South Atlantic Conflict v1.0

[academia]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
I entirely agree with conmcb25 that this scen is indeed not only fun to play but also challenging. The scen is not very long but it is absolutely hairy to play. It is the best example I have seen of modelling the violence and high losses associated with modern warfare.

wow! thanx for that compliment
it´s good to see that you are enjoying the game

about your suggestions...
1)
I also thought about destroying the chilean civ. it´s just a remnant of my first version in 2001, where i didn´t even participate in pbems. However, i feel that i´m just going to keep the chilean civ in the game but restrain the production of units and movement. just infantry with zero movement. something like that.

2)
Mmm... is that a problem? i can just erase those victory points for taking El Calafate... i don´t know.

3)
Yep, that "city walls" wonder is the great wall. The point is that the player that gets that wonder, receives city walls everywhere. I wanted to avoid the problem of cities without walls destroyed during the battles.

4)
ok. I´ll do that

5)
uh... that´s a mistake. i didn´t notice that!! i´ll fix it.
thanx

[techumseh]

AGRICOLA finds this scn challenging? Perhaps I better try it, despite the fact that it's not ToT.

[academia]

Originally posted by techumseh
AGRICOLA finds this scn challenging? Perhaps I better try it, despite the fact that it's not ToT.

wait for the new version!!
agricola pointed out many things that require improvement

[techumseh]

Will you do a ToT version?

[academia]

Originally posted by techumseh
Will you do a ToT version?

nope, sorry. like eivind, i´m still loyal to MGE

[techumseh]

bah! obsolete technology.

[academia]

ok. it´s done.

version 1.1 with all the comments and suggestions made by agricola and bostero included

enjoy it!

http://sleague.apolyton.net/index.php?title=South_Atlantic_Conflict

[AGRICOLA]

Has anyone tried playing Argentina as a solo game?

I tried playing solo and discovered that:
- Britain gets a full turn with all its units active
- Argentina gets a turn where fewer than 10 of its units can be activated
- Britain gets another full turn
- Argentina finally gets a full turn

This is considerably worse than the "ghost" turn at the start of Red Front.

The implication is that the Argentinian forces not only had no idea that the British were at sea but also were in such a disorganized state that they could mount only a minimal reaction to the initial British attack.

What makes things worse is that in this scen, under most conditions, there is no Argentinian fighter aircraft or AA unit that can attack or defend against a vet Sea Harrier and expect to survive. There are 30 vet Harriers at the start and they get reinforced at a rate of nearly 1 aircraft per turn. A rough comparison of unit parameters suggests that a Harrier is 50% better than a Dagger or Super Etenard, and twice as good as a Mirage III. There is no way that the 30 Argentine fighters (no more fighters can be built, bought or stolen) can destroy the 30+ Harriers. If, at the start, the Harriers are given two free shots at the Argentine forces, it's game over to all intents and purposes. IMHO, this is the crux of the problem with trying to play Argentina in a solo game and, possibly, in a multiplayer game as well.

@conmcb25: Any comments on how Argentina made out in your pbem game?

As far as I can see, the only way that a player has a realistic chance of holding on to some of the cities captured by Argentina is to build 2 types of units: vet TAM tanks and vet Oerlikon AA. As all Brit fighting units are vets, non-vet Argentine units are next to useless cannon fodder, best used to IRB needed vet units.

The TAM tanks are the only units that have a better than 50% chance of destroying Harriers, but only if they can attack them while they are on the ground, either on airfields or in cities. The reason for this is simple: the Harriers don't get the 100% defensive bonus against TAMs that they get against aircraft and missiles. If TAMs can attack a city and eliminate all defenders but not capture it, the AI will immediately move in fresh defenders and the process can be repeated until one side runs out of units. I would hesitate to undertake such a trapping operation with less than 40 TAMs.

Vet Oerlikon AA have a good chance of destroying a Harrier only if they are fortified on a hill. Elsewhere they can at best inflict significant damage on the attacker. However they are the best available AA unit.


This brings up the next problem, the " 20 ; # of rows in shield box " line in RULES. I believe that I pointed out earlier that this doubles the cost of building units and improvements. While I agree that building improvements plays almost no role in the scen, the same is definitely not true for units. Either Argentina undertakes a speedy program of incrementally rush building TAMs, AA and some transports or playing the scen as Argentina is a futile exercise.


