HC Beta Testing

Recon aircraft and radar activation

Mon, 09 Aug 2010 18:17:38 -0500

This continues from an issue reported by Akmatov, raised in a thread here and reported in the Issue Tracker here.

Essentially, it appears that AI controlled aircraft of the 'Recon' type have not been activating their radar unless painted by enemy radar.

This appears to have been the case since a version of HC Gold (specifically, hcg-2003.16b4b+) and, amazingly, has gone unnoticed until now.

Currently, or at least until the next build is released, only aircraft of the 'AEW' (airborne early warning) and 'EW' (electronic warfare) types would activate their radar otherwise.

In the case of the AEW aircraft, they can energize upon reaching the 'next leg' of their programmed path, that being the patrol point.

The question arises, therefore, whether you (and we would especially like to hear from the scenario designers out there) want:

1. Recon aircraft activate their radar upon takeoff and keep it active while enroute to a patrol point and throughout their mission;

OR

2. Recon aircraft activate their radar only upon reaching their patrol point.

In either case a Recon aircraft would still activate their radar if they were 'painted' by enemy radar.

Current Files

Sun, 02 Sep 2007 15:53:20 -0500

I'll post new test versions of the game files to this thread and will bump the thread as needed. See individual release threads for testing suggestions (those individual threads are also the place to post feedback).

Please read the beta testing guidelines...
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?showtopic=3574

Installation instructions (updated 2009/01/31):

Start with your 2008.044 patched game from Matrix.

Then apply any newer builds attached to this message.

Is this supposed to happen?

Mon, 21 Jun 2010 11:31:46 -0500

I've been noticing lately that if I detect one sub of a group, within a minute or so, I'll detect the other. At first I thought that was fine, they're pretty close together.

But, then I looked at the detection. I was playing a scenario with two surface ASW groups patrolling about 150 miles apart north/south from each other. A submarine was detected by a north group sonobuoy, about 15 miles north of the group, so about 165 miles from the south group. ~1 min later, its groupmate was detected...by CZ contact from the south group? What? You mean it was loud enough for the south group to see it 165 miles away, but the Spruance at 5 knots 10 miles from it never got a sniff?

Seems like the game is giving something away here? Or is it just my imagination? This happens all the time, too, with grouped AI subs and detections. The above is just one example.

Status Update

Thu, 05 Aug 2010 09:40:14 -0500

Yes, I know I have been all but AWOL for a while, but we finally managed to fill all open positions at work. That means a great reduction in overtime, that is both good and bad...hated the extra hours, loved the money. . So the good news is that I can now start devoting time to HCE again. Going to get the game up and going with the latest updates this afternoon, and probably just set up a second computer with XP for the editor (take the easy way out).

Should be seeing everyone in chat once again too.

Tony's Status update

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:29:58 -0500

I noticed there hasn't been a ton of action on the release notes verification and while I'm grateful for the issue tracker being somewhat alive, most of the excitement has surrounded a bashing of multiplayer. Well, it got me interested enough again to pound out some code. I'll try to remember to post an update here every couple of weeks until we get back to testable builds.

2010/07/31 - Another hour and a half of code edits working on the expansion to four group windows. Made it thru search.c, one of the biggies for this migration.

2010/07/29 - Couple more hours of code edits working on the expansion to four group windows. I'm getting antsy to see a compilable pile of code...

2010/07/27 - Fiveish more hours of code edits working on the expansion to four group windows abd complete tracking of detection status for each side.

2010/07/16 - Couple more hours of code edits working on the expansion to four group windows.

2010/06/22 - Detour to try to get the SE working nicely in Ubuntu with WINE. Made one critical code-change that allows the SE to work in pre-commondb battlesets without obvious issues. Roughly 5 hours invested.

2010/06/17 - Put in a couple of hours worth of code edits tonight, still working on the expansion to four group windows. Perhaps a bad move but am focusing on getting everything compiling and will return to bringing forward saved game conversion once the game runs again.

2010/06/10 - At least a week ago resumed looking into multiplayer. First steps in progress are gathering detection status per side and expanding from one to four group windows. The idea behind the group windows is to be able to view the game from different perspectives (Red, Blue, Green) instead of only from the player perspective. The task is complicated quite a bit by writing the saved game file conversion routines, both globals and group structures need conversion. Probably weeks or months away from useable build.

Windows 7 Compatibility

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:34:59 -0500

OK, got a new computer with windows 7. Will I need to do anything to HCE other than re-install it on the new box, or are there any compatibility problems with HCE and windows 7. My experience with 64 bit systems is nil, so keep that in mind.

If you are curious...

Intel i7 Core 930
12 GB DDR 1600 RAM
GeForce GTS 250 Video
1 TB HD

I bought a full out gaming rig. It's working great so far. I dont' forsee having to upgrade for a while, and even if I do, the RAM is expandable up to 24 GB.

I LOATHED Windows Vista...Windows 7 I'm finding myself content enough with however, pleasant surprise TBH.

victory conditions problem?

Fri, 11 Jun 2010 04:11:21 -0500

I've had a problem using victory conditions requiring a kill of 25 aircraft of specific sub type (attack). I don't know if this is a bug or just me, any one seen this sort of thing? Any one think of something I might be doing wrong?
If I reduce the number to 5 it works or if I change it to 25 aircraft (any type) it works.??
Don Thomas

Cleantopo2

Fri, 28 May 2010 10:19:56 -0500

I have seen the Cleantopo2 map that we can download in this web-page. I think that the battlesets maps that appear in the last HCE demo, at least the one I had download, are based on Cleantopo2. Is it possible to import the texture maps of the last HCE demo to use them in the original battlesets of my HCE copy? (Not only to use Cleantopo2 in the new user battlesets we can create on our own).

