Scenario: Iraq War 2003 (PTW)

[maxpower144]

This is my first scenario, so I hope that everything works okay. This is a fun and challenging scenario that usually takes as little as an hour to complete.

Description: A Coalition of the US, Britain, Australia and other forces invaded Iraq in an effort to depose Saddam Hussein from power. To suceed you must capture as many victory locations as possible. It would also be advisable to capture Saddam Hussein and his Generals and return them to a Coalition city or base until the end of the conflict. There is a time limit of 6 weeks (game has been shortened from the original time limit of 13 weeks to better serve reality), which is the appoximate length of time before the US/British taxpayers have significant war weariness. Try not to lose too many coalition units and do not decimate too many cities!

Download Version 1.4: http://apolyton.net/upload/files/max...2003-ver14.zip -- 12 Apr 03

Some mods in effect:

* Aegis Cruisers have bombard capabilites that simulate cruise missile capabilities
* Airborne Units, Special Forces, Fedayeen Saddam, Al Samoud Missiles, Terrorists and Predator Drones
* Capture the airfields
* Help the Peshmerga Army (Kurds) kick the Iraqis out of their homeland.
* Send special forces to locate and deal with a suspected Ansar al Islam terrorist camp.
* Capture Saddam, Udey (and more) and bring them back...
* Units are named to reflect the actual units that are in theatre.

Credit(s): To the Saddam Hussein scenario by Yoda Power. Also to the cnn.com web site for all the unit names.

Changes:

Version 1.1: (9 Apr 03)
- Fixed bugs in the ISRAELI and JORDANIAN civs that caused the program to crash.
- Added IRAQ air units.
- Added more Kurd units
- Fixed Victory Point locations
- Added some additional Al Samoud Missiles

Version 1.2: (10 Apr 03)
- Adjusted AI settings for IRAQ and COALITION units.
- Added Artillery units.
- Increased IRAQ Regular Armor (PANZER) strength
- Added (+) symbols to the names of all AEGIS units to indicate CRUISE MISSILE bombardment capability.
- Increased the strength of Al Samoud Missiles.

Version 1.3: (11 Apr 03)
- Removed the ability to upgrade some units.

Version 1.4: (12 Apr 03)
- Added food resources for coalition cities.
- Shortened game length to 6 weeks. (Instead of 13 weeks)

[maciek]

Good work! It's a very detailed scenario, you had some very good sources.

Are you going to update this as the situation changes, or leave it as the situation was in march?

Some constructive critics:

- You need airforce for Iraq, fix the air fields (e.g. H2, H3).
- UK forces should belong to UK civ, remember the rules of engagement are slightly different
- Australian SAS is missing
- Special forces unit is way too strong
- Aircraft ranges are too small, use http://www.fas.org/man
- All units should have much more moves, maybe double or triple them
- Al Samoud aren't equipped with nuclear warheads in real life. You should make them similar to cruise missiles, except with lower range.
- Iraqis don't have Marines or Modern Armor
- Boundaries aren't correct, Jordan is too small, Israel too large
- You can make Kuwait a separate civ, same as Qatar and UAE

[player1]

I've played this scenario.
(moded it to play Iraquies)

And I was destoyed at the end of 13th turn.

Coalition forces were weared out around turn of 10, when then took all but my last city, but after then Colaution made some alliances with Turks and several other counties and later I lost with their combined force (Turks took the city).

It would probably be boring to me to play on US side (too many units to move).


Now some commments:
What's scoring system.
Egypt had most victory locations at the end for example.
Should they only be in Iraq?

Iraq has no air-force.

Al Samud missiles are ridiculus.
They do use Nuke animation, but they are nothing more then one-use catapult (bomb. str 5, ROF just 1).
I bombed with all of them one US modern armor and it have't took even one HP damage.

Range of aircraft is OK, since US succeeded in boming almost everything on map.


While I like the way you made US superior by making Mod. Armor vs Tank, and Mech. Inf. vs Guerrila comparation, but I think that those defensive values of Iraq units should be slightly better. They should be able to hold ground in cities for some time without need of Mech. Inf. unit.

Defense of 12 would be OK.

Also, those Panzer Tanks are a little bit useless.
(Mech. Inf. is way to better for attack).

Somthing that it's not done well in civ:
if unit is not Mechanized, it DOES NOT mean that it has poor defense. So I would assume that Guerrila should have more standard defense of 10, better equiped Rep. Guard (represented by marine pic) would be 12. In that case make Rilflemen looking unit with defense of 8.

Also Rep. Guard shoudl be ELITE!

And lower Mech. Inf. attack to 18 (20 is way too much).

And make "Panzer" tanks more like 20/14 (still inferior to Modern Armor, will have has better attack then Mech. Inf and better defense then ordinary infantry).


To sum up:
Rifle: 8/8/1
Guerrila: 10/10/1
Rep. Guard: 12/12/1
Tank: just remove it from the game
"Panzer": 20/14/3 (it's still pretty inferior unit, but now Mech. Inf won't replace it)
Mech. Inf: 18/18/3
Mod Armor:24/16/4 (as it is)
(if Panzer seems to strong, then make it 18/14/3, but then make Mech. Inf with attack of just 16, since Mech. Inf should not make Tanks obsolete)

US Inf: up to 12/12, sp. forces are ok with 14/14



P.S.
And scenario lacks of Artillery.
Iraq should have artillery.


P.P.S.
Also to make Iraq more defenseive, add defense flag to Marine units (in rules), and then make all Rep. Guard unit defnesive (in units properites on the map), while keeping Coalition Infantry units with Offense flag.

