-academy.com/forum/showthread.php?22204-A-very-late-After-Action-Report-Summary) a few years back. So here is what I have in mind.

Premise: Two opposing navies fight for resources in a relatively confined geographic location with lots of small islands; perhaps the Aegean. The navies will be composed of DW platforms: playable platforms, AI warships, aircraft, amphibs, merchants, etc. Each side is played by one or more players, in theory one per side is adequate, but obviously the more people that can join in the better the battles will be. The territory each side controls will earn resources/victory points for that side. The campaign can end at a set number of points or when one side runs out of ships or territory. The turns can be divided into Three phases.

Phase 1: Ante up
Each side declares what they're going to do with their units. The commands would essentially be "invade island X" or "protect island Y" or so forth. No detailed movement tracking is required, so a dedicated GM is not needed. Declarations can be done via email with password protected Word attachments. The password is revealed after emails are exchanged, so no one sees the other side's declaration before they have made their own.

Phase 2: Battle
Anytime two groups end up trying to fight in same spot, a DW mission is belted out and the fight is played.

Phase 3: Resolution and Resources
A side that successfully invades an island takes control of it. If both sides land, then the side with more troops will take control. There is room to add some complexity here with contested territory and casualties (e.g. control is achieved at 2-to-1 advantage, losing side takes casualties based on ratio of forces, reinforcements can be landed, evacuations can be so the troops can be used somewhere else). Territory that is controlled generates resources for the side that controls it. Those resources get stored on-site.
On-site resources can be shipped out in commerce as part of the Phase 1 declaration. If this is successful (the merchies don't get sunk), the side will receive revenues from this. There may also be some fixed income as well (i.e. taxes from the motherland). So you have money to spend to train troops or purchase new platforms. (The purchase would actually take place in Phase 1 of the next turn).


That's pretty much it. I see some details that need to be worked out with mission design, abstracted land combat, and figuring out the available units and their prices, but those issues don't seem insurmountable. Definitely easier than the GDT was. And the best part from my perspective is that this format doesn't need a dedicated GM because there is no need for any secret movements to be tracked; the players themselves can run it. Which means I can run it and be a player!

So, would anyone want to do this? :06:

[Imamar]

Very good idea, something fun to do when inside on summer time! :salute:
( It is summer here right now, where I live, in Finland)

My question is, is this going to played via Hamachi or similar, or just using DW's own connect to host service?
Because everytime I have had Hamachi or similar installed to my comp, It somehow screws up my DW. It seems I cant use DW's own connect to host service after that, and it is annoying.
I have tried to make the correct changes to DW's danerouswaters.ini, but with no joy.
So if you guys decide after all to use Hamachi or such, please write down some instructions how to make it work, Thanks!

:salute:

[Molon Labe]

I personally don't care for Hamachi (the program...the fish is excellent!) but that would really come down to how many people can't connect without it vs. how many people can't connect with it.

[Hawk66]

How would you design the missions...I mean would there be AI units in such battles and would you randomize the locations/events so that the mission designer itself has no advantage ?

Hm...have to try out multiplayer...surely makes fun, especially multistations, I guess; the only drawback seems to be that you have to play several hours without interruption.

[Molon Labe]

I'm working that out.

Missions for something like this can be pretty simple because all you really need to to as a designer is put the right pieces in place. And the units present will be the units declared to that area by the players. My basic thought would be that you would have a goal line one side needs to reach or an area that one side must force enemy platforms out of. As for starting positions, you'd probably have a wedge or band of possible spawn locations... such that they start within 15-30 minutes of detection of each other, can fight the battle out in 2-3 hours max, and maybe with enough randomness to prevent spawn-killing and/or undue advantage due to a drop/restart.


Right now I'm assuming both sides see the .mu in advance of the match--no secrets. If secrecy is needed, there would have to be a dedicated GM to handle that.

[dd149]

This is pretty much the way the French and Italian community do it, with the recent progresses in the gameplay, a batch of new missions has been designed.

[Imamar]

Any news about this?

[Molon Labe]

I've got a preliminary map based in the south pacific with a set of roughly symmetrical islands that I think would work well.

[Imamar]

Any news?

[Molon Labe]

Sorry, RL had me tied up this week. I'll work on some details this weekend, I promise.


