Definitely, the air part of this game needs further development. With a well-functioning land base this mission could be very interesting. Remember to turn on the radars in the planes when using radar missiles and keep the radar on the target. Additionally, I think the carrier group should be further from the coast. Thanks for the mission!
Mission designers rarely understand just how far carrier groups tend to be from the coast, usually 300-500nmi, there's a reason why every naval aircraft takes-off with external tanks. A typical F-14 flight would have them fly 500nmi and then come back, maybe hitting an organic tanker on the way, and then landing. The A-6s and A-7s have even more range.
@@OfficialUSKRprogram Yeah but that would be really really boring to watch a group of F-14 fly 500nmi in on direction, fire some missiles and turn around to fly another 500mni just to replenish
regarding the issue of only the formation leader attacking: one of the buttons on the bottom right opens a window that lists all your assets, sorted by groups/flights/squadrons/etc. I believe I've seen in someone else's video, they used that window to select the entire fight of strike aircraft and issues the attack order to all at once. Not sure when or where I've seen that - has been a couple days already (and I'm watching Sea Power videos non-stop for a couple weeks, I think...😵) Not sure if that actually helps but worth a try, I guess!
Mission idea: Battle of the Atlantic Cold War. Over a series of missions escort a convoy across the Atlantic while dealing with soviet submarines and surface vessels. Convoy escort is a maximum of 4 ships, 1 destroyer, and 3 frigates of your choosing. Convoy is a minimum of 10 ships must include tankers as well as transport. For additional support, add a carrier battle group to the south of your position. As well P-3 support should be available when within their range from land. At least 1 enemy surface ship must spawn per battle in addition to submarines. However, make the numbers of enemies spawning as random as possible. The first mission you start off the coast of Nova Scotia and make your way towards Europe. You can choose the end point for each mission, and that will be your start point for the next. Or if it's easier, just one long mission split into separate videos. However, you want to set it up. Success is getting any supplies to Europe. Failure is the loss of the convoy. This would be equally exciting from either side, so playing as the soviets next would be great.
Seems to me the Tac AI {individual ship} is good. Strat AI {Task Force command} is lacking. I've watched a lot of gameplays. the human player wins 99% of the time. That being said, cannot wait to play this game!
Was about to comment something similar. The individual decision-making of the ships is pretty good, what is lacking is a supervisory entity that can remember threats and conditions and formulate responses which it may hand down to the individual units. Without it, the AI will not be able to enagage in efficient Naval Air or ASW Operations, as those two aspects heavily rely on being able to corraborate information. To give a possible example, the AI should be able to launch Interceptors to identify Air Contacs or redirect an ASW Patrol plane to track and ID a submerged contact, even if those respective entities do not have a Local Track for the intended Target.
I guess they'll have to make some logic for the AI to just dump out *all* of an airbase's assets if it feels as though it's under attack, perhaps with some built in delays for 'readyness' and pre flight checks/startup depending on how they're set up, then they just give them a generic 'protect base' to the fighters and 'attack hostile' to everything else. That'd be a good short term solution, of course ideally long term the AI commander should be able to 'think' about what flights it wants based on the information it's collected on your forces, but that's a pretty complex problem to solve so I'd understand if it took time
Most TV guided missiles have some kind of automatic target tracking system built in, usually based on finding contrast in the image. The operator on the hosting platform has to designate the target, but once that's done the missile is able to guide itself without help. The AGM-65 Maverick works this way, and has to have the target designated prior to launch. Because you can't see far enough to designate the target this way for longer ranged missiles, they send a TV signal back to the host aircraft - the operator then has to manually guide the missile until the target is visible on the TV link, then designate it. After that they can disconnect and the missile will guide itself.
I was just thinking that it was a suspicious coincidence that Stealth drops a video about communists attacking Alaska shortly after the t minus 53rd anniversary of the Great War a couple days ago
Scenario suggestion: A large wolfpack like attack of Romeo and Foxtrott subs against a protected Nato convoy. Maybe throw in one ore two Echo-2s, which need to be surfaced to launch their guided "missles". So basicly a typical misson for second-grade Subs.
Well....hopefully we can get MiG-29'naval versions sooner or later on this carrier class. Or a loadout option in the scenario builder. Half way in the video - hope those KO-45's are doing well soon. PS: Also, this game needs fuel gauges so to say, for the planes and non-nuclear vessels. Where you can read your jet loiter time? To be possible set up in scenarios too, for more challenging stuff.
