Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
The third mission is already in the work and will be a culmination of series! It should surprise many!
If you were subscribed before - unsubscribe, load the game, shut the game, then resubscribe to pick up the updates.
Many thanks for @Nomis for their contributions.
PS just finished reconding a full gameplay, took over 4 hours, TBH but with minimal accelerations. Will edit it out and post to my YT channel. Definitely look forward to create a continuation, more modern assets, more realistic. Besides Greenland we have Canada in crosshairs :) Time to defend brave Canucks!
Also if your lore suggests that the US is preoccupied with China and in the Red Sea, then how can they affort both a Marine Corp Expeditionary Unit and a larger than usual CVBG?
I think the US would be overwhelming with only a normal sized CVBG as described in my previous post.
I wish you all the best in your creative pursuits.
1. As Europe is fully engaged in helping out Ukraine in its defence against Russia, weapons are sparce, Denmark had to search among African and Latin American countries for old gear it can quickly ship to Greenland (which is currently "defended" by US bases, which are adversarial in this scenario). Also procure old decomissioned planes from France. Only "modern" bits are subs. USA also has some old gear, as it most effort is gone to counteract Chinese expansion in South China sea, as well as repell Houties in Red Sea. But DJT won't wait and Pete Hegseth sent few emojies and assembled whaever it could find, including Geaging DD :) Again, they had modern subs available as well as Tarawa and CVN and the mission was baked on the fly in the Signal chat.
USA side is clearly overpowered but it is still winnable and makes the engagement lot more interesting IMO. And pretty much land units are sacrificial ones. You need to make sure you still operate some CAP capacity and ideally few ASW helos to help our your subs against US avanguard.
Thanks for the feedback again, I will take it into account for the next mission. Hope you try again.
Yet the scenario reflects on how this engagement might take place in real life: US will send an overwhelmingly stong force to minimize its potential casualities, and ideally repell any attempt of defence, just shock and awe to put your opponent into submission and make it surrender in the first minutes.
However, the goal is to stop the invasion, taking heavy losses or not. Greenland and Denmark are committed to defend the sovereignity, at any cost. US while committed to land, can't afford heavy losses and will be repelled it the toll is high.
The mission triggers fully reflect it. This is a winnable scenario for Denmark, but not an easy one. Just like it would be IRL.
Few clarifications.
1. Yes Kobben-class only has ASuW torps, but honestly they don't stand a chance against LA-class in sub-vs-sub, so it would not make much difference, I can add a Danish sub or two in an update, but it won't make a difference.
There are 7 subs, not 6.
2. You missed an airbase. It might help with anti-air and ASW warfare :)
3. The only modern part is the current political sutuation, as long as weapons are matched in term of the era - I don't see a problem. I was planning to make an updated scenario with a modern weapons but not everyone wants to load a ton of mods (me neither) so I decided to start with a basic set of units.
4. Yes they are :) that's a point.
5. Yes they are :) that's a point.
I believe you might have misunderstood the idea: you are meeting an overwhelmingly strong and unreasonable opponent, you can't win it without taking heavy loses, but it can stop it.
Danish-Norwegian side:
Kidd-class destroyer as Iver Huitfeld and Absalon class frigates
Type 206 sub as modern German-Norwegian subs
Pegasus-class missile boat as Norwegian Skjold-class
P-35 Barlock radar/ESM, SA-10 Flaplid radar and SA-10 TEL (S-300F) for land-based air defence as substitute for Norwegian NASAMS or any other air defence European allies might provide.
An airfield with fighter-jets, maritime patrol aircraft, and helicopters.
US side:
Consider reducing the invasion force to a Marine Expeditionary Unit, centered on 1-2 Tarawa-class amphibious assault ships and other landing ships with destroyer/cruiser escorts and a single Los Angeles-class sub.
If you really want an entire CVBG, then that would realistically consist of:
1 Carrier, 2 air-defence cruisers, 3 destroyers and/or frigates for ASW and 1 nuclear attack sub. And additional support and landing ships.
2. You promise an air engagement, but the Danish side does not have any aircraft at all.
3. This missions lore is set in Donald Trumps presidency i.e. 2016-2020 or 2024-2028, yet the units used does not reflect this at all. You even include a WW2 era Gearing-class destroyer on the US side.
4. The Danish-Norwegian land based radars and air defence is laughably useless. The Neptune Radars have a range of only 24 nm. In effect the US airplanes are only spotted visually within 1 nm of the Danish units and the air defence does not really engage despite being set on “weapons free”.
5. The US forces are unrealisticly strong. They have both an amphibious assault ship with escorts, and an entire carrier battle group and 4 nuclear subs.