[maciek]

Are you sure that spec ops should have 14/14? AFAIK spec ops aren't destined for frontline battles or defence, they wouldn't stand a chance against regular infantry (because of much larger numbers and heavy equipment for the latter). Instead, they should have special roles, like high movement rate, "invisible", etc.

[player1]

By the way, I don't have idea what Stealth falg would do to Spec. Ops.

Isn't that flag used for Subs?

[maciek]

Re: spec ops. Invisible, not stealth. That way enemy won't see your units. Spec ops should have "Detect Invisible" ability, guess why...

Create a special unit "Terrorist" - also with Invisible ability, using "worker" icon.

I played this scenario as Iraq and... lost!

I lost 3 southern cities, including Basra. I held all other cities even if Israel, Jordan and Turkey were also at war with me (hmmm....). I had alliance with Syria and Iran against Coalition.

Score: Turkey - 1st, Egypt - 2nd, Iran 3rd, Iraq 4th... Humiliating time limit defeat, as the game said. "Saddam Hussein the Foolish" even if I destroyed ALL Coalition forces as they were advancing on Najaf and Kut LOL

There's no point playing this as Iraq without invading Syria or Turkey, otherwise Turkey or Egypt will always win.

Al Samoud are useless, Al Hussein don't exist, there's no artillery. BTW, Jordan built "Republican Guard Barracks" (or Palace, can't remember).

Resources are extremely limited, Iraq has more than one major oil field

But don't get me wrong, it was seriously fun to play this, especially after week 13 when I conquered Turkey, Jordan, etc

Need any screenshots or help with the units?

I guess if you already have Jessica Lynch Leader unit, then the scenario starts in late March. You can update the troop positions from this source:

http://globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat.htm

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/maps/fullpage.troops/

[maciek]

Possibly a bug? Whenever I want to talk with Israelis, the game just crashes (no error messages even)...

Check if you have proper Israeli civ entry in game rules.

[Yoda Power]

Hey you made this scenario from a basic made by me, postet at cfc. You could atleast ask me to use it.

here is a link to the thread i postet it in-http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...threadid=32940

and here is an update i made later for PTW-http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...threadid=48378

[maxpower144]

Credit should go to the Saddam Hussein Scenario for the start it gave me with the map. (Thanks to Yoda Power for pointing this out)

While we are listing credits:

Credit for the the unit names and descriptions are from the CNN web site.

You guys have pointed out some bugs andf fixes and I am working on these right now.

Some points:

- The Aussie special forces are in Kuwait City
- The Al Samoud Missiles are designed to be ominous looking but very ineffective.
- The Special forces are 10-10. The Airborne has the 14 attack strength.
- I am not sure if Britain and Kuwait having their own CIVS will fit in the type of scenario planned. (Doesn't COALITION cover all?)
- The Victory Points locations are screwed up and I will fix them.

[player1]

Maybe for next version you could remove Rubber from needed resouces for units, since today synthetic rubber is used.

And would also help Iraqes to build infantry after all thier resouces are destoyed.

[player1]

Republic Guard is still "regular" not ELITE!!!

They are supposed to be best traied troops (ELITE).

You should really add ROF of 3 to Al Samud Missiles.

They would still be pretty useless.
But would be able to take out maybe 1hp from Tank.

The way they are now 10 of them together can't take 1hp from tank (I've tired).

[player1]

Found a BUG!

It only appears if you modify game to play Iraq.

Airborne and Special Forces have no AI strategy flag, so they stay on strating positions without attacking (if you don't play US).

In order to fix this, if playing Iraq, you need to add Offense AI flag to these 2 units.

[player1]

For those interested:

-fixed Airborne and Special Forces AI flag
-starts as Iraq

[maxpower144]

IMHO-- Republican Guard might suppose to be ELITE but if you compare them to the COALITION forces they are not. Thye might have been ELITE at one time but in 2003 they are not. So to keep it realistic I have downgraded the REP. GUARD units.

The lack of resources means that IRAQ can't build much. This is what is planned because this is a "come as you are" type of conflict. There isn't to be much built in 13 weeks.

That is how I designed it.

[player1]

I don't know.
Republic Gaurd is supposed to be best trained and equped part of Iraq military.
Now, it looks that irregulars such as Feddayin or Kurdish units have better experience?!?
Not to say that there is no difference between normal Iraq infantry and Rep. Guard?!?
And isn't superiority of US described by stats of their units (like 14/14/2).
At least, seems more like Veteran status then Regular.

.

Some other thigns:

You can upgrade Popular Army to Mech. Infatry for 60gp.
Is that intended?
I don't thing so.

"Panzer" is useless.
Even if it's intended, they should have a little bit better stats (Like 18/12/3, although still weaker then armored cars). No army in the world uses WWII Tanks.

Add some Artillery units for Iraque!
They should have plenty of them.

Some things to increse AI of units:
Add offense flag to Airborne and Special Forces, in unit rules screen.
(to make scenario playable by Iraques, without crippling US)

Add defense flag to Marine units in unit rules screen.
Then manualy, in units properties, on maps screen, change AI strategy for all Iraque Marine units to defensive, while keeping "offense" strategy for Coalition and other countries.
That way Iraq will be more on defense.

You can get great effects by changing manually AI startegy for some units like Mech. Inf, or Infantry.
(for example when playing Iraques, Kuwait Defense force goes on invasion, instead of staying at home, becasue it's AI strategy is set to random)



P.S.
Are there any "home-rules" for this scenario which you need to follow in order to play it correctly.
(like never pay Syria or Iran to go on war against Iraq, because it's unrealistic)

Some docs would be nice too (just to explain some unit stats and other things).