Naval MiG-29s were only developed in the late 80s (first flight 88) but there were only ever two prototypes because the russian navy in the 90s prefered the Su-27K (which became the Su-33). Of course the Soviets actually never built the Orel in reality so it's a fine 'what if' scenario, though even as a hypothetical they couldn't get MiG-29Ks until the early 90s if you want any sense of realism- IRL they were only made in any numbers after the program was restarted in 2005 and only in service as of 2010 but a lot of this is due to economic/political issues so if you're simulating a 'what if' for a stronger/resurgent soviet union then it works fine into the 90s I think
Maybe reexamine the starting ranges. Things seem to start too close, especially for carrier operations. You barely have time to get your AEW up and away and no time to set up a BARCAP. A CVBG would be sailing into a battle zone with these assets already in place. If you spaced the enemy further away, it may mean some time compression to meet the enemy, but it will mean that you have the time needed to arrange your assets first.
Stable 67 is the latest. I recorded this last week. I prerecord and schedule my content a week ahead generally so you'll see some lag in versions compared to creators who create an immediately publish
@@Stealth17Gaming Yup my mistake, it is #67.. went back and watched the video… I’m assuming it takes a while to build out the scenarios the way you do, great work can’t wait for more.
Between completely negating AEGIS, and causing those Harpoons to go dumb. I think I underestimated how strong ECM was in this game... and I thought it was completely broken before this mini-series.
@@renato892-j4i I mean, it's probably the only way for NATO to consistently hit Soviet fleets with high subsonic weapons. In many of the videos the Soviets still had the ability to respond, here the NATO fleet couldn't do anything despite detecting the missiles earlier.
It should be noted that the Soviet Orel class carrier and the aircraft in it's airwing are fictional although based off a real program that was cancelled.
In the launch aircraft menu, there should be a way to tell the planes an initial altitude and heading. That way you don’t get a bunch of planes loitering at minimum altitude around your carrier. I assume in the real world, planes have a mission before they launch in most cases.
24:25 You told that Korshun to leave formation. It was the first one you tried to tell to attack a Pegasus, but you told it to go to the Pegasus, not to attack it. *shrugs* Some bugs, some user error. :D Love your content, though.
I'm starting to get "Task Force" vibes from this game. "Task Force" was an early 80s board game that grossly over estimated the Soviets while not just underestimating NATO but made carriers near useless. Seriously, helos were so much the key to the game that the old Moscow helo carrier was far more useful than a Nimitz.
Older IR missiles would likely be unable to lock onto sea skimmers, *espetially* soviet IR missiles as their seekers are inferior to US equivilent seekers due to the different sensor choices and difference in cooling making the soviets seekers less sensitive (but able to be 'always ready' and not need coolant). You probably have to get well into 90s era missiles to be able to have that possibility work reliably. US sidewinders as of the mid 80s so arround the AIM-9J/L or so (guess work) *may* be able to lock onto soviet antiship missiles if they had the chance to- they are so much larger than US sea skimmers and have a gigantic heat signature as a result of that + the speed heating them so much but then you also have to account for the pilot being able to get a lock which would be very challenging so perhaps for very skilled pilots (the game does have skill levels for pilots iirc) they're 'allowed' to at least try it
I'd love to see a recreation of the scenario "A Splendid Little War" from Harpoon Classic 95. It's in the first MEDC Battleset. I doubt if the game will have the right nationalities for it, but you can always just substitute them.
Just at the point where your ships fired at the fast-attack craft because the status was weapons free, and you designated the contacts as hostile. I'd like to see a setting where you could set the status for Air-defense weapons, surface attack and anti-submarine weapons separately. Also, those AS-13s missed because they are TV guided and you turned away after launch. I think you need to leave the launch aircraft alone so they can guide the weapons
I'd like planes to get that ECM style cone for quick attacking. Could tell flight lead to engage anything in a set area then the game sees say 4 planes and 4 of your fighters fire a single missile at it. Maybe a little less overkill than weapons free seems to be. Or really anything to make air fights less mirco heavy. And custom airbases would be nice down the road. Far as plane loadout.
True for semiactive, but why would that apply to TV guidance? The camera is in the missile's nose. As long as the datalink is in range it should work, the airplane should be able to stay back, that's the point of a precision standoff weapon.
Technically, I think that they are trying to destroyed the runways so planes cannot take off which would effectively neutralize the airbase. If you want complete destruction you might need something else. I think the Russian equivalent of the B-52 would be something that would decimate the air base. The fact the the air base *_is not_* defended by AA guns or SAMs is bad.
So, it looks like you were shooting the heat seekers at the A6s, and they decoyed and hit your planes, as the log says your fighters were shot down by AA-7Ds. It sounds reasonable. I guess that's the problem with sending them 'Weapons Free'
@4:43: Flogger doing 151 knots @ 37k feet ASL? dafuq, he should be falling out of the sky @23:15: AWACS doing 75 knots @ 15K lmao crew must be high on helium
Was the formation manager already available in #63? That seems to be very useful to pick single fighters from a formation and assign their targets without click on each of them from the map.