2010.006 Release Notes

Fri, 21 May 2010 17:18:57 -0500

HCE - 2010.006 - 2010/05/21
===========================
- Chg:0000 GE Changed logic of Ship vs Sub attack type dialog so that unavailable
attack type won't be chosen. (thanks CV32)
- Chg:B169 GE Yet another arc induced crash fixed, was examining group type
instead of unit type. (thanks Divefreak)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=169
- Chg:B160 GE Code fudged minimum Annex E range to 2.5nm so ease maneuvering for
a shot. The fudge number has been changed to 1.0nm for this build
meaning ASROC, ahead thrown DC, and DC type weapons now can be used
at 1.0nm even if their stated range is less. (thanks miller7219)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=160

User Manual draft review Wed 7pm Central Time on IRC

Mon, 17 May 2010 10:02:21 -0500

Anyone who is interested in seeing a draft copy of the user manual and adding input is invited to join us on IRC Wed at 7pm Central time.

When you arrive and show interest we'll e-mail you the Word document.

IRC
Server: irc.stratsims.com
Port: 6667 or 8067
Channel: #harpgamer
If you don't have an IRC client you can try the Java clients on the left side of http://www.harpgamer.com or you can try a simple client I wrote, http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=281

PS, working on the release is one reason you aren't seeing many builds this month...

Total victory conditions

Thu, 06 May 2010 03:29:24 -0500

I'm testing some of the PAK's new EC2003 scenarios and am stuck with a total victory condition (scenario 5, sink three amphibious ships).
I can only get this complete vic condition if I've scored a minimum victory. Is this normal?
D

2010.005 Release Notes

Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:17:35 -0500

HCE - 2010.005 - 2010/04/02
===========================
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed more crashes introduced by arc limitations in 2010.003.

HC Launcher Brainstorming

Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:44:08 -0600

For the first patch I want to have a basic game launcher ready, expanding greatly upon the idea after that.

Patch 1 Features:

Show scenarios within the HC directory and subdirectories.
Show orders of selected scenario.
If player chooses to launch the currently selected scenario, check that a valid DB is present somewhere in the HC directory structure and put the DB into place. Alert user if appropriate DB is not on the machine.
Allow launching of saved game.
Also include the battleset scenarios if possible (this may not be feasible for first patch)
Similarly launch the SE (this may have to be basic, i.e. just starts the SE with chosen DB, doesn't load a particular scen)
Launch the PE, ideally help manage one pfData file for each DB encountered
Launch the Orders Writer for the selected scenario
Enable/disable data export DLLs
Manage custom battlesets in the same manner as scenarios (matching DB, etc.) may have to be of a very basic nature for first patch.

Future Capabilities:

Grab xml listing of scenarios, databases, battlesets available on community sites and present it to user for seamless download.
Make other content available (custom photos for DB editing, sounds for the game,...)
Capture game statistics (platforms destroyed, lost, ...)?
Enable deletion of scenarios, databases, saves from local computer.
Enable uploading of scenarios, databases, battlesets to community sites?

2010.004 Release Notes

Fri, 02 Apr 2010 07:48:24 -0500

HCE - 2010.004 - 2010/04/02
===========================
- Chg:0162 GE Fixed crash introduced by arc limitations in 2010.003. This
was code attempting to grab non-existent arc information from
aircraft loadouts. (thanks ChrisP)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=162
- Chg:0000 GE Surface gunnery vs submarines Missile and Gun type radio buttons
were improperly greyed out (lack of missiles greyed guns, lack
of guns greyed missiles), remedied. (thanks Don Thomas)

Both of these should be easy to test. Saved game showing the latter issue is in the 2010.003 release notes topic in this forum.

It would be appreciated if an enterprising tester hunted for a second potential gun arc crash bug. I haven't seen it yet but what someone could try is aircraft vs aircraft gun engagements. Do they crash 2010.004?

Thanks!

2010.003 Release Notes

Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:48:52 -0500

HCE - 2010.003 - 2010/03/29
===========================
- Chg:0159 GE Widened name portion of unit display in Order of Battle dialog
(thanks Miller7219)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=159
- Chg:0155 GE Let AAA fire even for the player side! It was mistakenly disabled.
(thanks Don Thomas)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=155
- Chg:0154 GE Make point defense guns (to be generalized elsewhere eventually)
adhere to mount arc limitations. The code needed to be and
wasn't using relative bearing between firing unit and target.
(thanks miller7219)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=154
- Chg:0000 GE Modified Is_Crossing function to match PointDefense. This means the
only targets marked as crossing are missiles with the SNAP_UP_DOWN
flag.
- Chg:0000 GE Point defense missiles now also adhere to arcs.
- Chg:0000 GE Surface and air guns now adhere to arc limitations (again).
Unfortunate side effect is player may be presented with empty
weapon allocation screens and will be allowed to allocate weapons
outside of valid arcs (they won't fire, the allocation is quickly
undone).
- Chg:0000 GE Message Log window will show when standard gunnery engagements are
abandoned due to: target submerging, target going out of range,
and target going out of valid arc.
- Chg:0000 GE Player ships may now fire SSMs and Guns at surfaced submarines.
Added UI elements and logic.

Have at it

2010.002 Release Notes

Sun, 07 Mar 2010 10:52:56 -0600

HCE - 2010.002 - 2010/03/07
===========================
- Chg:0151 GE Point defense allow max of 15-seconds worth of ROF to be used
in each point defense engagement. (thanks Miller7219)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=151
- Chg:0000 SE More work on 32-bit SE conversion.

