Fiery Cross Island
 

Fiery Cross - South China Sea
Date: April 1, 2019

The International Court finally decided Fiery Cross Reef (now Island thanks to China) belongs jointly to both China and the the Phillipines. The island is to be demilitarized and each nation is to receive half of any and all revenues generated from fishing, oil, and anything else within it's waters.
Jubulant, the Phillipine government dispatched a team to the island to assert it's claim. Unfortunately they were met not with diplomats but with gunfire. China has refused to comply with the Internation Court ruling.
As an ally of the Phillipines the U.S.A. sent demands to China to immediately remove all weapons (which according to China were't there in the first place) from the Island. The deadline expired at midnight March 31st.

####################

Think of this as a beta test.

Amphibious operations are VERY hard to balance game wise.
Too many ATGMs and it's over before you hit the beach, and rarely will the attacking force be inadequate to the task so it's kind of an assured victory. The real question is what losses do you take in the process?

So ... questions ...
Scenario to long/short?
Chinese forces a challenge or is it a cakewalk?
Anything not included in the scenario you would have expected?

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Playing through it now! Only on turn five but things are turning out pretty swell! I'll post a full blow-by-blow once I'm finished.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

So, fifteen turns in, kind of sweeping the Chinese most everywhere. A few things to think about.

1. Ammo. I'm running seriously low on ammo for my Abrams tanks. Perhaps having an AAVP7 ammo carrier would help?

2. Air superiority. It is laughably easy to take out the Chinese SAM teams and establish air superiority. Perhaps add a few static SAMs? Even if they get KO'd by the SEAD they'd still pose a threat for a few turns. Maybe have them as reinforcements.

3. Why are all the ZTZ-99s KO'd from the start? I only encountered one that wasn't abandoned on the beach, and this was easily dispatched by a viper. Perhaps having three or four up and running rather than one would make the scenario more challenging.

4. Perhaps adding a few shelter bunkers and foxholes would make the landing more difficult without sinking the AAVPs before they can disgorge their infantry. Right now it feels far, far too easy to sweep the Chinese aside, and they feel rather sparse on the ground. There's no real point where I had to stop, pull back, and redress my line to launch another attack. I just keep pushing and pushing, using my venoms to draw out the enemies which I bash with either my Abrams, AAVPs, or vipers.

Overall I like the scenario so far! It's not all that difficult, but that's not exactly a bad thing. After that airport scenario of yours I'll take an easy smash over a hard, grueling series of attacks and counter-attacks any day.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Thanks for the input.

1. I'm sure an ammo carrier would help, pity you don't get one :p
2. I think it's safe to assume aircraft from carriers and the Philipines would make US air superiority a given, and eliminate any heavy (i.e. area SAM) air defenses.
3. Hard to hide a tank on a barren pile of sand, so like the heavy air defenses they're sorta toast ... guess they missed one tho.
4. The Chinese are all dug in, and most of the bunkers suffered the same fate as the air defenses and tanks. In fact there were several on the island, you may have noticed a number of piles of rubble.

As I said, balancing such a scenario is a pain. Your comments are certainly valid, but I hope you see the logic behind my responses. Between satellites and UAVs we probably know what they ate for breakfast and have certainly watched each and every bunker during it's construction. Were this someplace that didn't suffer such intense scrutiny I'm certain more of the fixed defenses would have survived.

But, I added a few more fixed fortifications and a non-radar guided SAM.

Thanks again.

P.S.
Glad you enjoyed the airfield scenario.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I can understand all that! It's strategic level combat changing how the tactical level works. Still, those are my two cents. The scenario is excellent, especially the map. It's a classic I hope to see in the next update.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

A topical scenario given the USN had two warships,the destroyer Higgins and the cruiser Antietam engaged in "freedom of navigation operations" just a few days ago during the week of 27 May 2018 around the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea.

<br>

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I didn't do the map.
A while back I had the idea for the scenario but map making isn't my thing so I asked if someone was interested in making one and Grant1pa was kind enough to do so.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

And this is exactly why I wanted to do the scenario.
China is betting no one is willing to risk all out war so they keep pushing and pushing. The trouble is, much like we saw in the 30's until someone stands up and says "No" they'll just keep pushing and eventually everyone will wake up one morning to a real disaster and say "How did that happen?"

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Fun scenario.

I had some OOB issues.

All of the support gunships and the LCMs did not have graphics.

Several of the company commanders (0 units) also did not have graphics. In addition they acted as vehicles (knocking down buildings) and played the sounds of horse drawn units.

I am not sure if the issue is my PC or an OOB issue. I have the latest patch.

As far as balance it was a bit of a cake walk. Slow steady advance using the helos to spot enemy units and direct fire to kill them worked for me. Without the helos it would have been more of a challenge.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I waited till the 2018 patch to release this as it uses some newly added units, but everything is from the default OOBs (tho sometimes edited a bit) so the lack of graphics is odd.

Hopefully the additional fortifications and SAM make it a bit less of a cakewalk.

I take it the lack of ammo resupply wasn't much of an issue for you?

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Define "Graphics"........... are you referring to the on map Icon or the photo that goes with it....or both?

I loaded the scenario and checked the first two things you mentioned.......support gunships and the LCMs....... both show the correct on map Icon and photo so I think you need to reload this from a fresh reboot and check this again and if it still shows as you describe you need may need to re-install your game..... are you SURE you put this into the correct game ? ( and are you sure you have patched the correct games.,..?) winSPWW2 does not have an Icon or a photo to cover for the ones the LCM or the Vipers use in this scenario which would explain why you don't see them and why all the other weird things happened as you described.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

By the time the tanks were out of main gun ammo it was over (22 turns) but the other units took up the slack. No need for ammo carriers.

