Idea, for new ARB map, with test of new gameplay type, and modern fleet

  • Yes, we need naval combat (at least for air battles).
  • Nah, let it be, how it was.
0 voters

Well, i make that topic in .ru first, but on .ru, all is to busy by whining on Russian/NATO bias, so i try it here…
And i apologize in advance if I mess up the translation - English is not my native language.

Pre-scriptum... I guess...

The main problem with the introduction of modern fleet - that modern anti-ship/tactical missiles fly VERY far, and any competitions will be destroyed in the bud. The whole gameplay will be “to bombard the enemy with more missiles than his SAM’s/CIWS can intercept, and to do this before he does the same to you.”
And opponents will only be able to see each other on radars/optics of battlefield control/forward reconnaissance aircraft/helicopters. Not interesting, dear.

The earliest missile ships, at the level of light/heavy cruisers modernizations dating back to the war years (Galveston/Providence/etc), could have prevented this, but more of that…

Old, but beloved topic

In order not to ruin battleships and artillery heavy cruisers, IMHO, early projects for converting cruisers into missile carriers, and missile boats/frigates for a small fleet would be sufficient.
As an example - American conversions of the Baltimore and Cleveland classes, Soviet Project 58, others will also find something.
And the control of such missiles could be done in two different ways: either direct (like an airplane, something like Okhka (MXY-1) will come out, only without a threat to the age rating - Regulus-1 are unmanned) with the mechanics of launching missiles, like launching seaplanes , or, if it turns out to be too imposing/powerful, control it like first-generation ATGMs.
But, it seems to me, there will be no imbalance, since such missiles are large and slow, and even 127/130mm with radio-fused HE, are not needed to shoot them down - even dense shelling from an on-board air defense battery is enough.

One could mention the British Tiger, the French Colbert and DeGrasse, the Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi, but with the exception of the Tiger they already had Exosets, which IMHO is too much, because does not apply to idea of early anti-ship missiles (which are more like RC projectile-aircraft), despite the warhead weighing 165 kg (and the TNT equivalent is even less).

Boats and other frigates will be armed with even less powerful missiles, which obviously will not be enough to seriously annoy the venerable dreadnoughts, heavy cruisers will feel the blow, but not fatally (at the level of a 305mm high explosive/semi-armor-piercing projectile), and destroyers and light cruisers, as a rule, have 127/130mm HE-VT in sufficient quantity to be able to defend themselves.

As a result, such anti-ship missiles will be scary for bots, effective, but quite counterable by attentive players who are watching the game - not sitting on the ****hub.


Now the idea is: “What if it’s AI-ships, not players, been the ones, who launch those big, long-range missiles?”

The essence of the idea is something like Carrier Strike Fleets (in future - CSF) brawls in the DCS, but the players will ONLY be on planes (the mode is for AAB/RB/SB).


Unless the setting is changed to the Cold War, which, by the way, will be a great development of the idea of the last “Moments of Valor”.

Groups of opposing ships are located on different sides of the map, similar to fields on regular land-based maps.

Composition of the CSF

1 aircraft carrier (optional, 1 more light/escort aircraft carrier/helicopter carrier, for emergency VTOL landing), 2 guided missile cruisers, 4 guided missile destroyers as guards of carriers.

(Hmm… Helicopter carrier… Well, if there are also ground targets, on a conditional island in the center of the map (the logical goal of the conflict?), then there will be a place for helicopters.)

For the map, the size of the Confrontation, the distances are more than enough. Especially considering that most of the space will be occupied by open water.

Takeoff, and start of the battle

Start - from an aircraft carrier (well, or in the air, if the rushers are not strong enough to wait ten seconds for their turn to take off), rearm/repair - also there.


It’s a sea battle, after all. If a “clack-clack” like me has mastered landing on a carrier in a realistic mode, even without a hook (albeit with the loss of the landing gear, but with the hook everything is clean and smooth) - then anyone who has trained in a test flight on the Americans can handle it.

To the very edge - “home” fleets will launch from ports/naval bases with an airfield on the edge of the map, from where players will take off.


(Don’t do this, let people learn how to take off/land on a carrier, and VTOL aircraft operators will be happy).
Well, or naval - take off from an aircraft carrier, army - from a ground airfield (or, which is better - free choice).

(God, where are we going - I’m already thinking about the fact that the players, not only the landing, will not be able to take off from the carrier without massacres and crashes. I’m paranoid and think too badly about them, right? Right?)


At the same time, from the beginning of the mission, the opposing groups of ships will be on opposite courses, so that by the time the players need to reload, the ships will already be closer.
And the “field” will be covered by escort destroyers/cruisers, “catching” cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles, and those who like to vulturing the airfield from above.


At the same time, it won’t be possible to sit under the “umbrella” of naval air defense - these same destroyers/cruisers will launch waves of cruise/anti-ship missiles at a certain interval (they also seemed to be planned as ground-based bots) at the enemy group, and if they are not intercepted (instead of bots-planes), then the allied CSF will begin to suffer losses until it loses, including the carrier, which will be one of the possible conditions for instant victory (mmm, oh those sweet sounds of the prices for Marinefliegers skyrocketing).