Nothing to test for the SE conversion as yet.

32-bit Scenario Editor Progress

Wed, 20 Jan 2010 13:53:19 -0600

January 10th I restarted the attempt to make a 32-bit scenario editor based on the current codebase. That day saw the development environment configured well enough to start compiling. Ended up at 39 errors, 667 warnings during compilation. For reference, the program doesn't get to run and go down in flames until there are 0 compilation errors.

January 20th update: 23 errors, 652 warnings, progress...

HCE Design Teams

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 11:10:43 -0600

I would like to propose that Harpoon CE create 2 programming/design teams:

The Harpoon Classic Team - Dedicated to preserving the heritage of the Harpoon legacy and furthing its development as it was intened, as a modern naval combat simulation. Modern naval combat is defined as the post 1955 era where missiles emerged and changed naval tactics forever. The focus is on the missile as the primary naval weapon, not gunnery.

The Harpoon Dreadnought Team - Dedication to re-working Harpoon as a World Wars naval combat simulation. World Wars naval combat is defined as pre-1955 where gunnery/torpedoes were the primary naval weapon, with naval air power emerging in the 1930's.

Each team has it's own programming person(s) to support it's own design team. Each team goes in it's own direction with it's starting code. I believe that continuing to support both types of naval combat concurrently within the same program is preventing Harpoon from evolving down it's original path, while at the same time providing a World Wars simulation that has very little degree in reality. I believe both camps can have thier "masterpieces", but that can't be realized within the same project/program.

I'm a modern naval enthusiast, but also an avid lover of traditional gunnery/torpedo duels of the World Wars era and dive bombers, etc. I think greatness to fulfill both lies within the Harpoon engine, just not together!

Opinions on this matter?

Revised EC2003 scenarios

Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:57:30 -0600

It would be very helpful if as many folks as possible could take for a spin some (or all) of the newly revised EC2003 battleset scenarios.

HG member PAK has graciously donated his time and effort to revise a number of these scenarios to resolve certain outstanding issues, typically problems with Victory Conditions.

Please take one or more for a spin with the latest HCDB and check fit and functionality with the changes reported by PAK.

Thanks!

Point Defense Gunnery

Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:09:27 -0600

I'm use 2010.001 GE.

Attached is a test scenario and database necessary to run the scenario.

Scenario: Blue (Bainbridge) will launch 8 SSM's (Harpoon IC) at a Red test platform armed with 2x127mm/38 Mk28 mounts (1 bearing Port and 1 bearing Starboard). We're testing:

1. How many shots will Red's mounts fire
2. Which of Red's mounts (if not all) will engage

*** Note: I purposely changed the min/max altitude for the Harpoon IC's to LOW/LOW to put them in the engagement envelope of the 127mm/38's.

Setup and Run:

1. Select the RED side to play
2. Blue (Bainbridge) will immediately get a visual and fire off all 8 of it's Harpoon IC weapons
3. Speed up the game a bit
4. After the Harpoons impact select Red's Test A ship from the unit window, "FULL" from detail window, and then "WEAPONS"
5. Select the 127mm/38 Mk28 mounts and then "UNGROUP"
6. Check each mount (Port and Starboard)

Which mount engaged in point defense and how many shots fired (ammo reduced)?

Results:

I have the 127mm mounts set in the database with a ROF = 4. The mount has 2 barrells and I want the mount to fire every 30 seconds (twice per minute, per barrell). I happen to like the old Harpoon gunnery system of 30 minute engagement cycles, that's why I have it set that way.

I've run this test many times and the 127mm mounts always fires 4 times in point defense (or so the ammo is reduced by 4 rounds at least).
Additionally, I've seen that only the Starboard 127mm mount will engage.

Questions:

I'm assuming the program is firing 4 times and not just reducing the ammo by 4. I conclude the ROF field controls the number of times a gun mount will fire in point defense? Is the mount getting 4 chances (at 20% each time) to kill the missile?

Maybe the mount firing arcs are the reason why only the Starboard mounts will engage? I've changed heading of the Test platform so that the Port mount bears, but still seems only the Starboard mount engages. Is there a "glitch" in the firing arc code? I seem to recall older versions of Harpoon did not really adhere to firing arcs much (if at all) and they were essentially information only.

Please play around with this test scenario and see if your findings are the same as mine and offer feedback. Maybe all above is by willful design, but I would think each mount should engage 1 time (or per barrel would be acceptable) and either the firing arc code needs shored up or removed entirely.

2010.001 Release Notes (testing complete)

Wed, 20 Jan 2010 12:20:20 -0600

HCE - 2010.001 - 2010/01/20
===========================
- Chg:0143 GE Early beginnings... Track sensor status by range ring.
No player noticeable changes yet.
- Chg:0000 GE Disable Windows\Cascade menu item.

Only need to test the latter. Nothing to test for the former yet.

2009.049 Release Notes

Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:19:49 -0600

HCE - 2009.049 - 2009/11/28
===========================
- Chg:B140 GE Let's not allow firing guns at submerged subs in the torp
counter-fire situation.
- Chg:2447 GE Phantom air group attempts landing. (thanks Herman)
See http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?showtopic=2529
- Chg:0000 GE Tanker prompted to land at wrong carrier, proceeds to land
at any old carrier it wants to. Tanker now listens and
follows orders. (thanks Maromak)
See http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?showtopic=2674
- Chg:B142 GE Work around inability to re-target within existing target
group when remaining weapons range <= 3nm and the target
is not an aircraft. (thanks Joe K)

Don't forget to update the issue tracker when you deal with the B### items. Thanks!

