Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pancho

Introducing a Third Force Into WOI

Recommended Posts

Okay, I'm working on a campaign called "Tattered Liberty," about the USS Liberty incident. It's a short campaign, as you might imagine, and it presents some challenges, since essentially you're introducing a third side into WOI.

 

One approach I'm considering is placing Israel and the Arab states on the same side. It's not as crazy as it sounds. The US wasn't friendly with Egypt at the time, since it was a Soviet client. After the beating the Liberty took, the Sixth Fleet would have probably been happy to shoot down Mirages or MiGs on 8 June 1967. Optimizing the campaign for USN, I'd change the frontline to parallel the Mediterranean littoral, and make my focus target Tel Aviv. Facing a whole coastline full of bad guys from Port Said to Beruit, anything could happen.

 

However, when I switch Israel to Enemy (that is, Force 2), Israeli forces don't show up on the map, although the Arabs do. Would I need to set all the Israeli bases to Enemy in the terrain files for this to work? (If so, that would probably negate this approach, since it would dictate a stand-alone campaign, and I don't think this scenario is substantial enough to merit a separate install).

 

What would really be great is the ability to set a third force to Neutral. I did notice that the Frontline data contains provisions for neutral areas. I don't suppose I could introduce a third force as Neutral, could I?

 

Failing that, I guess I could put the USN on the same side as the Arabs. That's predictable, but it would still do the job.

 

On the plus side, I've got the USS America in the Med, launching strikes. (After porting over F-4Bs and A-4Cs from WOV, I found that the America's squadrons were already in the game, and the correct squadron markings actually showed up on the birds. TK does great research!) The Saratoga was the other CV on the scene. It carried the same aircraft types as the America, except it also had a squadron of A-1Hs aboard. Do y'all think it's worth introducing another CV just for the Skyraiders? I guess I could also make the single carrier the Saratoga, too, in order to present the Skyraider option.

 

Thing is, I'd like to make this short campaign as easy as possible to install, so I'd rather not use any aircraft, skins, or ships that don't come stock with WOV or WOI. The America is Kitty Hawk class, which comes with WOV, but of course, the Saratoga is Forrestal class, which would require an add-on (as would the A-1H). As I said, I don't think this is a big enough campaign to merit a separate install, with lots of add-ons and stuff.

 

Unless I introduced Soviet intervention, maybe ...

 

Anybody have any thoughs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe to keep the install simple you could just focus on the jets. as much as i love this series, i just stick to the files that dont need ini editing and those that require clean instals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably easier and make more sense to make a mission pack rather than a campaign. The other question would be how to make the Liberty not sink after being strafed, rocketed and torpedoed by our "friends".

Edited by Typhoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
probably easier and make more sense to make a mission pack rather than a campaign. The other question would be how to make the Liberty not sink after being strafed, rocketed and torpedoed by our "friends".

Well, I wasn't going to focus on the attack on the Liberty, itself, but the response. A-4 and A-1 strikes were launched from America and Forrestal shortly after Liberty finally managed to get word to the fleet, to attack the Israeli gunboats. LBJ recalled the strikes. So in this campaign, we'd assume that the strikes weren't recalled, and see how things play out until the end of the Six Day War.

 

Maybe you're right, though, it might be better as a single mission. Another reason I'm doing this campaign is to lay groundwork for a Lebanon 1958 campaign, or a Lebanon 1983 campaign. Maybe it would be best to do a Sixth Fleet package as a separate install, including campaigns for 1958, 1967, and 1983.

Edited by Pancho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I wasn't going to focus on the attack on the Liberty, itself, but the response. A-4 and A-1 strikes were launched from America and Forrestal shortly after Liberty finally managed to get word to the fleet, to attack the Israeli gunboats. LBJ recalled the strikes. So in this campaign, we'd assume that the strikes weren't recalled, and see how things play out until the end of the Six Day War.

 

Maybe you're right, though, it might be better as a single mission. Another reason I'm doing this campaign is to lay groundwork for a Lebanon 1958 campaign, or a Lebanon 1983 campaign. Maybe it would be best to do a Sixth Fleet package as a separate install, including campaigns for 1958, 1967, and 1983.