I lost 1 LCAC, 1 gun boat, and an APC. The only units that gave me a hard time were the LAWs and the missile units. Some more of these would make it more challenging.

BTW: I meant to say gun boats not gun ships were the ones without graphics.

Thank you for making these fun scenarios.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I meant to say gun boats not gun ships. The Vipers were fine.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

The gun boats used in this scenario were just put in the last patch so if you don't see them on the map or the photos you don't have the last patch ( v12 ) fully installed

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1528132273

That is unit 539 in the USMC OOB and if you don't have it.....and that would seem to be the case, you don't have all of V12 installed

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Disregard.

It was an ID10T operator error. I was running v11. I must have missed the v12 patch.

Just updated and everything is fine plus I discovered some new scenarios to play.

One other thing though. When the gun ships enter shallow water they become immobilized (run aground I assume) but they are not listed as immobilized. Perhaps "Run aground" could be added as a status.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

You have missed at least the last patch for sure

The LCM-6 mod 2 Icon used is 7767 and that was only just put in for V12 so it's clear you do not have all of part of V12 installed

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

OK....:party:

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I tested this.... ( reminds me why I hate testing scenarios that start off with an airshow.....)

I managed to claw my way to shallow water( right to shore ) and they did not immobilize

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/attac...1&d=1528133651

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Could be an issue with certain "shallow water" hexes.
I had the same issue with the CCB but none at all with the Ml VI's.

Thanks again for the input.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

If you can find the coordinates on the map they grounded out that would be helpful

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

39, 95 or one of the adjacent shallow water hexes.

Reminder - I did not make the map so can't tell you a thing about how it was made.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

The CCB is a FO Vehicle that's been modelled as a boat but the important word is "vehicle"..... Vehicles *can* become immobilized in shallow water....it's a lower chance than being stuck in Mud but it's still a chance.....assume you've run onto a sandbar .... using a FO Vehicle as a boat is an allowed hack but it doesn't make it a full boat to the game code... accept it C'est la guerre. You could run the game again 20 times and maybe not get that happen ....or not, so stay in deep water with it. It doesn't need to get that close to shore anyways to do it's job.

It ***May*** be possible to add a bit of code that if a UC is given swim speed but NO land speed the stuck chance in shallow water is negated ....now on the list

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

It's an FOO vehicle with swim only - and the OOb designer made the move class "default" which will be a land vehicle movement class since they are trucks at base.

Making the M/Class boat or ship may help in the scenario (or with vehicles that are nominally land, that have been bodged into a boat).

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Ah !:doh: Good point. I will investigate that.....


EDIT...... yes indeed.... earlier CBB's are set to Boat.... that one was set to default

That should solve the problem.........Now corrected

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Thanks guys!
I'll change it in the OOB and repurchase the unit for the scenario.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Any more input?
If not I have a revised version of the scenario ready.

Fixed the CCB.
Added a few more Chinese fortifications.
Added a Chinese SAM.
Still no ammo resupply for the USMC :eek:

It's not that harder, but perhaps a bit less of a cakewalk.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I thought a company of Marines with armor, air and sea elements sufficient and may have given the player quite a bit of a challenge. However, adding additional defenders is another way I suppose to give the player more of a challenge.

Although, I am going to stop playing the scenario until the revised version is released, I will note the following from my notes thus far:

Turn 3: Seal Teams and Recon Team destroy Chinese squad at 121,116 thereupon the Chinese squad retreated into the sea. Anyway to set rally points (or some other mechanism) so that retreating units do not retreat into the sea?

<br>

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

I found the destroyed Chinese AFVs at (52,93), (67,96), and (120,89) without smoke irritating. So, I found using a simple hack to affect damaged smoke interesting. Here goes.

Briefly, we want to bail out the crew, save the scenario then open in Editor to begin with building the scenario. Once a crew is bailed and an opposing unit occupies the hex of the vehicle, after one turn the vehicle will show with damage smoke.

We can display damaged AFVs by bailing the crew out, destroying crew, and save scenario, then load and save as a scenario. This is how I accomplished the hack with Fiery Cross Island

1. Purchase USMC Plt of Engr Sqd
2. Place a Engr sqd in the same hex with the Chinese AFV
3. Change Engr Sqd size to 0, and men to 2
4. Inactivate Chinese AFV guns
5. Inactivate all USMC bombardment missions

Play the scenario with both sides as Human. Quit USMC orders
1. In Chinese orders, bail out AFV crews
2. Save the scenario after second turn
3. Copy/Paste saved scenario into Scenario folder
4. Change saved scenario format to scenario format
5. Open scenario in Editor
6. Delete USMC Engr Plt
7. Save scenario with destroyed AFVs displaying damage smoke.


I have included my working scenario file for review and comment.

<br>

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Handy!
Thanks.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Updated scenario.

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Although, I am away on vacation visiting family in the former Conferderate states, I'd like know if any further enhancements have been made to this scenario.

<br>

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Nope.
And not planning any unless something serious comes up.

Admittedly it's a pretty easy scenario ... IF you have a grasp on amphibious landings, overwatch, and not causing blue-on-blue with your own fire support.

Some folks however don't ;)

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Been on TDY and off board for some time. Loved the scenario! Thanks Suhiir!!

Tom

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Glad you enjoyed it.

Now imagine if the Chinese had an infantry ATGM platoon?

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Depending on where that ATGM platoon is located, it can either be a devil of a fight, or something to get smashed. I'd assume they'd be near the beach, but if they're further back they might avoid the absolute hail of fire that wrecks most everything on the beach. Of course, too far back and they might get picked off by roving aircraft. Would still be nice to see!

Re: Fiery Cross Island
 

Dug in infantry is pretty resistant to artillery/air.