Red Storm - The Cold War Gets Hot (scenario development)

[GhostOfDisco]

With my Sobieski scenario somewhat stalled (OK, I know I few things I could do, but for some reason I never get around to them) I've begun to start on a new scenario idea - a NATO vs. Warsaw Pact clash set in the mid 80s, using Curt's Ostfront map. Somewhat loosely based on Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising (well, I am thinking of some events that might allow the AI to quickly conquer Iceland, and raid the Atlantic therafter) I'm hoping for a large clash of military might across the fields of Europe, but no nukes. (Out-of-game explanation: because nukes take all the fun out of the game, making things quite unfair for all sides. In-game explanation: because nobody wants to wipe out the earth. Yeah, that'll do it. :P )

Anyway, just thought I'd start this thread for commentary and development. For a start, here's some of the units I've got (I don't have all the units set out, stats haven't been written up, and I need to finish city placement (plus maybe remove some placeholders someday, or something) but still...)

(Image uploading seems a bit too sluggish tonight, so...)

[McMonkey]

I love that book!

I understand how you have stalled on Sobieski. Sometimes it gets to the point where you are sick of the sight of a scenario and its best to have a rest from it and return with refreshed enthusiasm and energy!

The initial planning stages of a scenario are often the most enjoyable. I must have planned out (fairly loosely) dozens of scenarios over the years.Just a pity I will never have time to make them all. It will be good to try WWIII without the nukes. Good luck with this new project!

[bc1871]

This definitely looks like a fun scenario with a ton of potential. My only comment would be that it would be even more exciting to attempt to include multiple national NATO and Warsaw Pact Infantry Units(rather than relying on the generic grunt for NATO and the Soviet Bloc).

[AGRICOLA]

@Ghost

With my Sobieski scenario somewhat stalled (OK, I know I few things I could do, but for some reason I never get around to them)

IMHO, but for a few minor tweaks, Sobieski is ready to be released. Right now, it is a good scen and fun to play. I see no reason for you to go back and make significant changes.

Please don't fall into the same trap as others have fallen into: get bored/frustrated with making the final touchups and put the scen on the back burner. I've playtested too many excellent scens that were 90+% completed and then were never heard of again.

Make Sobieski your Christmas present to the Civ2 public.

Please!

[GhostOfDisco]

This definitely looks like a fun scenario with a ton of potential. My only comment would be that it would be even more exciting to attempt to include multiple national NATO and Warsaw Pact Infantry Units(rather than relying on the generic grunt for NATO and the Soviet Bloc).

That was my original plan, but given the number of nations involved (21 for just the WARPAC and NATO alliances) meant it took up a lot of unit slots. I thought that those unit slot could be better used for something other than "X country's infantry", so I modified it. Maybe I'll go back to it, or probably try to find some kind of compromise or something. I dunno.

Sobieski as a Christmas present? I like that idea. No promises or anything, but Christmas is about a month away...

[Hans99]

Looks very promising, i see we are advancing in time

Ah and i like the F-14...

[McMonkey]

Creating nation specific Infantry (or any other type of unit) is certainly very aesthetically pleasing but it will limit the amount of space for unit development (technologically) through the scenario. At the end of the day a Bulgarian Motor Rifle Regiment and a Polish one will be trained and equipped in a very similar way, whereas a Regiment of T-55's will be inferior to a Regiment of T-72's. Although the NATO forces have more diverse equipment I would expect that most Infantry units would have similar capabilities (obviously Mechanized units vary more). I kind of wished I had made generic infantry units in 'Rise of the Dictators' to free up space for more space for units to develop along the tech tree. Just a thought.

[Elensar]

Maybe have a few nation specific units if they are distinctive and interesting visually.

For instance, and I'm just using this as an example of the sort of thing - there would be a generic "Royal Guard" unit in a medieval scenario, but the Byzantines would get cataphracts (or Varangians) instead.

That sort of thing with a few unit types would allow for something more interesting than generic NATO Infantry III (as well as the picked example), but without using up dozens of unit slots.

[bc1871]

It's too bad that no one ever got their hands on the source code...then we could have a grand Cold War scenario! Also, "Red Storm Rising" took place in '85 or was it '82?

[GhostOfDisco]

Maybe have a few nation specific units if they are distinctive and interesting visually.

For instance, and I'm just using this as an example of the sort of thing - there would be a generic "Royal Guard" unit in a medieval scenario, but the Byzantines would get cataphracts (or Varangians) instead.

That sort of thing with a few unit types would allow for something more interesting than generic NATO Infantry III (as well as the picked example), but without using up dozens of unit slots.

