IssueMigrator1

Issue Information Issue ID #000074 Issue Type Issue Severity 1 – Low Status 30 – Feature Request Version 2014.010 Fixed in User scenarios loosing orders txt files through save/loadPosted by Grumble on 25 May 2014 - 11:02 PM A cosmetic one, GE looses track of the Red/Blue side orders txt files of User scenarios when the scenario is loaded from a save game. OK: When the User scenario is started anew from the scenario file, the orders are correctly loaded from <scenarioname>.BLx/RDx files ISSUE: When a save game of the User scenario is loaded, GE searches for the orders files under <savegame>.BLx/RDx. Repro: Load mod HDSC10 user scen check Show Orders are ok, from HDSC10.BLH save save.hph then load it Show Orders: No orders found for this User Scenario USER SCENARIO ORDERS Could not find the orders text file: C:\Program Files\Matrix Games\Save\HDSC\10\save.BLh Issue-074-User-scenarios-loosing-orders-txt-files-through-save-load.pdf HDSC10.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000001 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 22 – Fix Verified Version 2007.000 Fixed in 2008.025 Cannon fire onlyPosted by TonyE on 09 September 2012 - 06:57 PM Scenario used: saved game Cannon fire only.hpi Long Description: When ordered to intercept with Sidewinders and Phoenix, Tomcats show the "Should we attack with only cannon fire?" message. The targets are well within Phoenix range. Even if target is inside the minimum range of Phoenix and _outside_ maximum range of Sidewinder, Staff Assistance should ask to engage and use the shorter-ranged Sidewinder as the basis and display a message like, "Effective range is 10nm. Target range is 15nm. Shall we close to intercept?" Sequence to reproduce: 1. Immediately order air group AFA to intercept ZLA. 2. Message will appear 3. If airgroup is left alone and checked once in range of Sidewinders, the Weapons allocation window appears Expected behaviour: Proper intercept window should appear calculated with range of shorter-ranged weapon. Observed behaviour: Incorrect message appears asking to engage with only Cannon fire. Issue-001-Cannon-fire-only.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000149 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 22 – Fix Verified Version 2016.002 Fixed in 2016.003 Can't launch P-3 for ASW attackPosted by TEPonta on 13 March 2016 - 10:23 PM After Unknown Sub Group OOU is detected, I attempt to launch a P-3 from Base AAa to attack. I went through all the normal steps to select the number and type of aircraft, but after executing the order, I get a window that says "Sir, we have no released weapons available to conduct an ASW attack". If I launch the aircraft on some other pretext and then order it to attack directly, all goes normally. Issue-149-Can't-launch-P-3-for-ASW-attack.pdf ASW.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000055 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 92 – Will not fix Version 2009.097 Fixed in Issue-055-Scenario-Editor-Group-Window-2x-Garbbled.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000108 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 92 – Will not fix Version 2015.004 Fixed in Heap Corruption DetectedPosted by eeustice on 02 May 2015 - 09:43 AM Tony, Repeated Heap Corruption Detected crashes in my edited Backyard scenario in the Westpac battle set. Seems to occur after a Russian SSBN is sunk NW of Andersen Air Force Base (Guam). Attached is screen shots of the crash, db that us used for the scenario, saved game file and the original edited scenario. If you have any questions please let me know. Thanks, Eric Issue-108-Heap-Corruption-Detected.pdf Assertion Failed.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000005 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 0000.000 Fixed in 2013/01/01Posted by cullen52 on 21 December 2012 - 12:28 PM Will there be an extension of the 2013/01/01 --- 2009.66 upgrade or has it been replaced. If so, where might I download it. Thank you for any information. Issue-005-2013-01-01.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000048 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 0000.000 Fixed in Playing user scenariosPosted by PongoDeMer on 17 September 2013 - 11:55 PM Simple question: I have returned to HUCE and I have unzipped a number of user scenarios into the HUCE folder. I then booted up the game and searched all the battlesets and they are not there. I have also searched every file revealed by the 'load user scenario' tab in the file menu of the game... again nothing there! What am I doing wrong? PongoDeMer Issue-048-Playing-user-scenarios.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000079 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2014.010 Fixed in 2014.010 Formation air patrols "created" by the Game EnginePosted by broncepulido on 19 July 2014 - 11:17 PM Testing my own finished Manila Galleon 1988 scenario, I saw an issue almost detected in other scenarios not designed by me, when I asked myself how someone can design strange and many AEW patrols with helicopters devoid of radar. As this was designed by me, I did some research on it and clearly: - In the Peleliu and Trípoli groups, the formation editor creates, show and operates a lot of AEW patrols with 1xAssault helicopters each, never created with the formation editor when designing the scenario. - The concrete patrols are of 1xCH-53E or 1xCH-46E with Assault loadouts, or 1xUH-1N with Patrol loadout. - Playing the Red side and using the cheat mode, I observe the same AEW patrols in the Blue side played by the AI. You can see with the Scenario Editor as the patrols are not created on the scenario, but they are created and formed just at the scenario start. - The patrols are not formed if CH-53E is changed to Ferry loadout and CH-46E and UH-1N are changed to Cargo loadout. Issue-079-Formation-air-patrols-created-by-the-Game-Engine.pdf 7FT2.