 

sounds like a mission pack with multiple sorties from both 'sides'. there was also a precedent for follow on strikes against PT bases that had attacked USN ships........

 

and 1989, 1990, 1991 campaigns? maybe even 1999 (Kososo terrain?)

 

I might even know an old 6th Fleet guy to help out.......

Edited by Typhoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bounder

Wondered when this would show up ,you do know why there was no response . The US. was really at fault,Prior to anti shipping strikes IDF asked US. if they were going to have any ships in the area,they were told none would be near. After accounting for its ships,and being told no US allied ships were in the area they attacked thinking it was an Egypt ship called the El Quseir. The USS Liberty was to have moved further from the war zone but com failures,were stated as to why the ship never got the message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondered when this would show up ,you do know why there was no response . The US. was really at fault,Prior to anti shipping strikes IDF asked US. if they were going to have any ships in the area,they were told none would be near. After accounting for its ships,and being told no US allied ships were in the area they attacked thinking it was an Egypt ship called the El Quseir. The USS Liberty was to have moved further from the war zone but com failures,were stated as to why the ship never got the message.

 

yes, I know of all of those points and have read the reports. I don't fault the Israeli's for killing my shipmates by mistake. In war, accidents do happen.

 

I've also read a number of accounts from other perspectives that shed a different light on the potential culpability of the Isrealis. I've read them, I do not know how to answer them. I do know that those who lost personal friends or those with access to back channel information will not ever, ever accept those explanations. I cannot fault them either.

 

Only the Israeli's themselves know for certain. Our country accepted their explanation and so have I.

 

We have made similar mistakes on occasion. War is a terrible business, unforgiving of error. Error does occur. I don't think we should dwell on that aspect here, but should give honors due to those who fell in all battles on all sides.

 

In the small mission pack for the Gulf of Sidra incident, I tried to do just that in the credits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wondered when this would show up ,you do know why there was no response . The US. was really at fault,Prior to anti shipping strikes IDF asked US. if they were going to have any ships in the area,they were told none would be near. After accounting for its ships,and being told no US allied ships were in the area they attacked thinking it was an Egypt ship called the El Quseir. The USS Liberty was to have moved further from the war zone but com failures,were stated as to why the ship never got the message.

Yep Bounder, I've read up on the controversy, from both sides. Wouldn't be so hasty to assign "fault," though, because there's plenty of blame to go around. For instance, IAF pilots admitted that they saw Western lettering on the Liberty, and that gave them second thoughts, yet they carried through with the attacks. One of my college buddies had an uncle on the Liberty, a marine. A tragic accident.

 

Just thought it would make an interesting air-combat scenario, and I have for awhile. First proposed this campaign back in November 2002, shortly before I released Red Wings. :smile:

Edited by Pancho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bounder

negative when they saw the lettering they stopped attacks,and thought it was soviet.

 

1.According to the Naval Court of Inquiry [6] (page 23 ff, p. 111 ff) and National Security Agency official history NSA report pp. 21-23, the order to withdraw was not broadcast on the frequencies that the Liberty crew was monitoring for orders until 1525Zulu, hours after the attack, due to a long series of administrative and communications problems. The Navy said a large volume of unrelated high-precedence traffic, including intelligence intercepts related to the conflict, was being handled at the time and it also faulted a shortage of qualified radio men as a contributing factor to the failure to send the withdrawal message to Liberty in time. [7]

 

2If traveling at only 5 knots (9.3 km/h), its flag would not have been visible. NSA documents declassified on June 8 2007

 

ref. Wikipedia

and talks with ret. IAF pilots during MFO ops in 80's

 

being shot at 5 times while over seas (thank God they missed) its easy to mis identify. And in all the time I received FF only once did anyone get in trouble,or ever recive a write up.

Edited by Bounder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bounder
yes, I know of all of those points and have read the reports. I don't fault the Israeli's for killing my shipmates by mistake. In war, accidents do happen.