2009.037 Release Notes

Sun, 19 Jul 2009 13:24:28 -0500

HCE - 2009.037
==============
- Chg:0000 GE If the loaded scenario has no time limit set, default to 72
days. (thanks Brains)
- Chg:0000 GE Kamikaze plane capability added. Any loadout weapon that
contains the fragment Baka (case sensitive) indicates a kamikaze
weapon that if fired will shoot down the launching plane making
in essence a kamikaze weapon. (thanks Brad)
- Chg:0000 GE Allow inertially only guided weapons to be fired against ships.
This probably breaks something else!
- Chg:0000 GE Move RCS logging to radar log, before it was always logged.
- Chg:B117 GE Ferrying and Refueling fixes, also force refueling if the
tanker will hit bingo fuel before the refuelees hit optimal
fuel state for tanking. (thanks donaldseadog)
- Chg:0000 GE Added code for intercepts based on air to air guns, both player
and AI. Disabled the internal 3nm guns in commondb battlesets.
- Chg:B119 BS EC2003 GIUK 1.0 Scenario with modified VCs included.
(thanks PAK)
- Chg:B120 BS EC2003 GIUK 2.0 Scenario with modified VCs and orders included.
(thanks PAK)
- Chg:B118 BS EC2003 MEDC 8.0 Scenario with modified VCs included.
(thanks PAK & CV32)

For testing Baka and Air to Air guns you'll need other than stock DBs. Baka can be tested in Brad's WWII database. The Air to Air guns I imagine will come soon, I'll attach my test rig to a later post.

We need testing of air to air guns in pre-EC2003 battlesets, the old 3nm Intercept/Escort dogfight guns should still work there and ideally any guns in loadouts should not work in an air to air capacity.

A lock/remember feature for the windows.

Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:52:40 -0600

I'm wondering if it's possible to get some kind of "lock" for the windows, as I'm functionally an idiot, I keep managing to press the "cascade" button and ruin my window sizes and whatnot. Could we get a "custom" remembering feature or a lock so you can't change it?

Airborn ASW Search Plan

Sun, 02 Dec 2007 14:07:38 -0600

I've mentioned this at the H.U.L.L. before, but I believe this is the proper forum to post it. When an ASW A/C is sent on a long distance patrol, it seems to stay pretty much in one spot dropping buoys at random. The 5-6-5 Distro plan (see attached diagram) was the most popular plan we used to use in these situations. The Kingpin position and Road are based on the area you wish to cover and the Spacing is based on CZ conditions in that area. I realise it's probably not practical to have an A/C in the game drop bouys at these precise locations, but I would suggest an on station Patrol be given a detection area based on such a plan. Input from the player could be limited to location and possibly the Road, or axis of the field.

Buddha

Formation Window

Sun, 03 Jan 2010 19:54:13 -0600

I cant get the formation window to close in the Unit window with the new beta, not unless Im having a brain dump.

Bad News

Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:56:24 -0600

I've suffered a catastrophic hard drive failure on my home computer, and with it being the holidays it will be several days before I can even get a new one in to fix it. I will be able to get an old one up and running, but it will basically be limited to internet and the like. I'll update you when I am back to full running capacity.

refueling problem (once more)

Thu, 21 May 2009 21:03:53 -0500

I am sure that this has been hashed over many times before, and I thought I had it down pat, but ...

I would like to get some information about refueling.

1) I am currently working my way through West Pac 7, Thanh Hoa Bridge, using the demo of HCE. I have never had a problem with refueling before (which isn't saying much, though). But in this scenario, I am having problems. It was my understanding that you bring the tanker group and the group to be refueled close together, loiter both at the same altitude, and then join the groups. After 60 s, the refueling starts automatically.

I used this procedure several times with a "test" scenario and at various points in the main game, using various combinations, and over several game sessions. Only twice did the automatic refueling work (with the S-3B and an Intruder). All the other times, I had to resort to ALT-r.

Now I don't have a problem with giving the planes explicit instructions to refuel.

What I don't understand is why what appears to be the identical procedure for making something happen (the automatic refueling) does not produce identical results for each attempt. Surely computers are just big adding machines that obey the commands of their human masters? Is there an additional condition that I am not aware of? Is there a random aspect to the procedure?

2) I understand that a tanker can only refuel planes once. But how much fuel does the tanker carry i.e. how much fuel is transferred? And what happens when the group to be refueled contains multiple planes, possibly of various types?

2009.046 Release Notes

Sat, 24 Oct 2009 21:06:45 -0500

NOTE, grab the most recent HCDB for use with this build. Brad has removed air to ground capability from many of the aircraft guns, bringing the AI back to having a little more sanity.
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=235

HCE - 2009.046 - 2009/10/24
===========================
- Chg:0000 GE Allow aircraft to fire ASROC type weapons at submarines.
(thanks Brad & Brains)
- Chg:0000 GE If there are radars or sonars added to a plane's loadout they
will now be used as sensors by the GE if there are open
sensor slots available (a plane can currently have at most
eight sensors). (thanks Brains)

Replenishment At Sea

Tue, 25 Sep 2007 13:14:23 -0500

Pipe Dream #2:

I know I'm not the only person who has run out of and wished I could stop off at my nearest floating, friendly 7-11 (the AOR) and pick up some more of them. Particularly SAMs, as the AI seems to think 12:1 ratio is nessessary to shoot down incoming threats.

What I propose is a simple, yet workable solution to this problem in several points.