@dd149: Would you mind sharing some of what you know from the French and Italian communities? I'm especially interested in strategic goal ideas and how they let those factors influence mission design. Or any rules or abstracted events they use to figure out what happens outside of DW.

[Molon Labe]

Quick update:

This is the roughly symetrical set of islands I found:

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/2760/mapsegment3a.png

Right now, I think that you should only be able to "skip" one island from what you already control, the idea being that if you attempted to go further into contested territory you'd be intercepted anyways. So that keeps you from taking over the home base on the first turn.

For merchant raids, I'm thinking each island has lane of commerce that can be attacked/defended. But you'd also have the option to move cargo amongst your islands instead of shipping immediately, so you can convoy. For combat purposes, transferred ships would be considered at the destination in case the island is attacked, so moving them around carries some risk.

I am considering having a carrier that might influence ground troops strength within a certain radius... such as 1 space for helos and 2 for harriers. If this was done, the carrier would have to be placed in a sea space that could then be attacked. I'm a little concerned with this because it more or less means going after the carrier would be like playing battleship; you have to attack the right space to find it. It might not be worth it; but I definitely want to have DW objects that affect the overall game somehow and this seems like an obvious way to do it.

[dd149]

I will try to post some of the missions for reference, but they have been developped for RA due to database issues. Will try to do it during this week.
The pre briefing is on the forum some days before due date, and the map only is known, with the baseline of the scenario.
Usually the game lasts around 3 hours with around 6-8 players.

[Molon Labe]

It's just one game?

[sertore]

It's just one game?
Hello ML and dd149,
just a quick from Italian side: we play weekly in a close group of 5/12 commanders, every time with a new scenario, usually two sides, with different mission goals and lots of civilians and biological, sometimes few sides on AI. Due to the huge number of contacts we play with automatic TMA and active intercept. Current MOD is RA 1.32, but we can play with any other MOD if necessary.
Italian and french communities have a join venture active with ISS (International Sonar School), where they exchange 1 commander to get experience and information from other group: french community play usually with manual TMA and different type of scenario, usually doggy.
Briefing and rules to play the scenarios are pretty the same, with few different ROE in case of doggy on french side (limited number of weapons used in the same time, dd149 correct me if I am wrong); italian games keep usually no more than 2-2,30 hours.
Simmetrical set of island is an interesting scenario to develop a campaign: keep you work up and we will see if will be possible to participate with some of our players (time issue is relevant for us).
Thanks for effort and good idea (and LWAMI 3.11 for sure!)

[Molon Labe]

A few ideas to throw out for comments:

1. Aircraft use
Close Air support: Adding a strike aircraft/helicopter to a land battle will increase that side's attacking strength (numbers TBD). Aircraft may not perform CAS if the enemy forces have tactical or area-defense SAMs.

Naval Strike: Strike aircraft can attack naval forces in a DW match. The mission would be designed either to have the aircraft perform a stand-off attack, or to persist on the map (and risk being shot down); players' preference.

CAP/Escort: CAP is a defense assignment that denies airspace to enemy aircraft. Each fighter on CAP can deny one standoff naval attack (fighter's choice) or all CAS or persistent naval strike aircraft. Escort is an offensive assignment that nullifies CAP; each escorting fighter can nullify the effect of a CAP fighter (escort's choice). CAP declares first, allowing the Escorts to more or less choose which aircraft they are protecting. Fighter/Bombers can perform the Escort role if they abandon their CAS/Strike mission. The way this works in the end is if you have more attacking aircraft than the enemy has defending, you get "leakers" through. Optional: attrition for fighter battles

Airports:
Aircraft Housed: If the airport is damaged, then the % damage done to the airport is also the % chance that each individual aircraft was destroyed. If any aircraft was sortied in that turn, then there is a 25% chance that it was away when the airport was hit and is not eligible to be destroyed--but it may have to land somewhere else. Optional: individual target-able hangar entities, each with a chance of housing an aircraft; overflow does to the tarmac, where they have double the vulnerability described above.

Runway plates: each runway will have 5 runway "plates", represented by helipads. The location of the plates will be automatically known in a DW match. A plate damaged to 75% or more is considered cratered. To launch/recover, all plates must be in working order. Two cratered plates can be patched per turn (starting the turn after the attack).