 

I've also read a number of accounts from other perspectives that shed a different light on the potential culpability of the Isrealis. I've read them, I do not know how to answer them. I do know that those who lost personal friends or those with access to back channel information will not ever, ever accept those explanations. I cannot fault them either.

 

Only the Israeli's themselves know for certain. Our country accepted their explanation and so have I.

 

We have made similar mistakes on occasion. War is a terrible business, unforgiving of error. Error does occur. I don't think we should dwell on that aspect here, but should give honors due to those who fell in all battles on all sides.

 

In the small mission pack for the Gulf of Sidra incident, I tried to do just that in the credits.

 

 

very good reply as after 6 investigations its still were it is. As they say war is hell. Doing joint ops with 2/10 Marines heloborn ops we almost landed on the wrong LHA and were were moving slow, Think about id ing a ship at jet speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ref. Wikipedia

and talks with ret. IAF pilots during MFO ops in 80's

 

being shot at 5 times while over seas (thank God they missed) its easy to mis identify. And in all the time I received FF only once did anyone get in trouble,or ever recive a write up.

Heh, Wikipedia ... well, anybody can edit Wikipedia, Bounder (and boy, do they ever). I've read other reports that contradict the ones you're citing. Not saying you're wrong, just that there is plenty of static surrounding an incident like this one. Depends who you talk to -- somebody's always "uncovering" another document or tape or eyewitness account.

 

Anyway, personally, I don't put much credence in most conspiracy theories. You need too many people to make a conspiracy work, and too many people just can't keep secrets. Somebody always talks. Accidents happen.

 

That's one reason I thought this might make an interesting campaign. Maybe this topic is still too controversial to portray in a game, though, even forty years later. Too bad, because those Navy Phantoms sure do look good over the Med.

 

And I'm glad they missed you too, Bounder! Thanks for your service. :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bounder

Its just a touchy subject still IAF pilots I talk to are still saddened by the grief it caused,It is used as a training aid to show pilots what can happen,(if you read that account they even hit an IDF Infantry unit that same war.,but not to stop you I mean if I get that annoyed I just don't upload it, My only concern is that it tends to perpetuate the myth it was do intentionally. I myself would be far more interested in a War for Independence type of think the mix of WW2,and as modern as they could get AC fascinated me I just dont know how to do missions/campaign type of things.

"The History Channel had a special on the U.S.S. Liberty incident. Very well done show, and probably available on DVD." I saw that to ,but one of the few shows I found not as well done as their slandered show. Like I said I based mine feeling on talks with RET. IDF pilots,and personnel experience in training with USMC ,and war ops,both Army,and Joint ops with 2/10 Marines. (l am even authorized to wear a Marine combat patch).

 

I have photos of both ships and if not for a radar type antenna they do look alike.

 

 

 

lets not turn into a Pissing match but I do enjoy the conversation ,and seeing the feelings,as less people that really know fade away. Its like the Mi Lay incident the most argumentative people I know on the incident are only 25 years old.

Edited by Bounder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, to answer the original question....

 

You can only have 2 sides in this game...FRIENDLY and ENEMY. Any nation classed as 'neutral' will not have it's assets show up, or their 'target areas' (as defined in the targets.ini) attackable (is that a word??)

 

Already been there with the Iran/Iraq rebuild. Kuwait City, Doha, Dharan are all set as 'netural'. You can fly down there, manually, but are not tasked to hit anything. Seems to also work against anti-shipping missions, as I built routes running from Umm Qsar to Doha, and it never was assigned.

 

Sometime I wish this was more like XvT or XWA; they have 4 and 6 sides...you can assign all kinds of different alignments

 

Wrench

kevin stein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bounder

"Sometime I wish this was more like XvT or XWA; they have 4 and 6 sides...you can assign all kinds of different alignments

 

Wrench

kevin stein"

 

OMG that would be wild, think of the mixing one could do!