Each ship/land unit has 4-6 different types of supplies that it can consume.

Fuel
Food/Water
Ammo
Spare Parts
AV-Gas
AV-Ordinance

Each ship unit and base has a finite amount of each. Each is consumed at a set rate.

For example:

CV Roosevelt has 999999 Fuel (Nuclear), 10000 food/water, 500 ammo, 100 spare parts, 5000 AV-Gas and 5000 AV-Ordanance. It uses 0 points of fuel per day, 100 food/water per day, ammo as fired (1 shot = 1 point), spares are used only if damage is present to the ships subcomponants, and AV-Gas and AV-Ordanace are used at a rate of 1 point per sortie (each plane that takes off is 1 sortie). As these points are used, it needs to replinish them either via an AO group or by docking at a friendly port...running out obviously makes the ship quite useless.

Now, each AOR along with having its own needs in the food/fuel/ammo departments also carries a set number of 'stores' that can be consumed by friendly ships that need to replinish.

Quick Example:

AOR Wichita carries 10000 fuel, 100000 food/water, 5000 ammo, 1000 spares, 2500 AV-Gas and 2500 AV-ordanance. Other ships can take on supplies from the Wichita until it runs dry, at which point it can return to a port and replinish itself.

Land units work the same, but they take supplies from convoys, that can take supplies from fleets or bases.

OK, now the replinishment type ships...any cargo ship can carry stores, though some can only be unloaded at a dock/beachhead. Also, not every ship carries every type of store. Merchant ships might only carry food/water and ammo. AEs only carry ammo, and maybe a few spares, etc.

Another thing, ships can share from their own stores of food/water, fuel and spares to help another ship.

What would we need?

Ability to replinish at sea
Ability to dock/draw supplies from ports/bases
Ability to track consumables

Any discussion on this issue would be good, as I'm sure I'm not the only person with ideas on how this could work.

2009.048 Release Notes

Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:45:43 -0600

HCE - 2009.048 - 2009/11/21
===========================
- Chg:B141 GE Unit detail display would crash if aircraft's home unit was
destroyed. Fixed (thanks Don Thomas)

HCE - 2009.047 - 2009/11/02
===========================
- Chg:0000 GE When using formation editor from Group window, the masking of
the unit icons was going haywire (since oh, 2005 or so).
Finally tracked it down and fixed it, the masking should
now work (i.e. no black or white unit/group icon backgrounds
in all situations. (thanks DonG, and many others over years)

file will be uploaded in a few minutes, kind of backwards today

2009.045 Release Notes

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:50:12 -0500

HCE - 2009.045 - 2009/10/08
===========================
- Chg:0000 GE eff115 (trigger AI sensor state and prompt user for sensor
activation) modified to require that the target unit in
question be detected. (thanks Brad)
- Chg:0000 GE True air to surface guns can now be used against surface
targets, both by the AI and the player.
(thanks hoogelex & Brad)
- Chg:0000 PE Changed end_edit.bat support contact information to HarpGamer.

~~Oops, I forgot to put the new end_edit.bat in the zip file, we'll get that another time.~~

Probably the only thing you can test is the air to surface guns, see the attached save (which verifies AI aircraft in formation can attack player surface units), and the scenario which allows the player to attach ships and a base with air to surface gunfire.

To make that happen a fundamental change was made to how groups are targeted so look for anomolies with other types of attacks. Also be on the lookout for aircraft screaming to their deaths because they think they need to use their surface attack guns before going home to base.

2009.044 Release Notes

Sun, 20 Sep 2009 10:39:53 -0500

HCE - 2009.044 - 2009/09/20
===========================
- Chg:0000 GE Disabled the DEBUG ???? could detect us debug messages, they are
still logged to the EMCON_AI log if that is enabled.
- Chg:0000 GE Aircraft ready messages now show the Group ID where the planes
were readied. "4 x A-6E Intruder (AntiRadar) ready at ACb Oslo"
- Chg:B134 GE Force recalculation of group range rings and force Group map
update when any planes are shot down. (thanks Joe K)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=134
- Chg:0000 GE Disabled DEBUG messagelog messages for eff115 and point defense.
- Chg:0000 GE Started new credits tab post 2009.042 patch.
- Chg:0000 GE Added a DLL call for HC20 DigitalMilitaryArt.
- Chg:0000 GE Started DLL work to shift the MoveUnits effect to DLL and from
there to multithreaded.

You should be able to test all but the last two items (and the first and the fourth are half overlaps {eff115 = first item}).

2009.033 Release Notes

Sun, 03 May 2009 21:16:40 -0500

HCE - 2009.033
==============
- Chg:0000 GE Refined the EMCON situations for turning on Active Sonar...
If detected unfriendly unit is:
A torpedo within friendly unit Active Sonar range, turn it on.
OR
Using Active Sonar and is within friendly unit Active Sonar range,
turn it on.
OR
if friendly unit is a surface craft AND friendly group meets
an aggressiveness factor AND enemy unit is within friendly ASW
weapon range AND within friendly Active Sonar range.