2. Special Warfare
Sabotage: A SPECOPS team inserted into enemy territory can sabotage a target located within 30nmi of their point of insertion. If the target is a production site, dock, or shipyard, its productivity is cut in half. It can be attacked again, but cannot go below 0%. Repairs will restore 10% per day. If the target is an airport, then the team can destroy two aircraft. If the target is a military unit, then the team can destroy up to two units located within 2nmi of each other (or one SAM site entity that represents multiple units). Finally, if the targets are ships at dock, the team can either sabotage their propulsion or can attach charges. Sabotage can target two ships if their database displacement is 10,000 tons or less. SPECOPS units remain eligible to attack normally within a DW match.

Recon: Although there aren't any "secret" deployments in this campaign, knowing something is there doesn't mean it's targetable in DW. Recon makes the location of a target appear in a DW match.
Short range: 100% chance of locating any target within 8nmi of insertion point or last point of action.
Medium range: 50% chance of locating any target within 15nmi of insertion point or last point of action.
Maximum range: 25% chance of locating any target within 30nmi of insertion point or last point of action.
Move-search: 100% chance of locating any target within 5nmi of a point within 15nmi of the insertion point or last point of action.

Defense/Capture: Ground forces not currently engaged in fighting off an invasion can protect facilities. I haven't worked out the numbers yet, but depending on the size of the facility being protected, a certain number of soldiers are needed to protect it. Protected facilities cannot be sabotaged, but can still be recon'ed. Optional: partially protected facilities that have a % change of success vs % chance of capture. Optional: ground forces assigned to hunt SPECOPS teams.

Deployment/Recovery:
Deployment and recovery must be within 40nmi of the intended landing/departure site. The actual position the raft goes ashore is considered the Insertion Point for future SPECOPS missions, and should be within 30nmi of the intended target. The departure site chosen by the recovering side and must be within 30nmi of the last point of action. Mission design for recovery may require recusal of the GM to keep the launch/extraction points unknown to prevent camping. Multiple random launch/extraction pairs can also be created, with a radio message sent to the launching submarine at mission start. Recovery trigger criteria will be according to standard SCS recovery missions... probably .25nmi, <2 knots, etc, 5 minutes, periscope depth, etc. (Should the raft be allowed to Link for this?)

[Molon Labe]

Units!

Updated with preliminary prices (researched/estimated with FY2010 USD, revisions to these numbers for scaled capability are likey)

Right now, my thinking is that each side will start with a set OOB, plus some spending money available to customize part of their starting forces. And you'll be able to purchase more units along the way as you earn income. But that means I need to figure out what is going to be in the campaign and how much they cost. This is going to be the hardest part for me, just because the DB is so huge. So I'd like to share what I think should be in the game. What I'd like to know from everyone else is if there is something missing from that list that they think should be on it. Another issue is how much I should take realism into account in this. If possible, I'd like to keep the unit list to vessels that are part of the international arms market, so to speak--platforms that have been exported. But if there is an 'exclusive' platform out there that brings something important to the game, then I think we can give it a pass.

Carrier
Viraat CV $1400M

Air Defense Ships
Burke DDG $1200M
Burke IIA DDG $900M
Luyang II DDG $800M
Hercules DDG $425M
Type 42 DDG $400M

Major Surface Combattants and ASW Corvettes
Sovremenny Improved DDG $900M
Krivak IV (Talwar) FFG $430M
Freedom LCS $400M
Sovremenny DDG $420M
Rajput DDG $300M
La Fayette FF $300M (Singapore or Saudi version)
Perry FFG $300M
Jiangkai II FFG $300M
Jiangkai I FF $250M
Halifax FFH $250
Brahmaputra FF $225
Asagiri DD $225M
Karel Doorman FF $200M
Steregushcy FSG $200M
F-22P (Jiangwei) FFG $175M
Broadsword FF $150
Knox FF $120M
Descubierta FFL $100
Koni FFL $80
Grisha V FFL $80



Missile Corvettes and FACs
Saar 4.5 FSG $150M
Nanuchka II (upgraded) $150M
Tarantul V (Switchblade) $135M
Houbei FAC $125M
Tarantul III (Sunburn) $125M
Skjold $125M
Nanuchka III $110M
Saar 4 $110M
Gumdoksuri $100M
Nanuchka II $100M
Kaman (mod) $100M
La Combatante $90M
Veer $75M
Warrior $70M
Hudong (C-802) $60M
Osa II/Huangfeng (Styx) $40M
Buyan FFL $40M
C-14 China Cat $25M
IPS-16 Peykaap $20M
MkIII PB $4M
IRGC Speedboat $3M
Zhuk PC $2M
SeaArk Dauntless $1M

Mine Warfare
Natya MSO $80M
Osprey MHC $50M
Iran Ajr LST $40M
Sawari PC $2M
*Frieghter and Grisha also have minelaying capabilities.

