Syrian AA?

[Scipio]

Okay, it's a bit late to come up with this, and I bet this issue has been handeld somewhere, but I wasn't able to find it with the forum search, or I found to many results....

Anyway, what was the reason why the Syrians doesn't use manportable AA like the SA-7, 14, 16? Even if the Allied Air-supermacy isn't as overmodeled in CMSF as it would be in reality....

[Ryujin]

Because in theory the BLUFOR planes would be engaging from significant standoff ranges and not overflying the area. So any MANPADS being fired at them would not be in the area shown in CMSF anyway. While this may be a bit off for say a kiowa (I think they'd have to get in a bit closer), it's applied as a general rule in CMSF.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

This a ground warfare sim. Modelling MANPADS, SAM and ADA are outside the scope of that.

[Alan8325]

It will be interesting to see how air power and AA are modeled (or not) in CMSF2, which will supposedly have even technology between BLUE and RED. In CM:Normandy air assets will have a chance of not completing attack runs based on the amount of AA in the area, but this is WWII. With modern technology and air superiority doctrines in CMSF2 however, I think they will either have to totally eliminate air assets for one side like they did with CMSF or only allow air assets for one side to be used in any particular scenario.

I'd personally like the RED side to have air assets next time though, even if it means realism has to be relaxed a little.

[Scipio]

I wonder how they will handel this in CM:A. IIRC, the Soviet defeat started when the USA begun to deliver Stinger-rockets to the Taliban.

[Alan8325]

I wonder how they will handel this in CM:A. IIRC, the Soviet defeat started when the USA begun to deliver Stinger-rockets to the Taliban.

CM:A is confirmed to at least have the 23mm AA guns available as units in the game. As for how it affects air support, there may be the system that is in CM:N where attack runs have a chance of being cancelled, but more likely it's just up to the scenario designer to add or remove appropriate air support elements according to AA elements on the ground. For example, if there are 23mm guns in the field, you may not have helicopters provide support but attack planes such as the Su-25 could still make runs effectively. If the story and scenario briefing indicate that there are numerous significant AA assets around, such as SAMs and ZSU-23s, the scenario designer may not include air support at all.

I do not think that AA units on map will actually attack aircraft providing support though. That is why the scenario designer will have to make it realistic by including or not including certain things.

[akd]

Or they might simply be for direct fire ground use...(note that MANPADS are not in the features list).

[Alan8325]

That's most likely what they are in the game for. The ZSU-23s were pretty successful in the direct fire role against ground targets, especially the ones higher up where weapon elevation limits on other vehicles caused problems.

[Scipio]

Alan, I guess the mujaheddin will neither have air support nor ZSU-23 tanks available.

[MikeyD]

You could say the Syrian AAA threat is 'simulated' by the scenario designer not letting you bomb the crap out of every suspected enemy structure on the map!

There's nothing in the game to keep a designer from providing you with one squad of infantry and twenty A-10 bombers to get the job done. But the deisigners have got to take into account real-world aircraft availability, mission prioritization, the threat of (off-map) air defenses in an area. I recall in one scenario I wrote in the orders that air support would be unavailable due to a massive Scud missile gas attack on the main airbase! :eek: