TGIF: scenario list, discussion, and house rules

[Volcano]

First or second one? I didn't save the second one (forgot to). 

 

For the first one, I have mine where I joined 15 minutes into it (so its missing that part).

 

[TSe419E]

Yes, the second one.  My second AAR is so large it stops on “loading the mission.”

[BlackIce]

Just a quick t(h)ank you for having me at last night's TGIF battles and your patience and support.

I enjoyed both sessions and hope to be back soon.

[Volcano]

Glad you liked it, come back anytime. 😁

[Volcano]

24 MAR 2023:

 

Future Wars-Suslik-4377

Future Wars-Tenrec-4374

(trying this again, the scenarios from MAR 10 but were changed to a different scenario for a reason, we will play both if everyone is up for it)  

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• Draft? Yes.
• Random CO selection? Yes.
• Minimum # players: 6-8 (if we don't have enough then we will do something else)
• Don't forget about the time DST time differences between US and Europe until next week.

NOTES:

• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.

[Volcano]

31 MAR 2023:

 

Brush Fire-Rhino-4379

(trying this again, since it had serious issues a few weeks ago)  

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• Draft? Yes.
• Random CO selection? Yes.
• Minimum # players: 6-8

NOTES:

• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.

[Volcano]

7 APR 2023:

 

Domfessel 2013-4379-FMU

(or something else is lined up, if less people are available)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• Draft? Yes.
• Random CO selection? Yes.
• Minimum # players: 8

NOTES:

• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.

[Volcano]

14 APR 2023:

 

UN Safe Zone-4379-FMU-MAD

(or something else is lined up, if less people are available)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• Draft? Yes.
• Random CO selection? Yes.
• Minimum # players: 12

NOTES:

• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.

[Volcano]

21 APR 2023:

 

Future Wars-Adder-1-4377

(This is a new scenario, Part 1 of 3 mini-campaign/op, where results of one affects the next one. The winner is the winner of the 3rd scenario.)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• Draft? Yes.
• Random CO selection? Yes.
• Minimum # players: 8

NOTES:

• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.

[DK-DDAM]

looking forward to this

[Bond_Villian]

How did this one go?

 

[Volcano]

Pretty good. It's a new thing I wanted to try (linked TGIF missions). It was a fairly even fight, actually, and both sides did well. Some realistic tactics were used (imagine that, when things have value it starts to feel more realistically cautious). 🙂

 

Thanks for all those that played Part 1.

Doing a lot of math here, but here is a summary...

 

Future Wars "Adder" Part 1 of 3:

 

Mission Score:

OPFOR (attacker) - 536

BLUEFOR (defender) - 434

 

Losses, in "strength points":

2 x T-72B1 ERA, 415, 830,
2 x T-72B3 m.2012, 565, 1130,
1 x Tigr-M SpN HMG [MRAP L1], 67, 67,
4 x BMP-2, 160, 640,
Total= 2667

 

2 x Leopard 2A5A1-DK, 765, 1530,
1 x CV9035-DK, 303, 303,
1 x M113G3-DK, 99, 99,
1 x Eagle IV w/HMG RWS [MRAP L0], 160, 160,
1 x Fennek MRAT, 169, 169,
Total= 2261

 

Strength Points for reinforcements, calculated from Part 1:

(So how it works is, points are now calculated based on the results, and those are used to "purchase" permanent reinforcements, and temporary attachments...)

 

OPFOR Strength Points for purchasing reinforcements:

5000 points (attacker)

+1608 points (score x3)

-294 points (# of infantry casualties x3)

     = 6314 points, reinforcements

...additionally, +1000 points (for having higher score) of temporary attachments to be removed after the next scenario

 

BLUEFOR Strength Points for purchasing reinforcements:

3000 points (defender, 60% of attacker amount)

+1302 points (score x3)

-129 points (# of infantry casualties x3)

     = 4173 points, reinforcements

...additionally, +500 points (for having higher score) of temporary attachments to be removed after the next scenario

 

 

NOTE:

-I had to reword the Part 1 scenario briefing, regarding points accumulation, because the description of how this worked was wrong.

