CV32

Only the radar guided weapons have a consistently reliable performance when it comes to bearing only (BOL) attacks. The electro-optical/infra-red (EO/IR) weapons, the anti-radar missiles (ARMs) and the acoustic homing weapons (torpedoes) are virtually useless in the BOL mode. (To be clear, you can't currently launch torpedoes in the pure BOL mode, except in the self-defense mode while under torpedo attack, although you can drop them on targets with an area of uncertainty). Keep in mind, as well, that weapons launched in BOL mode will search only along a narrow bearing, have finite seeker angles (45 degrees for missiles, 90 for torpedoes), and limited seeker acquisition range (minimum 5 nm, maximum 20 nm for missiles, dependent on missile speed).

Absolutely. There are many SAM types that don't require a radar at all. When SHUK references IADS, or integrated air defense systems, I expect he's referring to the fact that some air defense systems that don't themselves have a radar can rely on detection/tracking made possible by other units. Some fighter/multi-role aircraft have multi-mode radars, which include both air and surface search modes. We can't model the modes, so both work simultaneously. Meanwhile, the Intruders and Hornets should be detecting surface targets for you, as well as most of the AEW and EW types. You can't determine true radar performance (ie. PD, or probability of detection) from the Unit Display but you can see range. So, as a general rule, greater range will mean better detection capability. I don't have the demo here, but I can put up a screenshot later using Ctrl Alt S and point out what can be seen. Unless someone else wants to help me out? Both ESM and jamming function is strongly related to altitude. The higher up you are, the better both will work. Of course putting vulnerable platforms (as reconnaissance and electronic warfare aircraft tend to be) into harm's way will often reduce their life span. There are no sure fire 'tricks', sorry. Just experience and tactics. Some air defense units, like the MANPADS, will have a very low RCS and you might not ever spot them, except at very close range and then only visually (or you have a superb radar).

ESM will only detect actively radiating units. SAM and AAA that don't use radars will, of course, not be detected. That's why I suggest using a good surface search radar as well. It will pick up those radar silent units and hopefully prompt the others into energizing their radars if they haven't already. Yes, Ctrl Alt S will reveal all units. The Prowlers will work much better at higher altitudes.

I think the last Bear D left service in 1994. The Kh-22 (AS-4 Kitchen) is also gone, withdrawn 2 or 3 years back. The planned Kh-32 was apparently cancelled. Weapons for the Backfire now would be primarily bombs, and although they apparently tested with the Kh-31P, I am not sure of the status of that effort.

Is SEAD a tricky business? Absolutely. Is it an impossible business? Nope, not at all. If you have assets with ESM and a good surface radar, put em up high near the enemy SAMs but not so close as to be in danger. Better yet, put two or more up, and at different bearings. ESM will only give you a bearing and a zone of uncertainty unless you are very close. Combine triangulation with a decent surface search radar set and you will be able to find, fix and destroy enemy SAM sites. Providing, of course, you have the assets and the weapons to do so.

I doubt it, or at least not for a very, very long time. Their best is still a bunch of elderly MiG-29s, with the continued rumors of a MiG-31 buy having never panned out. Their air defense missile systems (SA-2, -3, -5 and -6) are also pretty antiquated, despite the handful of SA-22 that they received (and which failed to do them much good in holding off the Israelis).

Well, your premises are wrong. Red airfield ZYa (Ussuriysk) DOES have attached land units (air defense systems, specifically) - seven in all - and they are very much alive. They don't show up in the Unit Map as being attached to ZYa because you haven't detected them. You cannot, of course, attack enemy radars that you have not yet detected. (The SAM circles are a bit of a cheat in favor of the player here, because it warns you of the potential danger). (There is also another, independent air defense group nearby with another 7 land units (SAMs and AAA) within it. I am getting ESM hits from it.) Meanwhile, the sensor damage you see at ZYa is for the installation's own air search/air traffic control radar, NOT for the attached air defenses. They have their own radars. Notice that when you move AUA closer to ZYa, and light up its radars, you get hits on the air defenses arrayed around ZYa. This savegame is a fine example of where misunderstanding the dynamic between Installations and MLUs (Mobile Land Units) placed within their formation, particularly air defense systems, can lead to a whole host of entirely wrong assumptions.

No worries. That's why we're here. Download and unzip the scenario file into your HUCE directory (or, if you have created a subdirectory for scenarios, you can drop it there). You will also need the custom HCCW database, which you can also download here. Extract that zip file into your main HUCE directory. It will overwrite your current 'commondb.res' file. To maintain multiple databases, be sure to rename your existing 'commondb.res' file. To go back to the official HCDB database, you can either once again rename that 'commondb.res' file to its previous version, or just download the most recent HCDB update. This scenario uses the Westpac battleset, so load up HUCE, pick the Westpac battleset, and then 'User Scenario'. Look for the scenario filename 'TaskF77' and you're off to the races. Happy hunting!

Thanks, Don. That was an enjoyable read.

Yeah, I've seen this before, though I cannot recall the last time. Please use the Issue Tracker for new reports.

