Command Modern Operations - Black Tiger II (US vs Iran) 1

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 3 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 24

  • @themacker894
    @themacker894 4 роки тому +6

    Great scenario. It's a real nail biter, and so close to reality. Also so much better without the music. I think you can probably turn the game sounds back on, which would make your job as commander a bit easier. For example, you would have heard the small boats shooting and wouldn't have wondered why they turned red. Keep up the entertaining series!

  • @NeightWolf49
    @NeightWolf49 4 роки тому

    Great video and tremendous restraint on the build-up portion.

  • @shawnp6653
    @shawnp6653 4 роки тому

    Late to the series, fun to watch!

    • @SeriousStrategyGamer
      @SeriousStrategyGamer  4 роки тому

      Excellent, and welcome to the channel. Espacially the later Black Tigers got extremely epic.

  • @commanderroddi7742
    @commanderroddi7742 Рік тому

    Also, Tarawa, the accent is on the TA (first syllable). as in,

  • @joker_g7337
    @joker_g7337 4 роки тому

    I usually use the windows reader to read the scenario for me.

  • @commanderroddi7742
    @commanderroddi7742 Рік тому

    Also, Phalanx are Awesome weapons against small boats.. It did seem as though you alocated too many Hellfires onto one boat? I'd think a single hellfire would sink one of those, and not as manny rockets. which would have helped you deal with the other group without using all your weapons.

  • @mikebersiks3280
    @mikebersiks3280 4 роки тому

    Can you not set a CAP station for the carrier planes which means that they loiter say 100nm north of the the carrier group and as it moves they move? Also, is there a way to set an escort station for the Hawkeye so that say a pair of F18s loiters around it whereever it may go?

    • @SeriousStrategyGamer
      @SeriousStrategyGamer  4 роки тому +2

      Yes, technically you can set up zones that move relative to ships, but it comes with two disadvantages: Realism-wise it would give a good indication of the position of the carrier task force, at least its relative movements. Gaming-wise it can lead to the patrol zone getting too close to enemy aa defences, so I like to retain some level of control about where the planes are.

    • @mikebersiks3280
      @mikebersiks3280 4 роки тому +1

      @@SeriousStrategyGamer I can see where it wouldn't be applicable, but in a scenario like this where you don't have to worry about telegraphing your position to 200 Backfires it might be useful. I would certainly always try and have a couple of fast movers escorting my AWACS planes in a tight congested airspace like the Persian Gulf

  • @commanderroddi7742
    @commanderroddi7742 Рік тому

    I'm so used to playing games with the NATO style symbols of half anf full circles, diamonds and squares that whatevver these are take me a bit to recognize (The other seems so fast and natural to asses to me). Also, that Iranian PB is the weirdest design I've seen (did they stick an aircraft style tale on it??? is it like the concept that a car with racing stripes is faster?). I'd hope .50 cal MG won't sink a ship the size of a Tarawa, but those can cause damage to sensors, weapons, and disable aircraft on the deck or elevators; not a mortal threat, but a threat nonetheless. Hellfires, rockets (Hydra) and Maverick B, C, D, E and F would be ideal to kill those ships (they have a small anti-tank warhead, whereas the G & K have a 300 lb. warhead meant for naval vessels). Also, as far as further assets, I'd imagine there'd be additional USAF assets in the Persian Gulf circa 2015 (F-16C Falcons for sure, maybe some F-15C Eagles or F-15E Strike Eagles; however, F-35 Lightning ** squadrons on USAF and USMC were beggining to transition into that plane, and there wre only 7 operational F-22 squadrons, and one of them was a training unit to transition new pilots into that airframe. It less likely that there would be a flight of those if there wasn't a conflic, however considering the transit and tensions with Iran, about 4 to 8 F-22s wouldn't be out of the questions? Not likely F-35s though.

    • @SeriousStrategyGamer
      @SeriousStrategyGamer  Рік тому

      True! Still always a balance between attracting new players to these games and entertaining the veteran crowd...

  • @masontrinh6880
    @masontrinh6880 4 роки тому

    That weird thing is an Akronoplan or something I’m pretty sure.

    • @SeriousStrategyGamer
      @SeriousStrategyGamer  4 роки тому +2

      Yep, close to that anyway (although much smaller). But what is the point of arming them with only MGs? As far as I can tll they could be missile armed as well.

  • @matthewconnors8503
    @matthewconnors8503 4 роки тому +2

    I laugh everytime you butchered the name Tarawa. Interesting scenario though, not to shabby👍

  • @basedeltazero714
    @basedeltazero714 4 роки тому

    Hmm, these groups of ships hanging around are kinda suspicious, lemme see what they are...
    ... it's a fucking WIG. Well, that's unexpected. Sadly they don't get their own icon in 3d.
    Apparently a real thing, though, and can even be equipped with actual missiles, which this version isn't for some reason. Also insanely fast, if you didn't notice.
    At least they don't have FTL motorcycles.
    ... wait, actually that's just how the game works, so I guess they do. Fair enough.

    • @SeriousStrategyGamer
      @SeriousStrategyGamer  4 роки тому

      Yeah, just imagine casually glancing over the screen and see one of these "ships" go 80 knots. Nearly spilled my coffee there...
      You got to give it to the Iranians, they are certainly quite innovative.