Amphibs
Hengam LST $100M
Newport $150M
Whidbey Island $400M
Ivan Rogov $400M
LCAC $40M
LCVP/LCM-6 $2M

Submarines
Seawolf $2.8B
Los Angeles (I) $1.5B
Akula II $850M
Akula I (I) $800M
Lada $450
Kilo Improved $350M
Kilo $260M
Sang-O Improved $50M
Ghadir $18M

Maritime Patrol/Surveillance
E-2C Hawkeye $300M
Saab 2000 AEW/R-99/etc. (Erieye) -$250M
P-3 $70M
CN-295 Persuader $35M
F27 Maritime Enforcer $35M
CN-235 ASW $30M
Ka-31 AEW $30M
CN-235 MPA $25M
F17 Maritime $15M
Fire Scout VTUAV $5M

Fighter/Attack/Bomber
Su-30 (India) -Kh-31 $53M (F/A)
Su-34 -Afla $50M (F/A)
F/A-18 (US) -Harpoon $50M (F/A)
MiG-29 $28M (F/A)
Jaguar (France) -Exocet $26M (A)
F-16 (US or Norwegian) -Mavs and Penguin $24M (F/A)
AMX (Italy) - Exocet $18M (A, subsonic)
F-4E (Turkey) -Have Nap $17M (F/A)
BAE Hawk $10M (A, subsonic)

Helicopters
MH-60R $50M
ASH-3 Sea King $40M
Sea King MK42/CH-124 $35M
SH-60B/S-70 $25M
SuperLynx $32M
Lynx HAS-3 $30M
Z-9 Haitun $20M
AH-64 Apache $20M
Ka-27/28 Helix $20M
Mi-28 Havoc $18M
Ka-50/52 Black Shark $18M
AS 565 Panther $15M
AH-1W Supercobra $15M
SA-319 Chetak $15M
Mi-24 Hind $14M
CH-46 Sea Knight $12M
Ka-60 Kasatka $10M


Land Based
Patriot $1100M (includes 4 launchers and a radar)
BAL-E (SS-N-25) $185M
BrahMos Battery $180M
SS-N-27 Shipping Container $165M
S-300PMU2 $125M (includes separate search radar)
S-300PMU1 $115M (includes separate search radar)
Moskit Battery $85M
C-802 Battery $75M
S-300 $65M (includes separate search radar)
SA-11 Site $60M
SSC-3 Rubez (SS-N-2) $35M
SA-2 $30M (includes separate search radar)
Tor-M1 (SA-15) $25M
MM38 Battery $25M
SSC-1 Sepal $25M
HY-2 Battery $15M
155mm Artillery $3

Merchants
Cargo $30M
Freighter $20M
LNG Carrier $80M
Oil Tanker $100M
Supertanker $120M
Armed/modified Fishing/Trawler/Dhow $1M



What else should be on that list, and why?

[Molon Labe]

Another idea to put out there...

I don't want to do loadout accounting like in the GDT. But as I think about the units involved and the costs of them, I would want there to be a penalty for shooting missiles in massive amounts all the time because "they're free."

So I was thinking that any missile or torpedo fired could be noted on the replay and the "reload costs" would be charged to that side, which would count against their income for that turn. Tedious, but might be worth it.

[TLAM Strike]

What else should be on that list, and why?

Platforms that are tailored for export:
LCS and its embarked units.
F-35

BTW is mine warfare going to be part of this, if yea then we need some Mine Warfare platforms like the Osprey and Sandown. The LCS also adds a MIW component too.

What about the Super Tucano? Its a nice little light strike aircraft. Also the BAE Hawk comes to mind.

[Molon Labe]

I'd like to have MIW but I haven't figured out how it would work yet. Any ideas?

The problem with adding 5th-gen fighters or ultra-light attack is variance in capability. Since fighters are just going to cancel out and CAS is just going to have an impact per sortie, it's easier to have aircraft in a narrower band of capability. Unless we want to add a layer of complexity, anyways, and start rating capabilities of various aircraft.

