May 10, 1985,
USSR & Iran army of 286 units opposed to Alliancde army of 313 units
for a battle of complexity 1.78 at Brigade(X) level
on a 25 Km/Hex map
for 75 turns of Full Day each.
by Patrice Baudin submited on 21-11-2002
Rugged-Defense Playing Statistics
JIHAD!! (version 2.0)
This is an hypothetical scenario, largely inspired by the well-known Victory Games' strategic simulation "Gulf Strike". It's not a true adaptation, but rather a kind of "à la manière de" (as we say in french).
Background : after his victory on Iraq on 1984's Spring, Iran spends one year reequipping his armies, with soviet's help. On the beginning of May 1985, ayatollah Khomeyni decides the time has come to bring the light of the True Religion to the Gulf's old monarchies. On May 10 1985, Iran's armies drive on the south. Their first victims are Kuwait (of course) and Bahrain. After a few days of indecision, USA jump in the fight with Navy, Air Force, land army and Marines, shortly followed by the USSR. The World clash for the Gulf's oil had just begun...
This scenario lasts two and half months (75 turns). 1 turn = 1 day. 1 hexagon = 25 km.
Protagonists : Iran and USSR versus the Alliance (Gulf council Nations plus USA). There is a good chance that Egypt, France, Israel, Pakistan and UK will come to the help of the Alliance, but it's randomly determined in each play.
In this scenario, many events can happen. Among them : a Yemen's invasion of Oman, and an Uprising of Kurdistan. On the other hand, there is a chance that Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE and Saudi Arabia will surrender when their capital falls. This possibility is weak for Saudi Arabia, not so weak for the others (in fact, for Kuwait and Bahrain, this will not make a big change!). If this event happens, some victory points will be added to Red player's total. There are many others events, which bring some variety to the scenario; but I prefer letting players discover that by themselves.
In this new version, if Tehran AND Qom (the holy town of shiite religion) fall, there are 75% chances Iran surrenders - which means the withdrawal of all iranian units, and 60 more VP for the Alliance player.
Use of chemical weapons is possible for the two sides (also hazardously determined in each play). About nuclear weapons, I think the way the system simulates nuclear war is, at least, strange, and rather unrealistic; use of nuclear weapons don't add anything to the game. But, in order to make things more interesting, there is a 10% possibility that Soviets ripost with nuclear weapons if Alliance uses chemical. Of course, in this occurence, US and Allies will also use nuclear (only 1 attack by turn for each player). From turn 18, the Alliance player cans also ask for nuclear release as a Theater option. If the answer is "yes" (20% chances), he will receive the right to make two nuclear attacks by turn; of course, if this occurs, enemy forces will also use nuclear weapons.
No paras attack can be launched against air bases in Israel, Syria and USSR : these countries are assumed to possess armies powerfull enough to protect their bases against this kind of threat.
This scenario can be played pleasantly against the computer; but, despite all my efforts, the AI don't seem to understand fully all the subtleties of modern combined warfare. So, the best is to fight against an human opponent. In this case, the better player must take the Alliance, which has an harder challenge to undertake.
Colours code :
Iran : brown;
URSS : black;
Kuwait : grey;
Bahrain : light green;
Qatar : dark blue;
UAE : red;
Oman : white;
Saudi arabia : light blue;
USA : green,
Marine corps : military green;
France : blue;
Israel : green and blue;
Pakistan : yellow.
UK : light brown
Egypt : Ivory.
Technical note : this scenario has been made with version 1,05 of TOAW2, with all advanced rules options. Of course, AI Level must be setted to "Strong". I've used Opart 2 300 mainly because it allows to put many more supply points on the map. This is very important, because there are numerous off-map boxes, which need supply.
Final precision : to day, such a scenario seems to be pure fiction, but, in the Eighties, I think this was the kind of nightmare which haunted the nights of some political, economical and military american and european leaders. After Iran's revolution, the soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the beginning of Iraq-Iran's war, Persian Gulf was really a powder keg. This explosive situation inspired Mark Herman's famous game : "Gulf Strike".
I bought the first edition when it appeared in France (1983), and, since I had my first PC (1989), I dreamt of a good computer adaptation. When I was working on this scenario, I found that "Gulf Strike", which is really a very pleasant game, is, on several points, rather simplistic. For example, the map is abstract, and false in many parts. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia's north are not as flat as it seems when you look at "Gulf Strike"'s map (a perfect tanks' playground, indeed!) Actually, there are two maps, with different scales. You see the work. Another big problem is the naval war (very important in "Gulf Strike"). There are no submarines in TOAW2, and naval units are rather weaks (even if you compare them to their TOAW1 counterparts; is this a bug?).
In the end, why such an hypothetical war, and not, for example, the Gulf War of 1990-91? Simply because, for a wargamer, the Gulf War has no real interest. Moreover, History has strange developments, and what seems to day been purely fictionnal can find in the future another actuality...
Now, have fun.