Simple Multiplayer FoF Campaign?
 

Now that we've finished LWAMI 3.11 and I released my China single-player campaign, 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 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:

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

Any news about this?

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

Any news?

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.

Quick update:

This is the roughly symetrical set of islands I found:

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/2...psegment3a.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.

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.

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!)

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?)

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?

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.

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.

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.

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?