Syria map prep - public scenarios

[Pikey]

Is anyone thinking about how to approach a scenario for the upcoming Syria map for a server?

 

I've been scratching my head on it for two days. I'd rather head back to 1982 but then Hornet, Viper, have huge weapon limits (no aim7 for the Viper) and Jeff was just a twinkle in his mums eye.

 

 

 

Anything modern is COIN/Strike with no Air Combat and complex ROE that means you cannot be accurate and require a fantasy setting.

 

 

Modern Air to Ground is also a bit dull (in my opinion, other will vary), being a fairly permissive environment above manpad altitude. All you will see of combat will be based off a tiny screen. We don't really have great insurgent units without using a mod.

 

 

 

I was considering an alternate timeline Syrian campaign but the thorn in the side is how to work with Russia realistically in a scenario that didnt include WW3. Then the scenario goes from far fetched to silly, and this might feel a bit of a detractor for some.

 

I'd be interested to hear what people are looking forward to on this map. I know I'd be weird and like to try operation Mole Cricket, because that was the largest scale air combat since WW2, probably the most significant single military action that happened in this place.

 

 

If you turned up on a public server hosting Syria... what would you want to do or see?

[shagrat]

COIN, especially with regards to ROE in focus. Strike missions against time sensitive targets. Kill-Box type engagements... close air support with "close", as in danger close, so you need to consider where to put a smart bomb, exactly, so you don't blast your own guys up together with the enemy. Spontaneous tasking against elusive targets, like mortar teams lobbing a couple grenades and hiding again.

Recon of potential hostiles and monitoring for actions allowing to prosecute according to ROE... Enforcing no fly zones, intercept and escort red air to make sure they "bomb" the right guys. Repel incursions into your allies/subjects refugee zones, by a foreign nation to the north... basically all that stuff that happened IRL and some that didn't, but easily could have.

With neutral faction finally back in the mission editor you could script nice "non-combatant" scenarios.

Then there is Lebanon (Beirut), Israel, Syria, the Golan Heights an area perfect for some "near future" scenarios unfolding, with the current tensions between US/Israel and Iran/Syria.

[Pikey]

The major issue I have with a modern Syria Map is the presence of complex ROE and Russia in the air, meaning that either its a hot air war and it's unrealistic, or I put up drones for people to shoot and that's just a training map where they dont shoot back. I don't have a solution other than to ground the RF coalition and somehow just deal with SyAF interdiction and air policing. I don't have a good idea for how to do that yet, since it's not a conventional war. There's a reason ED made two coalitions and fake IFF, it's the only thing that works well in public multiplayer! :)

 

Another problem is, trying to connect COIN/SCAR/CAS missions into a persistent story. I don't want to make a sterile training map, I want to have something that players can come back and say... Oh look ISIL are pushing at the airport in Aleppo, need to provide air support there, and the next day Free Government forces have cleared Aleppo... or not. The old Blue Flag formulae of 'capture the map' doesn't work with this scenario. Humans being objective based, I'd like to make a game for them.

 

The issue with players getting involved in a ground war is that all the units look the same, people will get frustrated and just shoot anything and unless there's pretty good direction from scripting, folks won't feel part of any point and will have 45 minutes of circles looking through their TGP's. There are no real air defences to speak off, no real distinction on wether a T-55 is from the Free Syrian Army, the Government forces or captured by ISIL (or even others).

 

I think what I'm trying to say is that I don't know how to create a persistent game from an Insurgency. Capturing airfields was so much more straight forward.

[shagrat]

Just some thoughts, no more than ideas (not sure can be done or how):

-A city like Aleppo divided into 4 to 6 "Quarters" with 3 to 4 choke points that need to be under control to "hold" that part of the city.

-Spawns/re-spawns of Insurgent groups affiliated with redfor or bluefor in rural areas that need to be eliminated to hold the area, while each eliminated group delays re-spawns, so the more you eliminate the longer you can hold an area.

-The rural areas could have an attached air interdiction zone overhead ( one controlled by red, one by blue) so engaging the respective ground targets makes you a legitimate target, by CAP, yet shooting down planes inside the controlled zone gives you a penalty of some sorts, where as being escorted out of the zone does not? The air to air conflict is tricky...

-Turkey/Syria border could work as a more traditional war zone with Turkey establishing a buffer zone vs Syrian army/local separatists and russian air support.

The Lebanon, Golan heights fictional conflict could work as well in a more conventional scenario... Iran and Syria supporting radical groups in Lebanon (Redfor), Israel and US/NATO trying to defend and seize control over Lebanon/Golan Heights/southern Syria.

[ADHS]

I would suggest to limit the armory. Use boats to deliver suplies

and convoys from the other side. This will arise a protective role

for both sides to protect their suppliers using different roles.

[Baco]

No, really? DCS with maps without assets and assets without maps? Can't be! LOL...