[Molon Labe]

About LCS... This is going to be a difficult ship to factor in.

At a price tag of over $600 million, you could buy a Sovremenny instead and have $200 left over to add a Steregushcy for good measure. If I priced it according to fighting capability, it would probably be under $200 million, so the cost would have to be "tweaked" to less than 1/3rd actual cost!

I'm trying to think up ways to make up for that gap. One thing is that we still have the Netfires version in DW (cancelled in real life), which means it could in theory shred small coastal targets. That's an in-game capability with value and it can be considered a fire support platform if fighting on land is close enough to shore (so having one around can be like having air support).

There might also be ways for it to use its cargo space. Maybe it can deploy a certain number of 34-footers? But how many, and what good would those boats be in an offensive situation? Maybe it can transport troops like an amphib, but how many?

Are these capabilities enough to make a player want to have it?

[TLAM Strike]

Another idea to put out there...

I don't want to do loadout accounting like in the GDT. But as I think about the units involved and the costs of them, I would want there to be a penalty for shooting missiles in massive amounts all the time because "they're free."

So I was thinking that any missile or torpedo fired could be noted on the replay and the "reload costs" would be charged to that side, which would count against their income for that turn. Tedious, but might be worth it. What about each player sends a screen shot of their weapons load out screen before and after? I love the idea of weapons for cost. Maybe some AI weapons like Mines could be bought?

About LCS... This is going to be a difficult ship to factor in.

At a price tag of over $600 million, you could buy a Sovremenny instead and have $200 left over to add a Steregushcy for good measure. If I priced it according to fighting capability, it would probably be under $200 million, so the cost would have to be "tweaked" to less than 1/3rd actual cost!

I'm trying to think up ways to make up for that gap. One thing is that we still have the Netfires version in DW (cancelled in real life), which means it could in theory shred small coastal targets. That's an in-game capability with value and it can be considered a fire support platform if fighting on land is close enough to shore (so having one around can be like having air support).

There might also be ways for it to use its cargo space. Maybe it can deploy a certain number of 34-footers? But how many, and what good would those boats be in an offensive situation? Maybe it can transport troops like an amphib, but how many?

Are these capabilities enough to make a player want to have it? I say nerf the LCS cost and maybe add that Russian LCS type boat the Buran (or whatever its called) corvette, it has a fire support function with its MLRS.

Maybe 34 footers could be for transporting SOF teams or have anti-SOF team abilities. Like higher probability of detection on insertion if they are around.

Do we have a coastal 802 launcher in the DB? If so we should have that, since its a "real world" threat and all.

[Molon Labe]

What about each player sends a screen shot of their weapons load out screen before and after? I love the idea of weapons for cost. Maybe some AI weapons like Mines could be bought?
Eh, I think the replay is easier. I could be wrong, but I think there's even a keystroke combination to show the type of weapons on the screen (probably show tags or something on the DW right click menus). The #1 reason to do this is that all of these islands are within TLAM range of each other, which means every base is going to get spammed every turn.


I say nerf the LCS cost and maybe add that Russian LCS type boat the Buran (or whatever its called) corvette, it has a fire support function with its MLRS.
I'm thinking a nerf to 300-400M will probably do the trick, combined with allowing LCS to be a logistic enabler of some sort. Buyan FFL's BM-21 type rockets only go out to 20km. Hmmm, come to think of it, that's still a great idea. It would be limited to providing support to troops "on the beach," but that still has value. I'll add it.


Maybe 34 footers could be for transporting SOF teams or have anti-SOF team abilities. Like higher probability of detection on insertion if they are around.
Any warship can drop a rubber specops raft for all I care. The 34 footers, in a DW game, probably are the best craft for stopping specops rafts. I haven't thought of any applicable rules that are outside of a DW match for while the team is offshore.


Do we have a coastal 802 launcher in the DB? If so we should have that, since its a "real world" threat and all.
Yes, but it uses the stock SSM model. Kind of lame. If only someone would make us a model. :hmmm:

[Imamar]

Molon, that sounds really cool and professional! :up:

I am wondering is this going to be easy for players like me, who doesnt really know much about mission editing, to play this campaign? :hmmm:

[Molon Labe]

Molon, that sounds really cool and professional! :up:

I am wondering is this going to be easy for players like me, who doesnt really know much about mission editing, to play this campaign? :hmmm:

TLAM and I are going to take care of the mission editing. Players just need to play and occasionally discus strategy.

