Campaigns for Modern Conflicts

[Imeror]

Since it was a topic, I enjoyed the lack of ammo on the Yantar.
It is strong and thus useful for giving ponctual help to SF, but it don't have enough ammo to do the work alone. It is a fire support, not a wonder weapon that win the map for the player. A good game mechanic, in my opinion.

Even the Americans that LOVE fire support are not sending Tomahawks each time a SEAL unit is in a firefight

[Tobi72]

Since it was a topic, I enjoyed the lack of ammo on the Yantar.
It is strong and thus useful for giving ponctual help to SF, but it don't have enough ammo to do the work alone. It is a fire support, not a wonder weapon that win the map for the player. A good game mechanic, in my opinion.

Even the Americans that LOVE fire support are not sending Tomahawks each time a SEAL unit is in a firefight

And that was exactly my intention when designing this campaign: to create a coordinated interplay between different types of weapons. In doing so, I even gave the Yantar more firepower than it actually possesses. In each mission, I try to maintain a balanced relationship between the number and strength of the enemies and the victory conditions that must be fulfilled.

[bondjamesbond]

Since it was a topic, I enjoyed the lack of ammo on the Yantar.
It is strong and thus useful for giving ponctual help to SF, but it don't have enough ammo to do the work alone. It is a fire support, not a wonder weapon that win the map for the player. A good game mechanic, in my opinion.

Even the Americans that LOVE fire support are not sending Tomahawks each time a SEAL unit is in a firefight

Everything’s fine in moderation, but if you’re under a never-ending onslaught of clones, you could fill every hold to the brim with rockets and it still wouldn’t help )) Because as soon as one wave of enemies is destroyed, three new ones will take their place – you might as well not even arm them, as they’ll simply trample you ))) But our Toby knows how to strike a balance and keep the game exciting!!!

The American penchant for bombarding every bush with missiles and bombs hasn’t paid off, as experience has shown, so you can’t do without the support of hordes of ground-based clowns and clones )

Even when playing your mod, where NATO air power looms over almost every one of my soldiers, without the backing of a massive ground assault, it’s just a bit of a nuisance.

[bondjamesbond]

Since it was a topic, I enjoyed the lack of ammo on the Yantar.
It is strong and thus useful for giving ponctual help to SF, but it don't have enough ammo to do the work alone. It is a fire support, not a wonder weapon that win the map for the player. A good game mechanic, in my opinion.

Even the Americans that LOVE fire support are not sending Tomahawks each time a SEAL unit is in a firefight

And that was exactly my intention when designing this campaign: to create a coordinated interplay between different types of weapons. In doing so, I even gave the Yantar more firepower than it actually possesses. In each mission, I try to maintain a balanced relationship between the number and strength of the enemies and the victory conditions that must be fulfilled.

You’ve certainly managed it!

[Tobi72]

Since it was a topic, I enjoyed the lack of ammo on the Yantar.
It is strong and thus useful for giving ponctual help to SF, but it don't have enough ammo to do the work alone. It is a fire support, not a wonder weapon that win the map for the player. A good game mechanic, in my opinion.

Even the Americans that LOVE fire support are not sending Tomahawks each time a SEAL unit is in a firefight

And that was exactly my intention when designing this campaign: to create a coordinated interplay between different types of weapons. In doing so, I even gave the Yantar more firepower than it actually possesses. In each mission, I try to maintain a balanced relationship between the number and strength of the enemies and the victory conditions that must be fulfilled.

You’ve certainly managed it!

Well, I'm trying my best. You don't always have to win the first time you start a mission; if you lose, you try a different tactic a second time. In the upcoming missions, you can look forward to variety. For example, they involve freeing tanker crews, taking over captured oil tankers, the Yantar's interaction with submarines and their silent attacks on naval targets, secret recovery operations of enemy hydrophones, and so on. All in all, short but intense missions; the first three were just a warm-up.

HDP.png (561.06 KiB) Viewed 231 times

[bondjamesbond]

And that was exactly my intention when designing this campaign: to create a coordinated interplay between different types of weapons. In doing so, I even gave the Yantar more firepower than it actually possesses. In each mission, I try to maintain a balanced relationship between the number and strength of the enemies and the victory conditions that must be fulfilled.

You’ve certainly managed it!

Well, I'm trying my best. You don't always have to win the first time you start a mission; if you lose, you try a different tactic a second time. In the upcoming missions, you can look forward to variety. For example, they involve freeing tanker crews, taking over captured oil tankers, the Yantar's interaction with submarines and their silent attacks on naval targets, secret recovery operations of enemy hydrophones, and so on. All in all, short but intense missions; the first three were just a warm-up.HDP.png

I have no doubt that we’re in for a thoroughly gripping storyline and a wide variety of challenges!
https://dzen.ru/a/XCyQzmIkjACqhxcn
https://fishki.net/1633743-11-izobreten ... ojnam.html