 

Sarcasm Aside, Yeah Modern Sirya is complicated, You could make a Turkey vs Putin scenario where Erdogan kicks the board and Brings the Turik Countries against Russia. While NATO watches from teh sidelines, to avoid WW3...

 

Then again you can always pull another "Intifada" from teh Hat and play with who supports who, directly or indirectly.....

Its a very volatile area and you can have any country on any side, for whatever reasons....

 

Just NOT NATO vs WARSAW or Russia in the clasical way.. maybe a proxy war.. but then again Puting is allready Boots on teh ground deep in Sirya....

[Baco]

of course ME, I am just waiting for teh Mirage III, mig 23, adn other lovely 70s and 80s planes....

[POLARIS1]

Interesting post.

This area invented the word "conflict" in the MW dictionary.

More than that...we have specialized in fighting, all sorts of fighting, for all sorts of reasons, for thousands of years.

We even know how to fight for no apparent reason or to pretend we fight when there are just reasons.

 

You want scenarios?

You don't have to invent anything !

Just open any history book...and I mean any starting from the bible...flip the pages and count to whatever number and stop.

Pick the fight from that page and go fly.

Next time just choose another number ;)

 

Oh.

And we never ever become friends after fights in the region.

We only rest till the next fight comes along.

 

So, please rest assured that one thing is absolute in this theater: its history can give you scenarios that aren't even imaginable, I mean for a normal human being.

[Habu_69]

Scenario: Neutralize all SAM's except manpads (or assume they have been neutralized). As mentioned, deploy small groups of ground forces from both red and blue in close quarters in many separate locations and rely heavily on JTAC/AFAC to avoid blue on blue. High player penalties for TK's. Limit inventory of GPS weapons. JTAC/AFAC could be high value targets for red Syrian side. Syrian mobile command centers are HVT for blue side. For air combat, Iran operates modern jets from some forward operating base just to add to the regional turmoil. Treat Russian aircraft as neutral for ROE purposes and have blue enforce no-fly zones in blue controlled areas. Russia occasionally supplies Syria with strike helos. Perhaps enter the Kurds. They are open season for red side and protected by blue.

 

 

Objective Red: capture a number of strategic geographic areas.

 

Objective Blue: destroy a number of mobile command centers. Protect the Kurds.

[Pikey]

Yeah, I've no issue picking out scenarios to do. What I need is something that works with the DCS engine and has a lasting player persistence they can keep coming back to the server for. The factions and proxy nature make that pretty complex already... ISIL joining the FSA for a push on Govmt forces in east Aleppo - for as long as that lasts before turning on each other. DCS can't keep up with the factions and its very much infantry driven, which is the worst news for pilots at 15,000feet. The other thing about insurgency is that it pops up and down all over the country with no such thing as a clear front line. Conventional warfare makes sense to people, modern warfare... people think they want it, but it's dreary. The Israeli 80's stuff would be much better to simulate and gives a reason to have persistence on the mission/server.

 

SAMs... nah. You have Damascus and Homs and the coast. Government strongholds surrounding the Russian port and airfield. Players always go for them anyway, but the fighting is not there. I'll model them as they are, but the action would be in the ISIL strongholds and where the action is, like Aleppo, the north, Raqaa, Palmyra in the centre. With the exception of an SA3 ISIL captured near Palmyra and theorised SA6's, ISIL don't have anything bar ZSU's, kintetic and manpads. Syrian Air defence is not something Operation Inherent Resolve is touching, it only kills Russians seemingly. They avoid the Russian areas and Government direct attacks (they successfully proxy those) and concentrate only on ISIL. Apart from that cruise missile attack, which was different and isolated.

 

So, (and I have thought this through a LOT) an imagined realistic modern conflict ends up as:

Strike a <oil well/weapons storage/VBIED/fighting position/mortar/tactical vehicle> at grid XYZ.

Long flight, drop a bomb pair, go home.

Oof. I think players wont like that :/ It seems to play out like a training map, lots of disconnected missions all over the map, no SAM's, no multirole, no air contacts, never below 15,000ft MSL.

Dreary? Is that what players want or is it just me? I can randomise that, put scoreboards up but what I really need is a way to make it a game (like some were hinting at, I didnt ignore those posts)

 

Players came back to our server 'RedSands' because the player would actually contribute to an online map, capture things or enable the capture and change the game. That is quite empowering and one of the reasons the BlueFlag formulae has lasted so long.

 

What I need is a "game". A way for players, in this map/scenario, can bring their own strategies ideas and beat the game whilst feeling their contribution is meaningful (unlike real life).

 

I can script pretty much anything I've ever tried to do, but I am at that... planning stage. I considered "Intelligence and reconnaissance" scripts... a way to unveil targets. I considered gaming a humanitarian "score" by how much you protected civilians, delivered food and water via helos, leaflet dropping, searching for C&C elements and using a map to score cities liberation... somehow. But I'm finding this very hard overall to execute and start writing.