Edited by Bounder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lets not turn into a Pissing match but I do enjoy the conversation ,and seeing the feelings,as less people that really know fade away. Its like the Mi Lay incident the most argumentative people I know on the incident are only 25 years old.

Roger that, Bounder, and I hear ya! :good:

 

For the record, I don't have a strong opinion on the incident one way or the other, aside from believing it was a tragic accident that cost the lives of good men. No axe to grind. Gameplay was the only motivation I had in considering this campaign.

 

I've lived through nearly 50 years of history, myself, and I'm always amazed at how ignorant some kids are of even the recent past. A college intern who works for me wasn't even aware that WWII ended with an atomic bomb -- I am not kidding. And she'll graduate this summer. Sad.

 

Thanks for the info, Wrench! I suspected as much. Dunno, maybe this one isn't worth pursuing. Of course, you could always insert the Sixth Fleet as a hypothetical intervention force on the Israeli side in any one of the stock WOI campaigns, or any one of my "filler" campaigns. That's so easy to do, though, it's almost trivial.

 

Might be better to move on to the Lebanon scenarios ...

Edited by Pancho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Might be better to move on to the Lebanon scenarios ...

 

Now that I can sink my teeth into......with the F-8B coming out soon and a stick it with a carrier battle group....oh yeah.

 

 

http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_259.shtml

 

However ole Tom Cooper seems to have gotten the wrong F-8 in his article. That model is a C and they didn't enter service until 1959.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now that I can sink my teeth into......with the F-8B coming out soon and a stick it with a carrier battle group....oh yeah.

 

More Crusaders!

[burns]Excellent.[/burns]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I wasn't going to focus on the attack on the Liberty, itself, but the response. A-4 and A-1 strikes were launched from America and Forrestal shortly after Liberty finally managed to get word to the fleet, to attack the Israeli gunboats. LBJ recalled the strikes. So in this campaign, we'd assume that the strikes weren't recalled, and see how things play out until the end of the Six Day War.

 

Maybe you're right, though, it might be better as a single mission. Another reason I'm doing this campaign is to lay groundwork for a Lebanon 1958 campaign, or a Lebanon 1983 campaign. Maybe it would be best to do a Sixth Fleet package as a separate install, including campaigns for 1958, 1967, and 1983.

Looks like we have been playing with similar ideas :biggrin:

 

In my MidEastWars pack I included a sort of USS Liberty scenario, with an added target area and the USS America (friendly) that would randomly show up (very rarely in fact). It didn't work the way I wanted, but I left it in anyway. So if you sometimes see a recon flight of USN F-4s in my campaign, this is why :)

 

A 1983 campaign looks very interesting, with French Crusaders and Super Etendards, Italian Starfighters and USN aircraft. Just a pity there is no Buccaneer yet (maybe use the Jaguar?). The stock WOI Lebanon campaign seems a good basis for this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bounder

Well here is a thought. Ive been adding Soviet,China,US,Nato AC ,and using the single player missions.

 

One could see how given the right circumstances the Soviet's may have added AC ,and crews to any of the Mideast conflicts.US would in turn back IDF, and Nato may follow suit. China could be a wild card as they would have to decide at the time how they hated more,but as we have seen before oil makes strange bed fellows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think adding the Soviets would be the right idea. I mean all those years of support and finally they get fed up and get directly involved. Using the excuse that the US is involved too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think adding the Soviets would be the right idea. I mean all those years of support and finally they get fed up and get directly involved. Using the excuse that the US is involved too.

 

that was actually very, very close.............

 

:grandpa:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that was actually very, very close.............

 

:grandpa:

 

Oh in the early 80's when my dad was at 6 ATAF in Izmir, Turkey yeah lots of stuff going on. I got stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh in the early 80's when my dad was at 6 ATAF in Izmir, Turkey yeah lots of stuff going on. I got stories.

 

 

"in the early 80's when my dad was..... "

 

thanks - junior! :rolleyes:

 

I had already rotated back to the states by then from the lively and exciting Med cruises playing tag with Russians, Libyans, etc......

 

:grandpa:

Edited by Typhoid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..