Or even better - at the edges of the map there will be “home/field” carrier strike groups, and somewhere in the center of the map there will be an island that will be captured by smaller groups (big landing craft, and a couple of destroyers/frigates of cover), who spawning a groups of landing crafts, carrying assault groups to the beachhead.
And the first missiles will fly precisely at these “landing” groups, generating waves of landing equipment on landing crafts.


(This happened even before the introduction of ground equipment, only without destroyers/large landing craft, just a group of landing craft, under the cover of boats, raided the shore in order to land AI tanks there, which then rushed to take the point).


Once such a group is destroyed, nothing will prevent the opposite side from capturing the island with a regular field (and air defense (plus, optionally, ASM emplacements, which, as a result, at certain intervals, in conjunction with CSF salvoes, will fire their own salvos at the enemy fleet, helping to overload its air defense)) on it, making it easier to reload/repair for subsequent attacks on the enemy’s already “home” CSF.

Sounds like a revival operation for SB, to be honest. But in realistic battles this would be simply awesome.
Yes, and AI ships would not have to be modeled so accurately, which would simplify the testing of these mechanics before making a verdict - “Is it necessary (a modern fleet) and is it worth the candle?”

And what scope is there for intra-session events?

  1. Seizing a square/air superiority on the edge of the map, from where, if successful, a flight of interceptable AI Corsairs/Intruders/Jaguars/Tornados/Su-39s, with Harpoons/Cormorans/X-29(35?), will fly out to attack the enemy CSF.
    Well, or the heavy Orion/Viking with Harpoons will fly out - it’s easier to intercept them, but they also carry more missiles.

  2. Or the same capture in a random square, where, if successful, a submarine will appear preparing to fire a salvo of anti-ship missiles at the enemy CSF, and the opponents will have a choice - either have time to destroy the submarine within 3 minutes (preparatory time for launch), or the submarine will launch the missiles, and submerge, and then the missiles will have to be intercepted… or not. But if you dont want to lose - better intercept.

  3. A group advances from the flank edge of the map to the CSF: a supply ship + a pair of cover frigates.
    If the supply group reaches the CSF, the team regenerates a quarter/third/half of the victory points/ships integrity (or players receive additional respawns/RP), when the ships restore damage, the supply group disappears. If it doesn’t reach, everything remains as it was.

  4. The team’s aircraft carrier launches an AWACS aircraft (Yak-44/E-2 Hawkeye) into the sky, as a result of which the team receives permanent marking of all enemy aircraft within a radius of 30-40 km from the AWACS aircraft, and more reliable target acquisition by radar, while he won’t be shot down. (And smart players WILL protect their “Eye in the sky”.)

  5. The team’s helicopter carrier launches an assault group (2 landing helicopters (Mi-8/BlackHawk) and 4 attack helicopters (Ka-52/Ah-1Z)) advance to the disputed island to clear the airfield fortifications and “land” on it.
    Attack helicopters suppress the SPAA (Yenisei, Shilka, Strela/Gepard, M163, Ozelot)/AAA (ZU-23-2/VADS) airfield cover, and ground assault group, which captured it, after which the “grunt wagons” land on it.
    If the helicopters were not intercepted, and the landing helicopter (at least one) landed on the airfield, the “owning” team of the group takes control of the Field.

Next is pretty weird idea, which better fit to same gamemode, but in WW2 setting.
6. A classic “brawl” of naval targets.
At a certain point, two groups of older ships, similar to the current top-end CL/CA/DD, begin to “feed” shells to each other.
The goal is to send the enemy squadron to the bottom before yours is sent there. Anyway:

In addition, the ships may be elderly, but they are quite capable of firing a cloud of 20-45mm anti-aircraft shells + 127-130mm HE-VT, so you will either have to use a smart weaponry from a respectful distance, putting up with a small number of launches/drops (and a battle fleet needs a lot of dakka to been killed), or risk exposing yourself to anti-aircraft guns in order to bombard the deck with unguided/“dumb” bombs.

Damn, for such a number of targets, it would really be nice to introduce the ability to respawn.


Ideally, the condition for victory will be the destruction of the enemy aircraft carrier/entire CSF.
As an experiment to move away from the tired “victory by depleting points/killing all enemy pilots” system.

In this mission/map, it is preferable that victory be based on the justified logic of the battle - steamroll/snowball by success in events (capture of the island, destruction of reinforcements, and at the end - suppression the enemy air defense of the CSF, with the destruction of aircraft carriers), when the enemy loses because he just cannot fight further , and not because “the points burned out.”

And Tomcats be able, to fulfill their predestined goal - defend CSF from boogeys and missles.

There will even be a place for a nuclear weapon (and what a hunt will begin for a nuke carrier eager to share his/her “burning love heat” with the enemy’s CSF…).

We should think about a topic with the same battle format, but for WW2 aircraft… Maybe that will force devs to make aviation torps useful.

No activity. Looks like all ppl went to discuss Abrams armor

1 Like

Why zero activity?

Думаю тут тоже CSF надо