The respective Message Log entries in debug builds are:
torpedoes at %dnm are within active sonar range
contact at %dnm is within active sonar range and using active sonar
contact at %dnm is within ASW range
(thanks to Brad for puzzling this out)
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed a bug in the radar function that wasn't telling radar at
what altitude the target was residing.
- Chg:0000 GE New command line options to enable a launcher program later on.
-b 1 (would load battleset 1 which is original GIUK)
-c 1 (would load scenario 1.0 of the selected battleset)
-c "C:\Matrix Games\HCE\MyScen.SCp" (would load MyScen.SCp)
-v "C:\Matrix Games\HCE\MySave.hpp" (would load saved game MySave.hpp)
-d C:\Games\HCE\hcdb-090427.res (would load hcdb-090427 as the commondb)
-r C:\Games\HCE\commondb.rsr (would load commondb.rsr as the commondb resource file)
-g 11111111 (explained below from left to right)
1st digit is player side in the scen 0 = Blue, 1 = Red
2nd digit is Nuke Release Enabled 1=yes, 0=no
3rd digit is Snorkeling subs 1=yes, 0=no
4th digit is Real Weather 1=yes, 0=no
5th digit is Maintenance Failures 1=yes, 0=no
6th digit is Full Ordnance 1=yes, 0=no
7th digit is Auto Formation Patrols 1=yes, 0=no
8th digit is whether to exit the game at scen end 1=yes, 0=no

Sonar EMCON, Brad please post your results as I think you confirmed that whole batch already.

There is no testing to do for the Radar function.

Command Line options please do take them for a spin. There is little error checking done, it expects valid inputs. Some combinations don't make any sense (selecting a battleset but not indicating a scenario or saved game for instance).
example command line to immediately load a scenario and start play...
C:\Matrix Games\Winharp32.exe -b 26 -c 1 -g 01111100
(that'll be WestPac 1.0 Blue side, no autoformation air patrols)

2009.043 Release Notes

Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:11:17 -0500

HCE - 2009.043 - 2009/09/04
===========================
- Chg:B129 GE In prior builds once missiles were already on the way to a
target, the player wouldn't be prompted to fire more missiles
even if units within striking range had available weapons.
That functionality existed to prevent inundating the player
with requests to fire weapons before previously launched
attacks were resolved. This proved confusing. Now that
behavior will only remain in force for anti-air attacks.
(thanks COBLU)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=129

- Chg:B128 GE Air groups could not fire at air formation patrols, fixed.
(thanks Don Thomas, Brad)
http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=128

Battleset Builder documentation

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 01:20:51 -0500

Note that the layout is designed for 5x7 paper, which is approximately half of regular letter paper.

If anyone wants the editable source documents, you will have to pester Tony for them.

2009.041 Release Notes

Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:58:19 -0500

HCE - 2009.041
==============
- Chg:0000 GE Command line option -u added for setting the process priority.
This is handy for autotesting to run the game at a lower
priority letting your other programs be more responsive.
Valid values are -2 thru 2.
-u -2 means low priority
-u -1 means below normal priority
-u 0 means normal priority
-u 1 means above normal priority
-u 2 means high priority
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed transparent error window when autotesting EC2000 IOPG
10.0 as Red by rewriting the Staff Assistant image loading
code.
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed crash bug when HandleLanding is called by a ship
group. This came up in autotesting of HDS I.

The only thing to test is the command line option addition.

2009.042 Release Notes

Sun, 23 Aug 2009 13:20:23 -0500

HCE - 2009.042
==============
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed another crash bug when HandleLanding is called by a ship
group. This came up in autotesting of WestPac.

2009.040 Release Notes

Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:17:45 -0500

HCE - 2009.040
==============
- Chg:0000 GE AAA works again (thanks donaldseadog)

using the launcher

Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:41:46 -0500

Sorry if this is either obvious or unhelpful but if it is useful great. In my testing installation (I've only just sorted out installations as suggested in beta testing guide) I have basically the latest beta (der!!) but I still have the 2009.036 GE (left with winharp32.exe name) and I've named the beta GE winharp39.exe.
Now if I want to run a particular saved game or scenario (with an optional selected database, which I have in the beta main folder and with descriptive names) I use the launcher and just amend the GE name in the launcher window depending upon which GE I want to use. Then to compare how it runs in the alternative GE you just go back to the launcher (don't close it) and the same options and games/scenarios are set, just amend the name of the GE and press launch.
A similar thing can probably be done if the GEs being compared are in different folders, just change the GE folder (I'm assuming the paths for game\scenario\database are absolute and not relative to game folder) - this is probalby easier if you have enough hard drive space for three or more installations but I don't.
Don Thomas

naval gun action

Tue, 11 Aug 2009 08:07:41 -0500

This is just an observation made using HCWW data base in particular ship to ship naval gun combat. Where a ship has say three twin turrets AI will choose say eight rounds to fire at a target will will fire them as four salvos from the first available turret with the inherent time delay defined by the turret's ROF when in most cases (depending upon angles etc) six rounds could have been initially fired, two from each of the three turrets.
The first two rounds are likely to do little more than wake up the enemy who might then choose to reply with all guns blazing before ai gets in the second salvo.
Also while we are advised of missiles etc being detected there is not such an obvious notice drawn to being pummeled to death by 10" shells unless you keep a good eye on the message board and don't have the time compression wound up too far.
It must have been hard in the old days, eh
Don Thomas

2009.039 Release Notes

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 15:27:07 -0500

HCE - 2009.039
==============
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed a crash bug in EC2000 MEDC 11.0 upon load (it was trying
to load an invalid aircraft loadout).

if you can load the scenario from each Red and Blue sides and run it for 5 seconds of game time in each case, you can report this as verified.