[Molon Labe]

I have a little bit of a backstory for this campaign. If you didn't recognize the islands in the map I posted, they are none other than the Solomon Islands of WWII fame (I didn't recognize them at first either, so if you didn't, don't feel too bad).

In the fictional world of this war, huge oil, natural gas, and mineral deposits are found on and around the islands, turning the small country into a regional economic powerhouse. The island of Bougainville (the furthest Northwest on the map), previously an autonomous region of Papua New Guinea, pulled a Texas, becoming independent of PNG and becoming a member of the Solomons. To protect themselves and their new riches, the Solomons built up a powerful Navy.

In spite of their new-found economic prosperity, the political climate degenerated into a revolution. The old guard and rebel sides both claim legitimacy over the entire republic, and half the military has defected to the rebel side. At the current time, each faction controls one island, and are gearing up to control all of them. The factions have nationalized the commercial capital of their islands and will continue to do so as they proceed, using the revenues gained to support their military expansion. Much of the economy, however, remains sustenance fishing, which will not be nationalized (and therefore, fishing activity in all cases represents the innocent countrymen of both sides... and they cannot simply stop fishing during hostilities because it is their lifeblood). A draft is in effect, however the more people are drafted, the less people are available to run commercial industy, and the people who are left behind are less happy to be working in service of a regime that has pressed their family and friends into a war they don't support.

[Imamar]

TLAM and I are going to take care of the mission editing. Players just need to play and occasionally discus strategy.

Ok, very kind of you sir. Thanks! :salute:

[sertore]

TLAM and I are going to take care of the mission editing. Players just need to play and occasionally discus strategy.
As far as I understood, the game will be played by group of players joined in different factions: I suggest a strong collaboration among Admirals of different groups and the editor, as the firsts should choose how, when and where use their units.

Another question: will any commander dedicated just to one unit (to be change in case of kill), or do you plan to have a pool of players to distribute on the units present game by game?

[Molon Labe]

As far as I understood, the game will be played by group of players joined in different factions: I suggest a strong collaboration among Admirals of different groups and the editor, as the firsts should choose how, when and where use their units.
That's the plan. I just meant that players wouldn't have to build the missions themselves. We will have a LOT of questions in the mission design process.


Another question: will any commander dedicated just to one unit (to be change in case of kill), or do you plan to have a pool of players to distribute on the units present game by game?
Just pool them. Within a team, though, if they want to assign a platform to someone, that's just fine. The problem with a rigid platform assignment is that it's hard enough to get players together no matter what kind of DW you're playing.

[Molon Labe]

As far as I understood, the game will be played by group of players joined in different factions: I suggest a strong collaboration among Admirals of different groups and the editor, as the firsts should choose how, when and where use their units.

I've already given you the short answer... here is the long one. TLAM and I will be setting up the missions, but according to the following standards and choices made by the players.

These are the steps to setting up an amphibious assault mission. I'd imagine the standards will be more or less the same for other mission types, with some tweaks.

1. Phase 1 declaration: Attacking side declares the attack in their blind order. The order includes all platforms assigned to the mission, orders for any SOF teams on the island, whether any LSDs will be deploying LCACs over-the-horizon or are going in themselves, and whether any platforms will go in ahead of the ARG to sanitize the area and/or if there will be advance pickets more than 10nmi from the gators. The defending side's blind order will include all platforms assigned to defend that island, the (approximate) positioning of any mobile SSM or SAM batteries, and orders for land forces in the area (land forces might be guarding specific installations or hunting SOF teams; if so they will not be available to fight against an invading force).

1A. Minefield order (optional)
If the defending side (or I suppose the attackers too) has placed a minefield around the target island, there is now a 2nd blind order specifying the location of the minefield (coordinate box). The attacking side specifies an intended landing site on the coast in their blind order.

2. Player's Intent and SOF actions: The defending side declares at what range from the coast they intend to intercept the ARG. If advance pickets are being used, they can choose whether to use range to the ARG core or the pickets. The defending side may also now choose to hold some of their forces in reserve, setting up two engagements at different ranges. The attacking side, if they have not already done so in the minefield blind order, declare a point on the coastline where they intend to land.

