Strategies from the STC 1: Mexican Standoff

In-depth tactical discussion on how to lose the least

Moderator: Defcon moderators

User avatar
Kuth
level4
level4
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:55 am
Location: Keele Imperium
Contact:

Strategies from the STC 1: Mexican Standoff

Postby Kuth » Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:34 am

Strategies from the Strategic Technical Center (Series1):

South America: Mexican Standoff

---------------

Thesis:
I actually had this manuver performed against me by the AI, and I thought it was a viable tactic. Haven't actually tested it sucessfully yet, but it's a concept worth writing about.

Most of the high population cities are crammed around Mexico for the South American continent, with a few placed in the southern reaches. Normally one would think this has the european dillemma: small space and not enough land room to cram all in what's needed. However...

When it boils down to a nuclear exchange between North America and South America, one interesting setup to defend your land territories there while nuking your opposition can be setup like so;

Image

The deal here is for your submarines to nuke what silos there are defending N.A. When operating in groups of at least three, an ideal task is to designate one silo as the first target of all three submarines, and repeat for the next target (optimally one cluster of submarines/bombers per silo). This way, the enemy silos are overloaded with short-range nuclear missiles and take damage and/or destroyed, leaving the rest of the cities open for ICBM/returned bomber attack.

It also makes airspace over the continental U.S. a hazard- as mexican missile platforms can hit most airbases situated in the United States.

counters:
The NORAD player has several oppertunities to break this.

1. Gulf of mexico counter:
Not pictured in the illustration is the rest of the S.A. fleet. If this is defeated in the African-European conflicts in the ocean (or by the U.S. forces on the east coast) then it's possible to route bombers around the defense net and attack the submarines from behind. The only problem with this is that bombers have to cross the mainland in order to combat the submarines- which means enemy defenses. Still, if S.America is being attacked by Africa, then the chances are good that the enemy will be distracted by African bombers.

2. Pacific retaliation:
Unless the S.American player does not divide his force, it's also possible to take the long way around and divert your forces south. The Pacific is a VERY large place to loose fleets, and a wise American player may deploy a force far to the west to come down and around behind the S.American forces without encountering thier screen.

3. Offensive SSBNs.
Unless the S.American forces have a carrier on ASW operations, several submarines could sneak into that general area and attack the S.American SSBNs when they surface to fire. This also means potentially sacrificing these submarines, unless you give your opponent more to worry about by overloading his defenses with parimeter attacks from battleships and fighters/bombers.
Last edited by Kuth on Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
kentuckyfried
level2
level2
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 9:25 pm
Location: Canada

Postby kentuckyfried » Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:53 am

Makes sense to me! Though I see that there are only 2 remaining SAM/silos for the rest of S. America in your example.
A. Smith
level2
level2
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:10 am

Postby A. Smith » Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:55 am

A possible counter to that is massing your sub fleets on one side and nuke the crap out of the souther cities (namely sao paulo and such). this should grant you victory, as most of the SA's pop is on the souther part (except mexico). Also puting 4 silos along the mexican border and the gulf coast, 1 near LA/San Francisco and one near NY should block most of the nukes. if necessary, scramble as many fighters as you cna to fight off nukes and destroy the fleets.
User avatar
Kuth
level4
level4
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:55 am
Location: Keele Imperium
Contact:

Postby Kuth » Wed Oct 04, 2006 4:32 am

...I forgot to point out that the illustration is not a definate setup, just a concept to a theory that could work.

Silos clustered around Mexico can do the same thing, with maybe 2-3 (I put 2 or 3 up here. The comp I think but 2 and did well against my rain of nukes).
Crusader Scott
level2
level2
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:24 am
Location: NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Crusader Scott » Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:13 am

Very thoughtful post! Thanks! Chess, Risk, and Diplomacy all have varying degrees of complex "opening books," and I suspect DEFCON will have its own share too! And that is definitely a good thing!

I read a lot of military history and know that you can find a lot of books that detail fundamental strategy and tactics for winning a ground war. However, I have never found a book that details the same thing about nuclear war. I could understand all the secrecy during the Cold War, but now that we have moved beyond that dangerous phase of brinksmanship, I wonder why nobody has published such a book. Surely there are detailed strategy manuals for nuclear warfare as well! And they can't all still be classified!

I was always curious about that.
User avatar
Kuth
level4
level4
Posts: 709
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:55 am
Location: Keele Imperium
Contact:

Postby Kuth » Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:21 am

...the whole idea about the STC I planned on being the 'setting' of perhaps Defcon's first fanfiction... the excerpts I write can be seen as 'essays' from students at the STC- who use Defcon (or the future version of it) as a training tool in studying Atomic warfare tactics. Most of them are observations on some setups and strategies used and observed in Defcon for players to digest and experiment with.

But yes- it's my hope also that Defcon becomes something like internet chess, since it's so small and yet so capable. And like chess sets players are already making custom sets... I know I want to create an official STC set for release eventually *shrugs*

Return to “Strategic Air Command”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests