mack

I get the same refresh problems sometimes. I just put it down to the site or something. IDK, maybe I shouldn't try and load multiple tabs of the site.

I'm getting an error message pop up: edit - I updated to the latest HCDB and it's working. edit 2 - You might want to have a look at the route for the Resupply group. They ran aground in my game.

SPOILERS . Well.. this escalated pretty quickly. After a pretty intense air to air fight, my Israeli forces quickly gained the upper hand, despite having to deal with successive waves of Russian built fighters carrying longer ranged AAM's. After reducing Damascus down to about 25% I then had a couple of planes shot out of the sky by the hostile Soviet Kirov lurking too close for comfort. After a couple of SEAD strikes, I was able to co-ordinate an attack with a 3rd SEAD attack, with the heavy punch provided by the Gabriels and Harpoons of my single sub and the small Israel surface force. 4 Harpoons hit the Russian Battlecruiser and sent her to the bottom. I then went to work on the 'true' mission, that being CAS against the northern ground forces. I lost more planes than I should have due to planes going to the wrong targets. Tip: Do not simply choose the 'attack' option when launching. You need to 'patrol' them and then guide them manually with waypoints, because against scattered ground forces the planes can go anywhere. With about half the enemy force gone, I received a note that a car bomb had gone off in Nevatim. After we re-armed, I blew the enemy tanks, bmps and trucks with JDAM. A raid warning caused by a SCUD missile coming in from the south was quickly followed by Nuclear Release, and as per orders I launched the Jericho missiles at mytargets. Damascus, already heavily damaged, was obliterated, and Tehran was 'wiped off the map' by a nuclear firestorm.

Are these potentially going to be include within the game itself whenever the next patch is?

Really need to take care of those long ranged F-15's to take out the nuke base.

I'd say that's a bit harsh on the British Post-Captains

Thanks for the answer.

An old proposal from me: point defense automatic, Area defense manually controled by the player Wouldn't that give the computer too big a disadvantage? It needs to be 'both sides' and as such needs to be controlled by the AI.

Hey everyone, just upgraded from a 1680x1050 (22") monitor to a full HD 1920x1080 (24"), and I found that the Group and Unit Windows has some kind of lock/max size on it. Is this intentional/intended (perhaps a windows OS limitation)? I prefer to have a bigger Group window rather than Unit window. Not a big problem (it's already huge anyway), but just curious.

This is a true and important part. At some number of SAMs the game considers the SSMs well enough covered and no more SAMs will fire for the next while. It is a big reason you'll see the LR SAM shooters go wild and then nothing from the shorter-ranged. Note I'm not trying to defend it (somewhere buried deep in HG forums is my explanation of my approach to improving the situation). It is a fascinating question, how is it decided how many SAMs to fire, at which targets and when??? I fiddled my scenario to go down to one defending ship and three attackers (to get enough SSMs to be a challenge). A number of SAM salvos were fired but I couldn't make any sense out of what was targeted and how many SAMs per target are allocated as it didn't seem consistant. Some times there is a 30 second delay between firing, sometimes 10 sec. The initial SSM firing consists of 6 pairs of missiles but only three pairs are initially targeted (with either 6 or 12 SAMs depending on whether 'light' or 'heavy' setting made) while the ships info box indicates (if I read it correctly) that 15 SAMs can be fired per salvo. Any way it is a very interesting query, thanks Koevoet for highlighting it> PS I tried doing a logging of a short game but couldn't find a logging catagory that told me much about SAM firings and I dread the 'log all' setting - any hints? Don Thomas (second swing) I can't leave this alone. The more I play with it the more I think Koevoet has highlighted a valid problem. The way I see it only point defences are considered on a unit basis. SAMs (even relatively short range ones) are considered on a group basis and if the ship with good SAM capability is a long way on the wrong side of a fairly incapable unit the incapable unit has to rely on its guns without touching its missiles (assuming the SAMs don't get there in time). In one case the Karel Doorman emptied every point defence gun but fired no SAMs (because the AAW frigate had fired of 20 SAMs that were never going to get to the SSMs before they hit the Doorman) Perhaps it is also to do with calculations based on the group centre, not individual units?? The AAW frigate thinks the SSMs are headed for the group centre (I'm guessing) and that therefore it has fired a worthwhile salvo of SAMs when in fact the SSMs' headings show up their target unit and the fact that the SAMs won't get to the SSMs before they get to their unit target. (am I raving nonesense, I hope not?!) I suppose good placement of units in the formation according to their capability is the short term answer (is it?), but that depends on correctly guessing the threat direction. Also (I do this sometimes) taking the target unit out of the formation and letting it fend for itself seems to help sometimes (but I'm not sure). happy sleepless nights, .......... Perhaps ships need to be given more autonomy/leeway when shooting their own shorter range SAM's. I don't think it's realistic that a ship wouldn't put up SAM's against incoming missiles even with a 'covering' ship firing long range missiles to protect them. I think perhaps any slow missile (eg Harpoons) that gets within 10 miles of a ship gets targeted if Sam's can intercept, and the same for 'fast' missiles (eg Kingfish) at 15. Especially ships with short range Sam systems like the ESSM, SA-N-9, Gadfly and ships with CIWS systems like the CADNS1 or RAM.