SPECOPS actions are also resolved at this time (recon missions, sabotage, being hunted by regular platoons, etc.).

***Note: The range to intercept is very important tactically. A large range to intercept also means a large potential starting area for the ARG, which may allow the force to slip by without being engaged. See 4A below. Also, the range choice may be constrained by the map. If the ARG approaches from the direction of a nearby attacking-side-held island, then the max intercept range is half the halfway point between the islands.***


3. Battlefield Prep mission design: If the attacking side sent in forces ahead of the ARG to sanitize the area, and the defending side has intercepting or reserve forces, a DW mission is designed around this action.
3A. Endzones. Intercept and Reserve Endzones are created on the map representing where defending platforms must finish the mission in order to successfully defend the coast. To create the intercept endzone, line is drawn parallel to the coast at a range 30nmi more than the defending side's intended intercept range. (This represents the approximate starting position of the ARG in the intercept mission). A range circle is placed at the landing point with a range equal to the range of the first circle minus 10nmi, minus the range of the longest-range surface-fired ASUW weapon on the side that does NOT have the longest-ranged such weapon. One final range circle is placed with the range of the last, minus 30nmi. These range circles form an arc representing the defender's starting area for the intercept mission--this is the Intercept End Zone. The Reserve End Zone is formed by an arc 30nmi shorter than the 2rd circle and the shoreline.

If the defending side is able to fly aircraft with air-to-surface radar, then the attacking side must declare the actual starting point of the ARG on the intercept circle line. The End Zone's can then be reduced in lateral size such that flanks are about 2 hours at maximum speed from weapons range from the line going from the starting point to the landing point.

3B. Defenders decide where to place their ships, subs, and mobile land units. Ships and subs should be placed such that they can finish the 3 hour mission inside one of the endzones. Dynamic starting positions are allowed. Land installations can be placed anywhere within 2nmi of their designated coordinates (this distance should help prevent the attacking side from taking advantage of the blind order). The locations are set to be automatically revealed if they were successfully recon'ed by SOF teams that turn. Otherwise, they must be discovered in-game to be attacked.

3C. Attackers place their ships and subs. Attackers must place their ships such that any standoff advantage the defender has is maintained by at least 5nmi (they cannot start in missile range if the defender has a longer ranged missile). Subs must be at least 15 minutes from a reasonable estimate of detection range from other subs and at least 30nmi from enemy ships (SSN) or 20nmi (Kilo). Dynamic starting positions are allowed.

3D. Aircraft (see aircraft rules on post 15)
Aircraft assigned to sanitize or defense are placed on the map if they were not nullified by CAP/Escort. Standoff attacks are placed just so that they fire their missiles and get out; they can even be removed by trigger. They can also be spawned by trigger, as long as the triggering event is something the pilot would be aware of. (e.g., the COMSAT entity can be used to create a player-triggered "go-code", representing the player summoning the air strike during the mission). Persistent aircraft (meaning they are not removed after they fire) may also be placed if desired. Persistent aircraft may also be summoned by trigger (e.g., a fighter can be spawned if the other side launches a helicopter). To prevent AI stupidity, a dummy target can be created away from the combat zone to allow an aircraft to dump some of its weapons so that it will not get itself killed later in the mission. Similarly, persistent aircraft can be dismissed by a trigger as well, but the trigger will probably have a timer attached to prevent this from being exploited.

All aircraft must spawn outside of opposing SAM range, and by a comfortable margin to allow for radar detection.

Aircraft that participate in the Battlefield Prep mission may not participate in following missions unless they are carrier/ship-based or are operating from an airfield on the island being attacked, unless the aircraft is an MPA, AWACS, or other high-endurance aircraft. MPAs operating from other locations may not use weapons in multiple battles.

3E. End State
Generally, only platforms that finish this battle inside the Endzones are allowed to participate in the Intercept or Reserve battles. Their starting points for those missions will be within 1 hour travel from where they finished in the Intercept End Zone or 4 hours in the Reserve End Zone. Units judged to be too far away to meaningfully participate in the battles can be declared no factor and not be placed on the next missions.