That sounds like a good idea. I'm wondering what unique units could I have - the French Foreign Legion and the USMC come to mind, as well as the 82nd Airborne, perhaps (though I might have to resort to a generic "Airborne" unit, or two units (one for the West, the other for the East)... I dunno. I'm wondering about the Belasgiari(sp) (you know - the Italians with the funny hats) - I'd like to put them in, but I'm not sure... The SAS also comes to mind, but I'm not sure how much of a role commandos can play in a continent-wide war scenario. But it does give me ideas?

Does anyone know what kind of colorful/unique Cold-War era units I could include here?

[Elensar]

Pity there's only one spy slot. Having commandos as cleverly tweaked spies would be very appropriate. Similarly tweaked diplomats would do in a pinch for the same purpose.

Afraid I can't think of any special/colorful units of the era.

How much are units going to advance? If you have only a couple levels of advancement, there ought to be room for at least a few "special" units.

[McMonkey]

Soviet Naval Infantry springs to mind

If I were making this scenario I would use the documented Tables of Organization as a basis for the units and work from there. If you need any figures I have loads of old books from the 1980's with NATO and WARPAC strengths etc...

Depending on the number of units you want in the scenario you could either go with Division strength units (which would include organic supporting arms) or Brigade and Regiment size units with separate supporting units (AA, Artillery, Engineer etc...). Brigade/Regiment scale would allow more varied unit types but you will probably need to do some creative juggling of the figures to avoid having too many units in the scenario.

In Rise of the Dictators I started with the real numbers of Army, Air and Naval units and then made them fit Civ2. This allowed me to keep all of the nations strengths realistically balance. For example an Infantry Division may have had 3 Infantry regiments in most armies but I reduced it to 2 for all nations to keep the numbers under control. Using this system you can accurately calculate the number of ships, aircraft and missiles too.

Leave enough space for some upgrading of weapons (Ie M60 to M1 Abrams).
I would also make some distinction between the main NATO armies Armoured forces (US, France, Germany, Britain). At the end of the day not all NATO countries can be represented individually and I'm not sure what it would add to the scenario by having multiple units with the same role and stats. Any space left at the end could then be used for special units like Foreign Legion, SPETSNAZ, SAS etc...

[Cyrion]

I'm wondering about the Belasgiari(sp) (you know - the Italians with the funny hats) - I'd like to put them in, but I'm not sure...

It's "Bersaglieri", and I think their role would be too minor to include them

[EZRhino]

I enjoyed reading Red Storm Rising, though I'm not usually a big Tom Clancy fan. 1984 era Fulda gap high cold-war oobs are fascinating and scary things. Sounds like a fun scenario:b

Out of curiosity how much time will a single turn represent? A Day? A Week? If so will the scenario feature build-able units or will the forces be fixed at the start like Tecumseh's Operation Market Garden, or Nemo's Second Front?

[curtsibling]

This looks like a riot! Was wanting to do a Modern scenario for ages...
But decided to do a Napoleonic one instead...(that's my current project)

I have some pretty modern cities you might want to use, Ghost...If you
need such things let me know...Modern stuff is easier to do that Turkish,
so I won't keep you waiting around, old chap!

[bc1871]

I'm assuming that your going to make the NATO units more versitile/skilled to make up for the fact that the USSR and the Warsaw Pact can throw more conscripts than God into the fight!

[Harry Tuttle]

I like the idea, this scenario should be fun, especially for NATO as the Soviets might have an initial advantage at the start of a conventional war. As for additional units, what about the B1B Lancer for NATO? The first model was delivered June 1985. I also see you have what looks like an Apache helicopter. Why not include the SuperCobra as well, as it was its operational predecessor?

[GhostOfDisco]

This looks like a riot! Was wanting to do a Modern scenario for ages...
But decided to do a Napoleonic one instead...(that's my current project)

I have some pretty modern cities you might want to use, Ghost...If you
need such things let me know...Modern stuff is easier to do that Turkish,
so I won't keep you waiting around, old chap!

You're got some new cities? Great! I'd love to see them!

I was going to have each turn be one month, with the scenario lasting several years. I hope that's not too long...

Hmm, I like the idea of 2 main units per division, plus auxiliary units, although that might result in about 4 units per division each (2 main ground units, plus attached artillery and helicopter units). I think I had about 5 units per division in 2013: A Union Divided, and that resulted in unit overkill (at least some people thought so). I know I was thinking for air units, 1 unit = 1 squadron would be good. I guess I'll go download RotD and see how you did it.

Here's one idea I've had for the scenario: Aerial refueling. I'd have air refueler units with in the "3" category and the ability to "carry" aircraft, which should enable them to refuel aircraft (i.e. let aircraft end their turn (without "running out of fuel" by "landing" on them). Can this be done?

[bc1871]

The inclusion of Military Police/Service Police/Provosts or some form of "Security Forces" unit might be a good idea, so that the player would not have to use his combat arms units to garrison NATO/captured cities.

[GhostOfDisco]

True, and I can use the WarPac's various "internal police" units for that role on their side of the Curtain.

