Mgellis

Good news and bad news... The RUM-139A on the DD 115 Akazuki seems to fire fine from the Mk 41 VLS. Sunk a Whiskey with them. The Mk 112 ASROC on the DD 122 Hatsuyuki and the DD 171 Hatazake does not seem to fire at all...one time I could never get it "in range" even at 3 miles and turning the ship around to face a sub at periscope level on pretty much any heading. Another time, I got in range easily enough, but the ASROC simply would not fire; it kept telling me, after I "fired" one or two, that I still had a full load of them and none ever appeared as missiles or torpedos going after the sub the way other torpedoes do. (Just curious...were the ASROCs this unreliable in real life?) Hmmm...I know this would not be fully realistic, but could the problem be with the mount arc only flag? What happens if you just say, "oh the hell with it" and get rid of that limitation?

File Name: Koeln Sunset (1981) File Submitter: Mgellis File Submitted: 25 Nov 2012 File Category: Scenarios My first scenario with the newest beta version of HUD-4, v 1.11. It is 1981 and tensions have increased between NATO and the Soviet Union. Intelligence reports suggest the Soviets plan to place several submarines in the North Sea and the English Channel. Their intentions are unclear, but NATO will not tolerate this provocation. A West German task force is assigned to force the Soviet submarines to leave. What will happen if the Soviets refuse to leave is not clear... Image: A starboard bow view of the West German frigate Köln (F 220) underway in 1982. U.S. Defenseimagery.mil photo VIRIN: DN-SC-87-01124. Author's Notes: "Koeln" is the spelling given in the HUD-4 database, rather than "Köln," so that is why it was used. Please be aware that there seems to be an issue with some of the ASROC launchers in the HUD-4; future releases of the database should include the fix for this problem, but until that time players should adjust their tactics accordingly. Click here to download this file

Gunny, can you tell us which ships you updated to correct the ASROC error, and did you get a chance to test those updated platforms? If you did, and they work, then what you're doing fixes the problem, and probably all we need to do is identify the ships that still need to be updated. If the ASROCs still don't work on the ships you updated, then something else needs to be tried to fix the problem (I suppose the ASROC is a particularly tricky platform because it is a missile AND a torpedo, instead of just being one or the other). And, of course, it could just be something I am doing wrong...is there anyone else who has time to test ships for the ASROC bug? Is there an official bug list for the HUD-4? If not, perhaps one can be started? I suspect it would save people time in a number of ways.

I remembered that from last time so I tried as many directions as I could and it did not seem to make any difference.

The ships I tried out where the Knox, the Reasoner, the Adams, and a couple of the Spruances. The VLS Spruance was able to fire the RUM-139A torpedo, but not the others (it said they were out of range). The ships with the Mk 16 (both types, 1A and 2A) launchers had the same problem as before. The ASROC comes up as an option to fire, but when you fire it, it does not fire, and it is not recorded as being expended. I haven't tested the Sparrows yet.

Go ahead, I haven't made any changes.

I am also still having problems with the ASROCs. Grrr! I don't know if it is something I'm doing wrong or if there is still a problem with the database, but I figured I should let you know.

Thank you, Gunny! So far, the new database looks terrific. The only odd things I've spotted so far is that the descriptive text for a couple of carriers (Gerald Ford and Liscombe Bay) lists them as Finnish (and as corvettes or mine warfare ships). I figured I better report that.

In other words, what was published with the beta version of ANW 3.11 was HUD-4 v1.1 (gold) and what Gunny will be posting in a few days, if I understand him correctly, will be HUD-4 v1.11 beta 1. (Would it help to call it HUD-4 v1.2 instead of HUD-4 v1.11?)

Should this be announced on the Old Pooners Group on Facebook? Or anywhere else?

This is more about overall approaches rather than specific scenarios or database entries and so on, so I thought it belonged here in the "general" category. I want it to be a more open-ended discussion... What's next for H3? What would you like to do or see with H3/ANW in the future? What aspects of the game would you like to explore or see explored by scenario designers? I'm personally interested in plausible Cold War "what if" scenarios, perhaps involving a medium-sized scenario (several ships but not a whole fleet, etc.), and perhaps involving NATO or the Soviets, but not necessarily against each other, but against less commonly considered opponents. Things like a limited confrontation between Japan and the Soviets in the 1980s. Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?

I could not get the VC to do more than specify "aircraft" (I wonder if this is a difference between 3.1 and the 3.11 beta or if I'm just doing something wrong) so in theory someone could "cheat" by having, say, a Fire Scout hover over the CIV unit in my scenario (Andes Wind). I figured the best I could do was tell people in the orders "use the MV-22." That way, they know they're cheating if they do something else, although I imagine in the case of the Fire Scout it would be pretty obvious.

So instead of an "attack" it's a separate aspect of the ship or helicopter? As an example, if you tell a ship to go board another ship, it just charts an interception course, catches up to the other ship, and the computer decides if the boarding was successful? (I imagine you want to set Weapons Tight so it does not blow the target ship to smithereens while it is closing on it...or does the "boarding" setting automatically tell the AI to not shoot?)