4. Intercept Mission design
4A. Attacking side's ships are placed at the defender's declared intercept range + 30nmi from shore. The attacking side's lateral placement must be such that the added distance to the declared landing point is no more than 15nmi. Dynamic locations are allowed unless the defending side has airborne radar. If a Battlefield Prep mission was played, then the starting location declared during that mission's designing will be used now, and the ending locations for the platforms involved in that mission will also be used as the starting locations for this mission, allowing for 1 hour of travel. Attacking side's subs may not be placed beyond the halfway point between attacking and defending warships.

4B. Defending ships, subs and mobile land units are placed on the map. If a Battlefield Prep mission was played, then the starting locations must be within 1 hour travel of their ending locations. Defending ships may not be placed so that attacking ships are in range if the attacking ships have longer-ranged weapons (10nmi buffer is acceptable). Defending subs must be placed at least 1 hour from a reasonable intercept range (10nmi) and at least 15 minutes from estimated detection range (for the sub with the greater detection range) from escorting subs. Land units may be placed within 2nmi of their declared coordinates, and are revealed on the map if they have been successfully recon'ed by SOF teams. Dynamic locations are allowed as long as they do not violate the preceding conditions.

4C. Aircraft are placed. The rules are exactly the same as in Battlefield Prep, but aircraft that participated in Battlefield prep cannot participate in this mission unless they had a base to refuel and rearm at (ship, airport) or are a high-endurance aircraft.

4D. Victory conditions
If the ARG's starting point is within 2 hours (max speed of slowest gator) of the landing point, then the attacking side may win by physically driving their LSTs or LCACs onto the beach. The actual landing point need not be the designated point, but may within 25nmi of it. If the battle is further out than 2 hours, then the attacking side may win by advancing their gators toward the intended landing point by a range equal to 2 hours of travel for the slowest gator at max speed.

The attacking side may also win by removing all threat platforms from weapons range of the line from the gators to the landing point. Expended weapons do not count in determining weapons range. For this purpose, threat platforms do NOT include aircraft or surface platforms that do not have 40mm gun or more powerful weapon, or a 57mm gun or more powerful weapon if the gators are escorted by a warship with a 57mm gun or more powerful weapon.

"Winning" in this case means a successful landing. Gators reaching shore or the goal line before the mission ends are successfully landed. If winning occurs by removal of threat platforms, then all gators are successfully landed. Gators that are damaged land troops with strength reduced proportionally to the damage taken by the ship.


5. Reserve Mission Design
If the defending side chose to leave forces in reserve, than one last-ditch battle can be fought to prevent a landing. The mission design criteria are the same as for the intercept, except that this battle is always fought within 2 hours of the coastline (for the slowest gator, or slowest escort if LCACs are being used). Reserve units, as well as units retreating from the Intercept mission towards shore, are allowed to participate for the defending side. Units that participated in a Battlefield Prep mission may be placed 4 hours from their endpoints. Unit placement restrictions may prevent units from being placed between the ARG and shore; this is fine, they can instead attempt to intercept from the flanks.


I know, TL;DR, but the basic idea is there will be plenty of collaboration.

[Molon Labe]

Quick update:

I have updated the unit list. This is getting close to being final, so, if there is something that "should" be on that list, speak up!

For the carrier, I've decided on the Viraat CV over the Clemencau. The Clem only has 20-ton catapults, and the only naval aircraft in DW under that tonnage are the A-4 and S-2. The Harrier is far more capable in DW than the A-4 is, so nothing is gained using the Clem over the Viraat.

TLAM, just for you I've added the Buyan and Hawk. I reconsidered what I said about the Hawk because, other than the A-4 (which I just removed), there wasn't a subsonic attack aircraft without cruise missiles on the list so it's not all that redundant. I had to discount its price to make it work though, that little thing is ridiculously expensive.

Lastly, I've got mission design guidelines drawn up for all the DW match types I could think of that this campaign would produce: Amphibious Warfare, LAM/Standoff ASCM Strikes, Screen Penetration, Battlefield Prep (sanitizing), SPECOPS insertion/extraction, Counter-Carrier, Commerce Raiding, and general search-and-destroy stuff (which would include counter-naval gunfire support or counter-mine clearance, etc.). I have abstracted gameplay elements for Air Warfare, Land Warfare, Special Operations, and Mine Warfare. Is there a situation I've left out anyone can think of?

[Molon Labe]

We're done with all the setup work. It's time to start recruiting. I'm going to start a separate announcement thread so people can tell we're actually doing this.