2009.034 Release Notes

Tue, 05 May 2009 01:45:34 -0500

HCE - 2009.034
==============
- Chg:0000 GE More command line option modifications.
-g, added a 9th digit to set the initial time compression.
0=paused, 1=1:1, 2=5:1, 3=10:1, 4=30:1, 5=60:1, 6=300:1,
7=600:1, 8=1800:1
so -g 111111118 would result in 30min:1sec initial time
compression.
-p option to set the CPU affinity mask.
examples...
-p 1 (run on CPU 0)
-p 2 (run on CPU 1)
-p 3 (run on CPU 0 and 1)
-p 4 (run on CPU 2)
-p 8 (run on CPU 3)
-p 16 (run on CPU 4, see a pattern yet?)
and so on and so forth
you can read about affinity masks various places on the
Internet, our command line option is decimal, many
sources on the Internet list only hexadecimal so you
may have to do conversions in some cases.
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed a situation where an assertion could be thrown in
the Sonar function.
- Chg:0000 GE Disabled "AutoTest is Activated" dialog when the -a command
line is used so that scenarios can be started from the
command line without user input.
- Chg:0000 GE Disabled the "Debug version..." dialog when the -a command
line option is used. Same reason as above.
- Chg:0000 SE Added command line options with the same functions
as the GE -b -c -d -r.
Added -t command line switch to specify working directory
i.e. -t d:\games\hcce
Note that the SE is a 16-bit application and hence works
on short filename
wrong: -d "C:\Matrix Games\HCE\commondb.res"
right: -d C:\Matrix~1\HCE\commondb.res
- Chg:0000 Big improvements to the patch installer script. It will
now properly read the previous installation directory,
make a backup of replaced files, and register itself
correctly.

Obviously it is time to edit your shortcuts to try different command line options

2009.038 Release Notes

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 09:41:37 -0500

HCE - 2009.038
==============
- Chg:0000 GE Fixed a crash bug that could occur when AI attacks player planes
with guns in loadout.

tough to test, I only ran across it while autotesting and it only happens if the gun is ONLY air capable. Anyway, I think you'll have to trust me this time that the fix works.

SAM fire rate

Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:14:41 -0500

In a previous discussion I was part of (Matrix Harpoon forum, Feb 18/09), I was given to understand that an Aegis cruiser was assigned a ROF of 20 and a control limit of 20 by Harpoon, that is, the ship is able to control 20 SAMs at a time, and can replenish them at the rate of 20 every 30 s. (In addition, I thought that the ship would normally fire 2 SAMs per target.)

More recently (Harpgamer forum, July 28/09), I was informed that this Aegis cruiser can fire up to 30 SAMs per 60 s.

There may be a typo here, or the rules may have changed in half a year, so I'm not going to worry about this discrepancy too much.

What does concern me at this time is that the actual fire rate seems to be rather higher.

I have provided a test scenario (see armtest.zip, attached). I have arranged to shoot some (40) Kh-31P Krypton ARMs at a Bunker Hill (CM) Aegis cruiser from 33 nm away. The ARMs travel at about 2000 kn = 2000/60 = 100 nm / 3 min, so the maximum flight time is just under 60 s. Depending on when exactly you shoot the ARMs (the cruiser can only detect them on the minute and half-minute), the ARMs will be closer when the first SAMs are launched. The SAM launchers should be able to fire twice.

In one test firing, the ARMs are 23 nm (42 s) away when the first batch of SAMs is fired. Since the SAMs travel at the same speed, the time and distance are split 50-50: the first batch of SAMs hits when the ARMs are 11 nm (20 s) from the ship. The message log tells me that there were 24 SAMs in that batch.

When the ARMs are 6 nm (11 s) from the ship, the SAMs fire again. Again, the time and distance are split 50-50: the second batch of SAMs hits when the ARMs are 4 nm (6 s) from the ship. The message log tells me that there were 30 SAMs in that batch.

Now I would expect the Phalanx CIWS to have a go, but actually the 5" guns are the only point defense to fire. And then the ship gets hit.

So there do appear to be some discrepancies.

1) What is the ROF of this ship? It appears to be at least 30 SAMs per 30 s.

2) Why were less SAMs fired in the first batch?

These results seem to be infinitely repeatable (except for the number of hits).

P.S. "Surface SAM fire rate" is set to "normal".

Our part in the 20th Anniversary of Harpoon

Sun, 05 Apr 2009 17:47:10 -0500

Due date August 2009

HCE 20th Anniversary items

CV32/TonyE - In game links to the gallery, probably from platform display
Everyone - BattleSet of 'all time best' scenarios
AGSI/TonyE - Spiffed up splash screens to be provided by AGSI, 800x600 BMP or PSD format, we currently rotate randomly between four splash screens.
TonyE - Links to and/or embedding of nostalgia interviews (Bond/Carlson creation of Harpoon, Gilman the ups and downs of Harpoon, etc.)

AGSI is going to put together a unique compilation of the games for the 20th Anniversary of the computer games, we've agreed to be a part of that and this evening reached a list of work that should be attainable by August.

Where we all come in as beta testers and evangelists are #2 and #4, but especially #2. The battleset will be a commondb battleset. It is up to all of us to decide the area though I'm guessing it will be one of the four original areas GIUK, NACV, MEDC, IOPG due to there being a plethora of scenarios for those battlesets. So share your preference of area then start sharing your favorite scenarios in that area (preferably with links so that we can actually compile this). I think we'd be happy to include personal statements about why you like a particular scenario and include those with the chosen scenarios.

As for the nostalgia interviews, it sounds like it is up to AGSI to do the biggies (Bond/Carlson/Gilman) but I'd love to see us come up with some of our own nostalgia pieces. If you want to set up your webcam (or highdef steadycam or...) and talk for a few minutes about your Harpoon history we'll include with the game or linked from the game to the material posted on some website. Needn't be a video but that'd be fun when someone comes to do a 40th anniversary and wants to compare the aging process.