[EZRhino]

I was going to have each turn be one month, with the scenario lasting several years. I hope that's not too long...

We're talking about high-tempo mechanized maneuver warfare similar to the Persian Gulf War but on a much larger scale. War planers from both NATO and the Soviet Union expected a war to be decisive within three weeks (in fact both sides expected total operational losses of over 30% within the first 3-5 days!). After that, it was thought either logistics will have been exhausted or the war would've gone nuclear

IMO you might want to consider using fewer units per division purely for playability reasons. My understanding is that NATO and European based US forces had about 30 divisions in 1985 and the Soviet Union+Warsaw Pact collectively had over 90 divisions (in Europe only, that is, not including divisions involved in the Afghanistan war or defending the border with China). 90X4=360units, that almost twice as many units as you get in Red Front. It might be bit of a chore.

[EZRhino]

Does anyone know what kind of colorful/unique Cold-War era units I could include here?

US Army 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment "Black Horse". On the front lines at the Fulda gap

[McMonkey]

I agree with bc1871 about the Internal Security/Police units for garrisons rear area cities (like in First Strike). This would also make it easier to calculate the sizes of the opposing military forces.

I think EZRhino is right about the time frame too. Turns should be measured in days rather than weeks or months. This would allow you to accurately calculate and represent unit movement.

[GhostOfDisco]

We're talking about high-tempo mechanized maneuver warfare similar to the Persian Gulf War but on a much larger scale. War planers from both NATO and the Soviet Union expected a war to be decisive within three weeks (in fact both sides expected total operational losses of over 30% within the first 3-5 days!). After that, it was thought either logistics will have been exhausted or the war would've gone nuclear

Well, at the outbreak of World War I all sides thought the conflict would be resolved in a matter of weeks, and in World War II Hitler thought his invasion of Russia would be finished before the winter of 1941. We all know how those plans worked out.

Also, I'd like the player to be able to eventually build reinforcements and the like, and you can't exactly whip up an armored regiment in a matter of days (I always found it funny you could build M-48 and -60 units in rmsharpe's excellent "Malta" scenario, even though each turn was a day.)

Thirdly, it seems such a scenario would waste the large map I'm using, that a map such as the one used in Frederick the Great would be more appropriate for such a situation. Plus, the scope of the game isn't just confined to the battle for Germany - I'd like to allow the WarPac player the space and time to go beyond the Rhine to France and beyond, conquering Europe and even America in the name of Marx, and conversely let the NATO player try to drive on Moscow to liberate all of Europe from the scourge of Communism.

So, I'm thinking 1 turn=1 week or so might be a possibility, though I have many reservations about mere days...

IMO you might want to consider using fewer units per division purely for playability reasons. My understanding is that NATO and European based US forces had about 30 divisions in 1985 and the Soviet Union+Warsaw Pact collectively had over 90 divisions (in Europe only, that is, not including divisions involved in the Afghanistan war or defending the border with China). 90X4=360units, that almost twice as many units as you get in Red Front. It might be bit of a chore.

I guess I'll have to figure something out...

[bc1871]

The Centurion Tank should probably be removed from the NATO Armored Section, since by the 1980's, if memory serves me, they were no longer being operated.

[Harry Tuttle]

"I'd like to allow the WarPac player the space and time to go beyond the Rhine to France and beyond, conquering Europe and even America in the name of Marx, and conversely let the NATO player try to drive on Moscow to liberate all of Europe from the scourge of Communism."

In that case I think nukes should be included. I doubt France or Britain would allow their countries to be overrun without resorting to nukes. Much less the US. If anything the nuke units could be given by events once a line is crossed.

[bc1871]

Also, are you going to be using trade caravans to simulate supply and logistics?

[Case]

That sounds like a good idea. I'm wondering Does anyone know what kind of colorful/unique Cold-War era units I could include here?

US armored cavalry regiments (which had a very important screening/speed bump role along the German border), NATO reservists (who seem to have had a key rear area security role), Warsaw Pact reserve units using older equipment, Soviet and Polish marines (who would have operated along the Baltic coast), etc.

I note that the units file is missing any French aircraft; these would have been much more important than F-14s and F/A-18s (the USN's carriers would have operated in the Mediterranean and against North Cape, and probably not have ventured into the North Sea).

[GhostOfDisco]

Well, I do need to get some slots for the French Mirages (should I just have one Mirage unit, or several?) as well as the Super Entendard.

Trade caravan to simulate logistics? I might.

[Case]

Well, I do need to get some slots for the French Mirages (should I just have one Mirage unit, or several?) as well as the Super Entendard.

I don't think that the Super Entendard would be worthwhile - only small numbers of them were built to operate off the two French aircraft carriers. I think that the F-117A entered service in the late 1980s rather than the mid-80s, so it could be cut as well. I'd suggest using either the Mirage III or Mirage V and the very different Mirage 2000.