Okay, this is Scenario 5.0 in HDS9, called "What's Mine is Mine". Keflavik, in this scenario, is held by the Soviets and protected by a vanguard of Patriot and Hawk SAMs (presumably being operated by some very well cross trained Soviet operators), both at Keflavik itself and at Reykjavik. There are also some 48 fighters, including Flankers, Fulcrums, Foxbats and Floggers, and ample AEW&C being provided by Mainstay aircraft. The Tornado F.3 in this battleset has a terrible ATA/DATA. Also, the Sky Flash missiles have a miserable PK of 35%. The Flankers and other Soviet fighters, however, have pretty good ATA/DATA numbers and are shooting various flavours of AA-10 Alamo varying in PK from 30 to 45%. You're not the only one who has had Tornados go up against Flankers and fare terribly, believe me. If your 8x F-4G fly directly from Kinloss toward Keflavik, and attack it with HARMs from maximum range, the anti-radar missiles will have to fly through both air defense envelopes (Keflavik and Reykjavik) before reaching the target. Moreover, at game start, there is a Soviet surface action group just offshore from Keflavik that includes, among other ships, a Slava cruiser armed with SA-N-6 Grumbles. Depending on the angle of your approach, you might even have to toss your missiles through its defensive envelope as well. Given the high PK of the Patriot SAMs (probably 70% or better in this battleset) and their insane ROF, not to mention the Hawks and other defensive weapons, it is easy to soak up 32x HARMs. Especially when you shoot from maximum range and give the enemy a full 70 nm of flight time in which to engage them. I tested this myself and did not get a single HARM through to the target. Just like you. I've attached a savegame from just before HARM launch. I assume this is from a different scenario from "What's Mine is Mine", as there are no BLUE ships in this scenario. crazedlogtest.zip

If you hope to make this 'productive' in any fashion, you need to do exactly as Tony asks you. That's all I am going to say.

Its probably a very good thing that proposed arms deals (including, at one point, Rafales) did not go through in the wake of the Lockerbie settlement and 'normalization' of relations.

File Name: Task Force 77 File Submitter: CV32 File Submitted: 27 Feb 2011 File Category: WestPac DB Used: HCCW-110222 Authors: Brad Leyte Battleset-WPac: .scq - WPac - WestPac Task Force 77 A Harpoon Commanders Edition (HCE) scenario for the Westpac Battleset and the HCE Cold War Database (HCCW-110222 or later). This scenario is intended for play by the BLUE side only. In April 1975, with the North Vietnamese tightening their stranglehold on South Vietnam and their army closing on Saigon, the Americans assembled a large naval force to assist in the evacuation of American civilians and Vietnamese refugees deemed to be at risk when the entire country eventually fell to the NVA. In this scenario, the Soviets launch a much more overt effort to support the North in the closing days of their campaign, seeking to ensure their own grip on Cam Ranh Bay and the vital sea lanes of the Western Pacific. The administration in Washington, red faced from the Watergate scandal and looking for diversions, turns to face the Communist threat once more. This scenario is dedicated to Anthony Eischens, an F-14 fan and a champion of the game we love. Click here to download this file

A flurry of new scenarios (rather than snow) in the dead of winter is a great thing to see. Thanks, folks.

Joe, I have yet to see any evidence of your particular 'issue' being the same as anything reported by anyone else. This may be related to the fact that your issue cannot be nailed down. Other folks reporting a 'challenging' AI could be related to an unbalanced scenario, a different database/battleset, or maybe they're just new to the game and are unsure how to play. Time and again, both Tony and I have advised that generalities will not help. Again, I have asked quite plainly that if anyone has problems like yours, they should step up so we can identify this problem. Cue crickets. This forum has now been up and running for six years. If the alleged "a** chewing" occurred here, the exchange will be still posted here. So, are we to understand that only brute force works for you? Pummel them until they run out of weapons? Is that it? Yeah, its the rather strong implication that you were intentionally being prevented from posting that I won't tolerate. So, if you had some quirky error with the forums, that's fine. It does happen. I am simply going to say this: If you are genuinely interested in determining and resolving your particular issues, then you will have to follow Tony's instructions to the letter. If you're not prepared to do that, then please quit the ranting. This place will not turn into the kind of thing that has plagued other forums. We don't volunteer our valuable time and pay the bills here for that nonsense.

From RIA Novosti

From RIA Novosti

I don't know who the 'cadre of believers' are, other than you and your still mysterious friend, but they are welcome to speak up. Maybe if we can't get anywhere with your particular problem, we might be able to help them with theirs? As for the 'developers', two of them are right here in this thread. The game has seen plenty of 'tweaks' over the years, and is still being 'tweaked'. None of them ever created an invincible AI, however, or some method of the AI having a set of loaded dice. Some folks think the AI is too easy as it is, right now. Well, since neither multi-axis attack or wave attack seems to work for you, except via brute force, I am curious about what does work. Can you be more specific? What methodologies do you employ? Oh, and I'll ask again, what was the issue with 'permission' to post in this thread? (It seems to be okay now, I assume?) Reminder: You're going to have to provide savegames again for us to get anywhere, ultimately, with figuring out your issues.

How's that? Are you getting some kind of error message? Edit: I've merged the thread. JoeK, if you continue to have difficulties posting to this thread, please let us know before starting another one on the same subject matter.

Good to hear you have it resolved. Way to give me a scare!

There are nine available Libyan installations in the HCDB, including Tripoli, Benghazi, Tobruk, Beida-La Braq, Metiga and others. Are you sure you have the right database open? Nope, you can't rename bases in the SE, unfortunately. There are a few generic installations available if none of the above are what you need.

Bears and Blackjacks are back. What next?

From Navy Times