Just a few quick questions... 1) Am I correct that using this setting means an "attack" like a patrol or a strike does not result in the destruction of a unit but making it change sides when it has taken enough "damage," or does something else happen? And it only works if one is using certain weapons like paratroopers...I think it would count as a database error if one could "board" a ship with Harpoon missiles. 2) How well does this work in ANW 3.10? Or do I need to wait for 3.11 to come out? 3) Could this be used against a submarine? (I'm thinking of scenarios where the idea is to force the submarine to surface to prove it was really in waters it had no right to be in.) I'm guessing the submarine would have to be on the surface to make this work--is there a way to do that? (That is, are there conditions under which a sub would surface if it was not already surfaced?) 4) Any other comments or advice about using this setting for missions? Thanks in advance. I look forward to your answers. Mark

Yes, I had a feeling it was something like that. When the weapon says "not illuminated," that sounds like you need to hit the target with some kind of laser/radar/etc. To be honest, I have had terrible trouble with ALL of the Mavericks, although I'm not sure if this is an error or if I'm just not using them right. I'll do a few tests and see what I can find out, but the message is usually something like "Cannot acquire target" or "Target not illuminated" or something like that. I wonder if it a sensor issue on some of the aircraft, etc. using the Mavericks rather than the Mavericks themselves. Just like with the Hellfires. Isn't this fun? Aren't you glad you volunteered to do this?

Just a quick update...I finally got tired of Herman's behavior on CombatSim and Armchair General and reported him to the moderators. Fortunately, he is so rude and foul a lot of the time that he sabotages himself. (The errors that he spots are worth reporting. But the way he does it is counter-productive.) I figure he'll either get his wrists slapped and stay away from the HUD-4 thread or get himself banned, especially if he lips off to the moderators after they contact him. I get the impression he has gotten himself banned from forums that way on more than one occasion. Well, we will see what happens. If worst comes to worst, I can always leave those forums behind and rely on other forums like Facebook to let people know about new scenarios, etc.

MH-60R and MH-60S seem unable to use the AGM-114 Hellfire. When they are close enough to fire, and I try to use the Hellfires, they say "Cannot illuminate target." This seems to happen no matter what I do, so I don't think it's simply that I'm coming in from the wrong direction or anything like that (I'm not sure that would matter with a helicopter anyway). The MH-60R does not seem to have trouble firing the AGM-119 Penguin and the MQ-8 Fire Scout IS able to fire its Hellfires at exactly the same target. I figured I better report this so Gunny can figure it out. I'd recommend checking other platforms that use the Hellfire, too, as some of them may have the same problem. On a related note, I have had a similar problem with Mavericks (AGM-65s), not just occasionally not seeing a target (the RIM-66s do this sometimes, but then they will finally see the target and fire) but NEVER seeing the target and NEVER firing, so I would check those as well. Something is causing these weapons to not "see" their targets and not fire, and I do not think it is anything the target is doing, which suggests it may be a database error or some other bug. Thanks. Mark

I understand. I'm just eager to see it. I wish Matrix would release 3.11 already.

Excellent! Thanks again for all your work on this. I can't wait to try the revised platforms and all the new platforms out...I'm hoping Matrix releases ANW 3.11 soon (or that you just break down and post "beta 12"--or whatever the number is--here on harpgamer).

File Name: Operation Andes Wind (2017) File Submitter: Mgellis File Submitted: 14 Nov 2012 File Category: Scenarios A few years in the future...a military coup has put a junta hostile to the United States in power in Chile. American citizens need to be evacuated before they can be detained and used as hostages. An amphibious task force, and two other ships, must complete this mission while protecting themselves against Chilean forces. Image: A U.S. Marine Corps MV-22B Osprey on the flight deck of an amphibious assault ship. Navy NewsStand Photo ID: 051115-N-3527B-049; Author: United States Navy, Photographer's Mate 3rd Class Timothy Bensken. Click here to download this file

I got it to work. What I did was this... The three sides are US, Chile, and Neutrals. I set Chile's posture towards the Neutrals as Friendly (but hostile to the US) and the Neutrals posture towards everyone as Neutral. Chile does not automatically see where the Neutrals are or what the Neutrals see, but sees them as Friendly if he spots them, so he does not fire. Since I don't want Chile to blow up the civilians but simply to shoot down anyone trying to rescue them, this works for this scenario. One of the Victory Conditions is that you have to hover an aircraft right over the CIV unit. It can be done. (You could cheat, in theory, by using another VSTOL aircraft or a helicopter like a Fire Scout to do this, but that's a limitation of the game and since people would know they were cheating...well...what's the point?) I'll probably post it later tonight or tomorrow.

You may have checked this already, but I noticed the RUM-139 ASROCs did not operate properly, either--the ones you can load into the VLS system on the Burke and the Ticos, although it may be the VLS system (the Mk 41, I think) and not the torpedoes themselves. I could not get them to fire; they also said they were out of range, even though they were within only a few miles of the sub. CDL error with them, too? This is a sneaky error because you probably wouldn't notice it unless you changed the default loadouts on the MK41...the Ticos and Burkes don't seem to normally have the torpedoes loaded but are capable of carrying them. I swapped out some SAMS and put in some ASROCS in the scenario I'm working on now (with a 2005+ Tico and a Flight IIA Burke) because I'm sending these ships into an area where a submarine is known to be on patrol, so I figured it would make sense to do this. That's when I noticed the problem.

I'm working on something similar right now. One of the Victory Conditions will be hovering an aircraft over a CIV - Evacuees facility to simulate a rescue operation. The area that has to be reached is about one square mile; I figure this is big enough that if the aircraft is on "hover" it should be able to remain on station for the 20 minutes necessary. If I can get it to work, I will let people know; if not, I will try something different and see if I can get that to work.