One thing I noticed about the Orel. She can't launch and recover at the same time. But I know US super carriers can do that. Can US carriers launch and recover at the same time in the game?
Ask the Devs if the R-60 Aphids on the Floggers are rear aspect only models or later model all aspect. Launch your EW aircraft early Jamming the F-15 radars as well as the ships. I would have launched with the AWAC. Use the Kirov to take out the F-15s not the migs. If the F-15s are RTB then use the Migs. Scenario really needs EC-130H and/or EF-111s Flying from Anchorage, not to mention ELINT and other recon assets. I would have like to have seen a larger Soviet TF including an Oiler and Ammunition support ship. But the again i would have liked a USN Carrier group south of Soviet TF (A Midway or CV-14 or other SCB125 upgrade).😁
I really think you should have included a slava class or kara class instead of the kirov, for air defence purposes, as the carrier has almost the same number of missiles as kirov, and also strike craft, but you lacked MRAD.
I think the inability for the computer to coordinate its units and mount an effective defense really speaks for the need for multiplayer support. I know part of it is that the airbase support isn't complete yet, but even when it is done, I doubt it is going to have the ingenuity that a human player would have.
I know right? i was shocked when i learned there was no multiplayer support. I thought "damn, they better make sure their AI is top notch otherwise its gonna get boring real quick" but alas, it seems the game needs much more dev time
@@RandallRoman multiplayer is infinitely harder if the game isn’t designed for it from the start. They’ve made a ton of work for themselves if they decide to do mp
The absurdity of the notion that the USSR navy ever stood a chance of defeating a similar US force in this scenario is laffable. But then again anything can happen in war. Just like an imaginary Russian aircraft carrier. After all it's just a game
if the airbase ai and SAM defences were working, i doubt a single bomb would even have hit the airfield. Game still seems rather early in dev im afriad
With the in-game Harpoons flying at just 21 ft, how come the Russian naval SAMs are able to engage them? None of the systems in the scenario (Gecko, Gauntlet, Gadfly, Grizzly, Grumble) should be able to engage at that low of an altitude. Or is the game not modeling minimum altitude engagement specifications?
I dont remember the source, but i do remember reading the naval variants had modifications to allow this. the soviets werent stupid, they knew what missiles would be coming at them. Also the ocean is very good at absorbing radar emmisions. It should be very easy for any radar platform to shoot at a low target as there is essentially no ground reflections coming back from the water
@@catfunt5583 None of the variants from open source information for those particular SAMs of that time period show minimum engagement altitudes as low as 21 ft, you'ld need to jump forward in time to the availability of the Russian Redut system to be able to engage at that low of an altitude. Secondly, water is good at absorbing RF radiation _once_ the RF wave is propagating inside the water, but at the boundary layer, meaning the RF wave is propagating in air and then impinges on the sea surface you get RF back-scattering leading to what is termed as radar sea clutter. It is this RF clutter which the system has to be designed to deal with in order to handle low altitude engagements.
@@catfunt5583 Another interesting in-game info as seen from other YT videos is that the Harpoon and Penguin AShM are always shown as flying at 21 ft altitude. It doesn't appear that the game is modelling the actual flight profiles of the real world weapons. So it might turn out that the game also doesn't model minimum engagement altitudes for SAM systems.
@@xenoaltrax485 interesting. Thanks for the correction. Maybe it’s a gameplay choice. Would be pretty un fun if harpoons were a guaranteed hit every time just because they could fly so low. I still find it hard to believe the soviets wouldn’t know what targets the radars would be up against. Compared to a ground radar, a sea radar is definitely going to frequently engaging low flying targets. But I suppose it’s all classified and we will never really know.
@@catfunt5583 On the missilery info website there's a diagram of the older version Harpoon flight profile which shows that most of it's flight profile is at around 50 ft which can be engaged by the older Soviet SAM systems. So at least in the real world, the Soviet systems were matched to the threats of the time, and when the threats evolved to very low level sea skimming profiles, the Russian systems evolved to match, like the Redut system.
Yeah the airbases not working isn't a good thing... as to an idea how about the Soviets have closed the Straits of Hormuz in say 1982 the Soviets have taken Iran after the fall of the Shah and are now attempting to blockade the straits and the USN has to push it's way through... so a SAG Iowa class backed by a CV against small fast attack craft backed up by Soviet heavies and land based air power...
Aircraft act like crackheads. They need to fix the dumb behaviors and ignoring commands before release. Fix it BEFORE release or the purists like us will bash the shit out or Microprose...
The only part about this mission. If Russia and NATO were at war with each other, that fleet would have been taken out long before it every got near Alaska. Would have been picked up on satellite, and hammered with B-52s armed with Harpoons & AGM 86 conventional cruise missiles escorted by F-15s, and would be nothing that fleet could do about it.