I just created a scenario in Westpac with an Anzac ASMD protecting an Kanimbla from 2 Pegasus missile boats and it all seemed to work fine for me. The Anzac launched 18 ESSM's at the 16 Harpoons (in 2 separate engagements), and all 4 of their Mistral TETRAL Sam's. 1 got past the Anzac, and it was promptly blown out of the sky by the Kanimbla's CIWS which shot all 16 rounds. The only thing that didn't seem to work was the Anzac's 127mm Gun not firing at the Harpoons, but that's probably got a DB reason.

I think you should probably upgrade to HCE.

Yeah, I considered leaving behind the support vessels but thought that might not bode well for their survival, or my eventual need for replenishment. The minefields pretty much prevent a straight route. They don't actually do anything though? Unless I've missed a patch which added replenishment? The Antonio is basically a large slow target, transfer it's helos to the CV or something. If the Supply class would actually replenish the SAM's on the CV group, then I'd keep it, but they don't do anything afaik.

Something I just can't understand is this huge, massive quest for "diversity", but someone says they are gay, and suddenly that's too "diverse" and you get booted. Stupid rule.

There are 2 "on station" windows. Perhaps one is minimum vic, and the other total vic? 1 km/h = 0.539956803 knots Shorter (minvic?): 777nm = 1,439 km 48 hours total mission 22 knots = 40 km/h = 35 hours Leaving the Supply and Antonio ships behind can get you to 29 knows = 53 km/h = 27 hours -------- Longer (tovic?): 864nm = 1,637 km 48 hours total mission 22 knots = 40km/h = 40 Hours Leaving the Supply and Antonio ships behind can get you to 29 knows = 53km/h = 31 hours. So you can get there in time, although it's a tight call, and you really need to motor along. I'm also fairly sure there is a heavy minefield which will slow you down.

Damn. It'd be really nice if it were possible to extend the formation and ready/launch aircraft screens down so you could see say, an entire carrier groups air wing at once. I don't think it'd matter as much from the right to left stuff, but making them longer up/down would be awesome. The formation window annoys me especially because it seems to "snap" back up to the top of the list sometimes and I have to scroll all the way back down.

The simplest answer is that the closest thing the 2 games have to each other is that they take place in water. Further posters will be able to discuss further.

Whilst I'm on the subject of the UI, is it possible for the following windows to be made resizable/bigger: Select Battleset menu. Ready aircraft menu. Launch aircraft menu. Aircraft loadout menu. Formation editor (and perhaps make it so it doesn't snap back to the top of the list). Attack menu.

1) I'd just pick a side at random maybe. 3) Okay

I'm going to ask for a perhaps more practical idea, but could the game engine be modified so that: 1) A plane/helo attacking a yellow/uncertain contact will drop his sonobouys at the edge of that field, rather than as a "cross" inside that uncertainty diamond, and once that field is established, then start dropping buoys inside. 2) Plane ASW formations with more than 1 aircraft would sent the 2nd aircraft to the "end" of the diamond so they could cover the whole diamond earlier, for example Plane 1 drops on the 1st and 2nd sides, Plane 2 drops on the 3rd and 4th sides, then they work on the middle. As it stands any ac that join a search will cover the exact same ground as the first have. 3) The ability to drop torpedoes without having a target, that would work on a snake or circle search pattern. Many patrol craft carry 6+ torps, and I wouldn't mind wasting one for the chance to aquire a target that might have to rev to flank speed and give away it's position to my patrol.

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?

There is a pretty good account of this battle in one of the Aubrey/Maturin books. I can understand Linois though, he faced the prospect of being surrounded and heavily outnumbered, like they said, those ships aren't like the merchant ships of today, they packed a punch, even if they didn't compare to a 74 gun SOL.

I don't know too much about shipbuilding, but it seems incredibly wasteful to go through the entire rigmarole of designing and building a new class, then stopping it after 3 ships. Then again, this is the navy that built Seawolf, stopped because it was too expensive, then built a less capable, but more expensive replacement.

Hah, that's the one where the team come back from like 40 points down to get in front in the last seconds, only to concede a TD from the return and lose?

Are there any actual Australian units in this? Or are they abstracted by Canadian units?