TacOps Tactical Discussion Group #3

[GCoyote]

:...Gary, you mentioned that you had an idea for the scenario in Tactical Discussion Group3. Do you want to start a new thread and begin plotting the new scenario concept? . . .

Is there any interest in:

1. An obstacle breaching exercise?
2. A POW Rescue mission [Sorry John, no tanks]/
3. Break-Out from encirclement [just now beginning to consider this one].

The first one should be easy to set up using any offensive scenario, probably TF Stubblefield. The only drawback is that I have to know where all of the red units are to realistically position the obstacles so I will not be submitting a solution.

I can do the second one by adding a POW facility to DeGoey/Dingman. The existing massive air defenses should make it an adequate challenge and I can always spice things up.

I got the idea for the third one reading "Last Stands". I haven't figured out any of the details yet.

[pmaidhof]

Is there any interest in:

1. An obstacle breaching exercise?
2. A POW Rescue mission [Sorry John, no tanks]/
3. Break-Out from encirclement [just now beginning to consider this one].

Obstacle breaching or breakout. The raid scenario didn't really do it for me. In fact I never played the factory raid scenario since having owned TacOps for what feels like forever.

My 2 cents.

[tinjaw]

Count me in for any of the above. I have no preference at this point.

[Hub]

Breach

[Rame]

Obsticle Breach

[GCoyote]

So it looks like the consensus is already for breaching. I'll start working on it for possible posting next weekend.

Any specific requests? I'm leaning toward using the different types of obstacles in different areas and letting the players decide where and how to do the breach.

[dhuffjr]

This should be interesting. In my testing by myself obstacles form a huge obstacle. From what I have read real life exercises don't always have the greatest results either. A multi-layered system with covering forces would be a very difficult situation indeed. Good thing we have helos and fuel tankers so we can go around them. I truly would pity the folks that would have to perform an assault/breaching attack against a well set up and defended fortification.

[pmaidhof]

So it looks like the consensus is already for breaching. I'll start working on it for possible posting next weekend.

Gary, if you need any assistance in setting up the scenario, developing the scenario, or anything - let me know.

[GCoyote]

Gary, if you need any assistance in setting up the scenario, developing the scenario, or anything - let me know.

Not a problem. Modding the factory scenarios until they are almost unrecognizable is one of my favorite passtimes.

I settled on TF Gebhard because I think you are going to need the fire power and because there are more US Army engineering assets in the database. You will have a number of engineering units to pick from, take what you need.

I've extended the game time so that you can complete the original mission although once you get past the central ridge there isn't much else to do. Resupply will be notional.

Obstacles will be covered by observation and fires as much as possible given the battle space and OPFOR units. I also added a few extra squads of OPFOR infantry to decrease the artifical "open flank" effect of the map edges.

How does everyone feel about going against OPFOR thermals?

[JohnfMonahan]

I view OPFOR thermals like I view advanced ATGM warheads, a delusion to artificially balence the game. Make cut the Bue forces big time though.