However, I did want to try playing Argentina, so I did the following:
- changed " 20 ; # of rows in shield box " in RULES to " 10 ; # of rows in shield box "
- the only other file I altered was Falklands - Argentina .scn
- units changed so that all Argentine units are active
- Argentina gets the first shot
- hex-edited Chile - Argentina and Chile - Britain alliances and established embassies; this got rid of Chilean aggression and provided info on losses
- set pre-existing unit losses to zero for all civs so casualty lists are accurate
- gave fortress units to all cities in Argentina because AI controlled British ships and helicopters do attack South America

I'm only playing Week 9 but the scen appears winnable or a stalemate might be achieved if things don't go so well. South Georgia is probably secure and Galtieri's brilliant scorched earth startegy on East Island (4 cities razed and all airfields pillaged) looks like it might work.

[academia]

I tried playing solo and discovered that:
- Britain gets a full turn with all its units active
- Argentina gets a turn where fewer than 10 of its units can be activated
- Britain gets another full turn
- Argentina finally gets a full turn

mmm... that´s gotta be wrong. i just wanted one full turn for britain before the argentine turn.
i´ll check that again. it´s a mistake.

The implication is that the Argentinian forces not only had no idea that the British were at sea but also were in such a disorganized state that they could mount only a minimal reaction to the initial British attack.

hehe... that sounds like what actually happened in the real conflict

If, at the start, the Harriers are given two free shots at the Argentine forces, it's game over to all intents and purposes. IMHO, this is the crux of the problem with trying to play Argentina in a solo game and, possibly, in a multiplayer game as well.

Well, it shouldn´t be that way. Only one free shot for britain.
i´ll fix that.

btw, great analysis of the game. it´s obvious that you really played and payed attention to details

vet TAM tanks and vet Oerlikon AA. As all Brit fighting units are vets, non-vet Argentine units are next to useless cannon fodder, best used to IRB needed vet units.

you are right. building oerlikons is a good way to stop the british. tam tanks... that wasn´t my intention for these units.
mmm... i need a piece of advice here... do you feel that building barracks in all the argentine falkland island cities will help? should i improve the oerlikon unit or any other AA unit?

This brings up the next problem, the " 20 ; # of rows in shield box " line in RULES. I believe that I pointed out earlier that this doubles the cost of building units and improvements.

damnit! i thought i´ve changed that.
again, it´s a mistake. don´t take it into account in a future version.

- the only other file I altered was Falklands - Argentina .scn
- units changed so that all Argentine units are active

yep. i´m planning to do the same.

- Argentina gets the first shot

i´m not going to do that. i still want the british AI to have the first shot.

- hex-edited Chile - Argentina and Chile - Britain alliances and established embassies; this got rid of Chilean aggression and provided info on losses

eh? didn´t i do that??
crap. i´ll double check it then.

- set pre-existing unit losses to zero for all civs so casualty lists are accurate

Mmm... how do you do that??

- gave fortress units to all cities in Argentina because AI controlled British ships and helicopters do attack South America

ah yea, i noticed that but i didn´t consider it relevant. do you really think that i should create those fortress units?

I'm only playing Week 9 but the scen appears winnable or a stalemate might be achieved if things don't go so well. South Georgia is probably secure and Galtieri's brilliant scorched earth startegy on East Island (4 cities razed and all airfields pillaged) looks like it might work.

hehe. good for you

one more time, i really appreciate your help agricola!! you´ve been a great playtester

[N35t0r]

do you have any spare units?

because if so, I'd experiment with lines of impassable/high defense units (a la minefields in Red Front) to limit the area in which each civ can operate...

[AGRICOLA]

I have double checked everything that I wrote in my previous post, just to make sure that I had not written nonsense. With one exception, everything looks correct.

The exception concerns the Chile - Britain and Chile - Argentina alliances which are fine in version 1.1. Sorry about my error.

hehe... that sounds like what actually happened in the real conflict

If so, then you have done a great modelling job. I would have expected that there would have been a chain of Argentine "fishing" boats 500-1000 km north of the Falklands. Who knows, they might even have spotted some English kippers steaming south.

tam tanks... that wasn´t my intention for these units.