Okay then, discuss and contribute

bingo fuel

Wed, 15 Jul 2009 01:41:23 -0500

Warning: This gets into some hardcore calculations

In the course of dealing with a refueling issue, I did some measurements I would not normally have done. I obtained some results that may or may not make sense.

I sent an F/A-18D tanker cruising out from its base. Every time its "bingo" status dropped by 10%, I checked its distance to base (F6 in the group window) and fuel range remaining (F in the unit window). I expected that the distance traveled plus distance remaining would add up to a constant (1050 nm, the initial basic range of the plane).

What I found was that the two numbers added up to an increasing total, so that the plane was able to travel significantly further than 1050 nm total.

There is a certain amount of round-off error to these results, for several reasons. First, because the mouse must be moved around to get the information needed, my reaction time has an effect. Second, the game may not do the calculations continuously. There may be other reasons.

I used a land base to ensure that the base was in the center of the formation.

the measurements:

% above bingo distance to base fuel remaining total range
90 85 nm 983 nm 1068 nm
80 159 nm 927 nm 1086 nm
70 227 nm 875 nm 1102 nm
60 289 nm 829 nm 1118 nm
50 340 nm 790 nm 1130 nm
40 388 nm 754 nm 1142 nm
30 428 nm 724 nm 1152 nm
20 467 nm 694 nm 1161 nm
10 505 nm 666 nm 1171 nm
0 536 nm 642 nm 1178 nm

Since it is pretty simple to subtract the distance to base from the listed plane range, and the game is not doing that, there must be something else going on.

I have a guess, but it would be better for someone who knows what's going on to say so, rather than me making guesses.

a graphical representation

tanker dumping fuel

Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:45:31 -0500

Could someone please make a comment about the issue that I have reported here:

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=122

Something to the effect of

a) This is intentional, or
b] I have seen this before, but can't explain it.

I would like to know if I am dealing with a bug or a complex process.

It may be that people only look for recent posts, and the issue tracker is hidden.

I have tried to reproduce this with the demo but it works differently there. In the demo, I have found a definite mistake in the way tankers are handled, but I see no reason to report that because the demo is an older version of the game.

EC2000/03 Scenario 1 "Big Fish"

Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:12:58 -0500

I am still working on this post - needed to store the data somewhere, but I need to interrupt the process.

new data

Anecdote about a refueling problem.

Strictly speaking, this does not belong in this thread, because it is not a refueling issue, although it arises as a consequence of a refueling situation.

In EC2000 Battle for the Norwegian Sea 1 (Big Fish), you need to fly some EH 101 Merlin helicopters from Kinloss, Scotland to some friendly ships just S of Iceland, refuel there, and then assault some US ships NW of Iceland. The Merlins have a range of 500 nm, so they can just barely make it to the refueling point. However, all the target ships are more than 250 nm from the refueling point, and these helicopters (or any helicopters) are NOT CAPABLE OF IN-FLIGHT REFUELING ! This means that the helicopters have to fly suicide missions. Fortunately, the victory conditions do not require you to recover your helicopters, just get them to the target, so it�s not a game-breaking problem, but it certainly is strange.

pictures

norefuel
targets

ExportDLLs

Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:47:34 -0500

HCE has, as of version 2007.022 the ability to send some game data out to external DLLs. I'll work up documentation as able. As implemented in 2007.022 every piece of data that AGSI allows us to export is being exported. We'll work with AGSI to increase the exported data items (for instance, number of missiles or planes in a unit would be nice, weapon launch events would be nice, etc.).

The DLL files will live in C:\Matrix Games\HCE\ExportDLLs\ in a default installation.

To disable a DLL, rename it so that the file extension is not .DLL, i.e. rename DataDump1.dll to DataDump1.dll.bak to turn it off.

The DLLs will slow the game somewhat depending upon how much processing each one does, some of them like DataDump1.dll make large files.

The DLLs also throw their errors back to the GE, so if there are bugs in the DLL, it will crash your game. This was common in my first generation of DLLs.

I have yet to optimize the GE for this process to reduce the amount of data sent and will do that as time permits.

Data exported by the DLL Interface in 2007.022 (version 1 of export specification):
// Functions to send the data to DLL
void dllexUnitLatLon(UnitPtr Uptr); (Position in decimal lat/lon of each unit)
void dllexUnitShowing(UnitPtr Uptr); (Visibility of each unit as viewed from each side)
void dllexUnitURegion(UnitPtr Uptr); (Uncertainty regions of each unit as viewed from each side)
void dllexUnitCourse(UnitPtr Uptr); (Unit heading in degrees)
void dllexUnitSpeed(UnitPtr Uptr); (Unit speed in knots)
void dllexUnitAlt(UnitPtr Uptr); (Unit altitude band)
void dllexUnitShowingSide(UnitPtr Uptr); (Unit side as viewed by each side)
void dllexUnitSink(UnitPtr Uptr); (Unit is sinking)
void dllexGameTime(long GTime); (Current game time starts at 10,000 and increments in seconds)
void dllexMsgLog(char *MsgLine); (Message Log line)
void dllexUnitToGroup(UnitPtr Uptr, GroupPtr GroupOld); (Unit changing from old group to new)
void dllexUnitNew(UnitPtr Uptr); (New unit, i.e. plane launched, missile, etc.)
void dllexUnitFree(UnitPtr Uptr); (Unit freed, leaves map)
void dllexScenLoad(void); (New scenario/save loaded, report info to DLL)

I should note in case anyone is into programming and wants to get right to writing a DLL, holler and I'll help, but more importantly the version 1 specification isn't set in stone yet for what data is exported and how it is exported.