 

-Remember that the Mission Score in Part 1 and 2 only matters for the accumulation of strength points for the next mission and determining who gets the majority of temporary attachment points and to get an idea of who has the momentum and how much. The Part 3's score is the final score that determines the winner of the mini-campaign (the other scenarios are setting up the final battle).

 

[DK-DDAM]

indeed thank you lot on the blue team for keeping up with my planning. and holding them off the 3 major points.

next friday will be good again

[Volcano]

28 APR 2023:

 

Future Wars-Adder-2-4379

(Part 2 of 3 mini-campaign/op, where results of one affects the next one. The winner is the winner of the 3rd scenario.)

 

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:

• Draft? No; sides will be the same, new participants will be drafted.
• Random CO selection? No; either will be the same as Mission 1 (if they are willing), or a volunteer on that side will CO instead.
• Minimum # players: 8

NOTES:

• Remember to play within the TGIF House Rules and SB.com Community Rules.

[Colebrook]

On 4/23/2023 at 5:53 PM, DK-DDAM said:

indeed thank you lot on the blue team for keeping up with my planning. and holding them off the 3 major points.

next friday will be good again

You did a good job DK, by the way did you report that bug with the UAV scout?, because i think is a big one.

[Lumituisku]

6 hours ago, Colebrook said:

You did a good job DK, by the way did you report that bug with the UAV scout?, because i think is a big one.

What kind of bug? Did it disappear?  

[Colebrook]

6 hours ago, Lumituisku said:

What kind of bug? Did it disappear?  

No, was like loosing the map view on the infantry unit controlling the UAV, but only after recovering the UAV from the first launch(at the start everything was OK).Anyways DK can explain better what exactly happened.

[Lumituisku]

Just now, Colebrook said:

No, was like loosing the map view on the infantry unit controlling the UAV, but only after recovering the UAV from the first launch(at the start everything was OK).Anyways DK can explain better what exactly happened.

Ah well I have no clue of that. I was curious if it just vanished as that has happened now several times for me (I have though it as because battery or something) but last sunday @Kingtiger had drone vanish too and from his stream I clearly saw that it still had 20 minutes battery left so. That's why I was interested.   Never seen or heard the map view loss before.    Thanks!

[DK-DDAM]

it apparently crashed but kept moving on the map.. ill have to look it up at some point again, to try and replicate

 

[DK-DDAM]

did anyone record it ?

[Volcano]

So I went back and checked, and LOS is required to that drone. I thought I had it also return to base if LOS was lost, but I guess I didn't, and that was an easy mistake, and I fixed that.

 

What likely happened (after looking at the AAR), owner told UAV to fly "home" and jumped to another unit. While flying home, LOS may have been lost and then it just started flying straight. LOS was possibly re-established, but then it was flying on a direct course at that point (not home), then then ended up flying permanently out of LOS.

 

(One thing we probably want to do is have a drone continue carrying out the last instruction when LOS is lost, and if that was to fly home then it does that instead of going totally brain-dead.)

 

I just changed it so that it will RTB when LOS is lost. Always check the drone settings in the Planning Phase on that unit, though, so you know. The point is, 9 out of every 10 issues is that the drone requires LOS, and I think that is what likely happened here (unless of course something more specific is observed).

[Volcano]

Thanks for all those that played Part 2.

Doing a lot of math here, but here is a summary...

 

Future Wars "Adder" Part 2 of 3:

 

Mission Score:

OPFOR (attacker) - 480

BLUEFOR (defender) - 481

YES, BLUEFOR literally won by 1 point! Their 1 point will gain them +500 attachment points to buy attachments, so that is good for them to offset OPFOR's advantage in the previous.