I didn't pay much attention to the TAMs until I was forced to figure out a way to reasonably efficiently kill Harriers; then they became very interesting indeed. However, the TAMs are far from all-powerful. Expect to lose 2-3 vet TAMs and have one damaged in order to destroy a 120mm Wombat or a Tracked Rapier AA.

You have added LVTP-7, Panhard AML 90 and UH-1 to the units Argentina can build. IMHO, the UH-1 won't do much for the Argentines, the Panhard is actually a liability, but the LVTP-7 has very attractive D=5 and 6 hit points.

mmm... i need a piece of advice here... do you feel that building barracks in all the argentine falkland island cities will help? should i improve the oerlikon unit or any other AA unit?

This is a bit complicated. Right now, playing Britain (B) is tricky, playing Argentina (A) is very difficult and I have no hard information about multiplayer (M).

(A) and (M) can probably be left as they are except that Barracks might be restored in the major mainland cities. In the Falklands, Barracks are definitely needed but I see no reason why players can't build the few that are required. Argentina has enough money at the start.

Similarly, for (A) and (M), unit parameters seem to be adequately balanced.


(B) seems to be a bit of a problem because the AI controls Argentina which needs to build units in order to prolong the battle. Furthermore, any ground units built on the mainland are unlikely to reach the Falklands because the AI does such a poor job with transports, especially the C-130 which IMHO is a great piece of unit design. Built Pecaras will fly from the mainland to the Falklands but they are counter-insurgency aircraft and too weak to affect the battle. Would it be stretching reality too far for Argentina to obtain (build) either Daggers or Super Etenards and hope that the AI actually builds them and flies them to the Falklands.

I think that the 35mm Oerlikons are good enough. If you make them stronger, (B) may have serious problems.

- Argentina gets the first shot

i´m not going to do that. i still want the british AI to have the first shot.

Yes, I did get a bit carried away on that one , not because I had any intention of attacking the British but because I wanted to get Argentine units out of harm's way on East Island, leaving just enough infantry to raze the cities.

- set pre-existing unit losses to zero for all civs so casualty lists are accurate

Mmm... how do you do that??

I can help with this in one of 2 ways
1. Hexedit the final versions of the 3 .scn files before you post them. I'll can either PM you my e-mail so you can send them or you can attach them to a post. It is a trivial editing job.

2. If you want to do it yourself, frhed is a good freeware hexeditor that you can download and I can send you screen shots of the two sections in each .scn file where a few numbers have to be changed to zero.

Please let me know which you prefer.

- gave fortress units to all cities in Argentina because AI controlled British ships and helicopters do attack South America

ah yea, i noticed that but i didn´t consider it relevant. do you really think that i should create those fortress units?

Yes, please, definitely for (A). I don't think it matters for (B) and (M). Units built on the mainland have to assemble in port cities for either air (C-130) or sea transport to the Falklands. Here they are vulnerable to marauding British warships.


Hope this helps a bit.

[AGRICOLA]

Another minor problem has cropped up when playing Argentina.

It appears that if things are going badly for a British port city, the AI will load one of the Fortresses in South Base on a transport and take it to a threatened city like Port Stanley. It's one of those cases where the AI does something that is not allowed human players.

Of course, this makes Port Stanley invulnerable.

As there is no good reason for Argentina to try to capture South Base, perhaps the 2 Fortresses in it could be disbanded and replaced by a Coastal Fortress, SAM Missile Battery and Barracks.

[academia]

one more time, thanx for your help agricola!

i´ll post a detailed answer and work on the scenario tomorrow

[Cyrion]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
It appears that if things are going badly for a British port city, the AI will load one of the Fortresses in South Base on a transport and take it to a threatened city like Port Stanley. It's one of those cases where the AI does something that is not allowed human players.

I nearly posted on that topic yesterday, so I'll make my suggestion now

Why not make the Fortresses sea units with a move of 0? So they couldn't be ferried across the ocean! And with a defense of 99, no problem with the "ship caught in port" loss of HP...

Or am I wrong somewhere??

[techumseh]

I'm afraid so. The game engine assigns a very low defense factor to "ships caught in port". Same for air units defending in a city. You might try experimenting with the role of the fortress unit to see if the AI is less likely to attempt to transport a unit with 'naval transport' or 'air superiority' as its role.