Command: Modern Operations

Command: Modern Operations

Not enough ratings
Air Sea Battle 2027
   
Award
Favorite
Favorited
Unfavorite
Tags: Scenario
File Size
Posted
Updated
1.838 MB
9 Aug @ 2:57pm
13 Aug @ 10:46am
6 Change Notes ( view )

Subscribe to download
Air Sea Battle 2027

Description
This is a remake of the scenario "Air Sea Battle" from the Chains of War DLC, in which the US aims to move two CVBGs from the Java Sea to the Bohol Sea, whilst attacking Chinese facilities and assets stationed in and around the Spratly and Paracel island chains.


Some additions/changes include:

- GPS and communications jamming

- Delayed satellite communications: Information gathered by LEO satellites will only be displayed when the satellite comes within a certain radius of a ground station, whilst HEO/GEO satellites release their information in 5 minute bursts every 30 minutes. This is for both the US and Chinese sides.

- Unmanned Underwater Vehicles: UUVs are present on both the US and Chinese sides.

- Much higher threat environment: The player will have to contend with an advanced, layered, air defence, as well as numerous other, more "offensive", threats ranging from the PL-15 and PL-17 air-to-air missiles to the DF-26 and YJ-21 anti-ship ballistic missiles.

- Tweaks to existing units and missions (on the Chinese side) as well as many additions by myself to the AI missions and behaviour.

Note:

Due to the length (6 days) and complexity of the scenario I have only been able to playtest it a limited number of times. Frequently I would have to cut short testing the scenario in order to make needed changes, and then replay from the start. Please let me know if there are any issues and they will be quickly addressed.
8 Comments
Exorcisto 17 Sep @ 3:26am 
@oiajz Thanks for the feedback! If you think so about the bases, then that's a strong argument.
oiajz  [author] 15 Sep @ 8:17am 
@Exorcisto Regarding extra bases, they are not present in the original scenario and at the time I thought that adding additional bases like you suggest would unnecessarily expand the scope of the scenario to something completely different than what was originally intended, which is why I decided on not adding any more. I have also experienced issues with EMCON, but as you say this is something for the developers to address. If you find any other issues please let me know, thanks.
Exorcisto 14 Sep @ 8:55pm 
I would also add military bases in Cambodia, the Philippines, Singapore, since they actually exist there and in case of a conflict the US will definitely use them as airfields for aircraft. It cannot be that they will simply go on such a dangerous expedition and risk their ships by not using these strongholds.
Exorcisto 14 Sep @ 8:48pm 
There are no MQ Stingray tanker aircraft on the aircraft carriers themselves (I added 7 of them myself to each carrier through the editor). But they must be there without fail, since logistics in this mission is very important, so that fighters can be sent far ahead of the carrier strike group. I also noticed a problem with EMCON compliance, but this is a complaint to the developers. The fact is that the ships turn on their radars when ballistic missiles arrive, despite the doctrine, and thus immediately become visible to the Chinese. Can anyone advise on this problem?
oiajz  [author] 31 Aug @ 11:39am 
@dukeofrough I imagine the issue with the UUVs is not specific to this scenario, not sure why they would be totally undetectable though. I am also not sure why the satellites would not work, every time I played they were able to detect both ships and land facilities at different levels of classification. The comms delay should not impact it either, but I will have a look at some point.
dukeofrough 30 Aug @ 8:23pm 
I may be doing something wrong but sensor detection does not seem to work. Unable to detect Chinese UUV's even when using active sensors from close range. Also Sat SAR birds are not detecting anything for either side.
andrewnlarsen 13 Aug @ 8:23am 
Looking forward to this and will keep a close eye on this.
TBLackey 9 Aug @ 9:48pm 
sounds great, loved that scenario, will try it out now