 

Losses, in "strength points":

2 x T-72B1 ERA, 415, 830,
2 x T-72B3 m.2012, 565, 1130,
2 x BMP-2, 160, 320,
1 x TOS-1A, 490, 490,
2 x 2S9 Nona-S, 155, 310,
2 x Mi-24V Hind-E, 411, 822,
4 x BTR-82A, 133, 532,
2 x Typhoon-K 6x6 [MRAP L0], 52, 104,
Total= 4538

 

1 x Leopard 2A5A2-DK, 854, 854,
1 x *APS [1x veh], 150, 150,
1 x M113G4-DK, 194, 194,
1 x M113G3-DK, 99, 99,
1 x M113G3-DK TOW, 152, 152,
2 x Fennek MRAT, 169, 338,
1 x CV9035-DK, 303, 303,
1 x M966 HMMWV, 150, 150,
Total= 2240

 

Strength Points for reinforcements, calculated from Part 2:

(So how it works is, points are now calculated based on the results, and those are used to "purchase" permanent reinforcements, and temporary attachments...)

 

OPFOR Strength Points for purchasing reinforcements:

5000 points (attacker)

     or 4000 points (if BLUEFOR counterattack)

+1440 points (score x3)

-369 points (# of infantry casualties x3)

     = 6071 points, reinforcements (attacking situation) or 5071 (counterattack situation)

...additionally, +500 points (for having lower score) of temporary attachments to be removed after the next scenario

 

BLUEFOR Strength Points for purchasing reinforcements:

3000 points (defender, 60% of attacker amount)

     or 5000 points (if BLUEFOR CO opts for a counterattack situation, which comes with challenges)

+1443 points (score x3)

-105 points (# of infantry casualties x3)

     = 4338 points, reinforcements (defense situation) or 6338 (counterattack situation)

...additionally, +1000 points (for having higher score) of temporary attachments to be removed after the next scenario

 

 

NOTE:

-Seems I made a mistake here and forgot to remove one of the Spike ATGMs from the first mission that was killed, so BLUEFOR had an extra one. I will compensate by giving the option of adding some extra points to OPFOR, or giving back something that was lost in M2 of similar value (it happens, this is complicated, but 99% correct so far isn't bad).

 

-Part 3's score is the final score that determines the winner of the mini-campaign (the other scenarios are setting up the final battle).

 

-Part 3 will have an end condition if too many losses on either side occurs, causing that side to retreat (with a warning when 15% away). Also, Part 3 can be significantly more complicated if the BLUEFOR CO opts for a counterattack situation. Since Part 3 maybe be a bit more complicated, it might take longer to make it, we will see, but worse case scenario we might play it two weeks from now (but I will try to get it done this week).

 

-"Counterattack situation" (think of a few scenarios in the MBT 87 campaign that were like this) is when the defender decides in the last scenario to  make a counterattack instead of defense. There are pros and cons to both, but the counterattack works like this:

• Time limit of scenario increases by +30 min.
• BLUFOR gets more points and will defend with only what they have available (main force + attachments) for ~60 to 100 minutes (random). Later arrival means more bonus points for BLUEFOR's final score and bonus points for OPFOR's final score for early arrival.
• Starting BLUFOR is a holding force, reinforcements are the relief force. Relief force counterattacks to take back lost OBJs, or if arrived early, helps hold existing OBJs.

Future Wars-Adder-2-4379a_15836_042823RYZEN9-39002108.rar

[DK-DDAM]

thx for another great mission on the blue side... lets rock it up on the last mission.. and hope we can hold the russian horde away from the northern terrain of oksbøl..

[Volcano]

Thanks for playing part 3. 

 

BLUEFOR ended up winning the mini-campaign (538 points vs. 369 points).  Seemed to be going pretty well for OPFOR in the last battle, but BLUEFOR was able to turn it around. Good job. 🍻

 

Any sort of campaign (mini or otherwise) can get stressful, but that is what makes them fun. We will try to do something like this every two or three months or so, let's see what happens.

 

 

[DK-DDAM]

Thank you @TSe419E@Colebrook@fidelthefallguy for holding out with me on this final mission... It was an incredible journey through the terrain even if we only did defending this time. Who knows if it'll change next time.. But you guys made it a treat to see how this map could be used..

 

DK