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000096 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2014.020 Fixed in 2014.020 Helo blip enhancer too effective?Posted by CV32 on 30 October 2014 - 05:11 AM Launched an ASuW strike of more than a dozen antiship missiles at an enemy surface group. A pair of enemy helicopters (Helix, iirc) along the missile flight path decoyed ALL of the missiles. I will try and get a useful savegame, but this might be a tweaking issue rather than a bug as such. Issue-096-Helo-blip-enhancer-too-effective.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000093 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2014.020 Fixed in Land Attack Missiles Have Incorrect Names in Unit WindowPosted by eeustice on 25 October 2014 - 10:47 AM Kind of a strange on here. The Land Attack missiles have odd names. In missile group BJM Target is ZJ003 8X RIM-162D. ZJ003 is a SA-6b missile battery. Missile launched was either a TACOM IV or TLAM-C or D. Kind of confused here on how to right this up. Checked db in both the SE and GE and it appears that I have all the correct missiles in my launchers. If this is a db issue I could not find it. Trying to launch an ASM attack it appears that when I go to launch a TASM all the weapons appear to have been turned into TASM's on the ship I am launching them from. Which means ESSM's became TASM's. I looked in the Platform Display in the GE Reports menu and looked at the Nimitz and it showed the correct weapons in the correct launchers however when I look at them in Carrier Group AVC attacking Surface Group WPS my Unit Weapons Loaded shows all TASM III. Attached is my saved game scenario, latest db and a couple screen shots. If you need any additional info please let me know. Eric Issue-093-Land-Attack-Missiles-Have-Incorrect-Names-in-Unit-Window.pdf Land Attack Missiles.zip WP Backyard 936-1.0001.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000112 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2015.007 Fixed in 2015.007 Refueling in HC Version 2015.007Posted by eeustice on 07 June 2015 - 12:08 PM Refueling Air Group FSA consisted of 5 groups of 5 Fighters and 1 group of 10 Tankers. Only 2 of the 5 fighter groups refueled. Other 3 were left high and dry Attached is the latest version of my db, a couple saved games, and the GE log file with refuel logging set in the HC Launcher. Before the changes were made with Refueling each group received an equal amount of fuel from the tankers. If you have any questions please let me know. I was trying to place this in the Refueling forum but was unable to figure out how to attach the files so I have place all the info here. Good luck guys! Eric Issue-112-Refueling-in-HC-Version-2015-007.pdf Refueling.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000141 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2015.026 Fixed in 2015.026 GetDisk AnnexA ErrorPosted by eeustice on 22 December 2015 - 08:53 PM Just after the start of my Spratly 3 Test scenario receive a GetDisk AnnexA Error about 2 game seconds after starting saved game. Happened about 5 times in a row. Unable to continue playing scenario. Attached is the latest copy of my Fictional db, saved game and a word doc with a screen shot of the crash. Ran scenario again with out launching any Blue AC and crash occurred at the same time in the game at 25 second after start of scenario. Seems like there is some kind of issue with the Chinese J10B KLJ-3 Radar. ID 45057 in sensor annex. As soon as I select the sensor In the SE in the Platform Display in the Groups drop down menu I get the same annex error. If you have any questions please let me know. Thanks, Eric Issue-141-GetDisk-AnnexA-Error.pdf GetDisk AnnexA Error.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000158 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2016.007 Fixed in Game Engine errour changing altitudePosted by broncepulido on 14 August 2016 - 07:25 AM Demo scenario to be played in the GIUK Battleset, 1980-2016 standard database. I did take-off with 2xF-35 from the Blue Base (launched with orders to attack Red Base). When trying to change height from Low to Very Low, errour messange and Game Engine stops (tested many times). When in other essay I did lauch 2xF-35 in patrol (with the idea of after they reach patrol point change height to very low and attack Red Base), almost immediantly launched same errour message (probably when changing height). Adjunt files are test scenario and errour message. Issue-158-Game-Engine-errour-changing-altitude.pdf CLIMB TEST 14 AUGUST 2016.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000181 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2017.001 Fixed in HC Launcher UpdatePosted by eeustice on 27 February 2017 - 05:44 PM Just wanted to see what the new unit logging captures. When selecting the new Unit logging received the following message: Ignored Argument Unrecognized -I option unit ignored GHE still opens and everything works like it should. If you have any questions please let me know. Thanks, Eric Issue-181-HC-Launcher-Update.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000183 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2017.007 Fixed in 2017.007 Very slow game engine?Posted by broncepulido on 07 May 2017 - 03:40 PM I'm not sure, but think something strange on the Game Engine, playing the latest Patrick scenario, apparently not a big scenario, the game is going very slow, see attached file (Same with my Bubiyan scenario some days ago, also a small scenario). Middle East map. Issue-183-Very-slow-game-engine.pdf autosave1.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000206 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2017.016 Fixed in 2017.016 2017.016 crash at startPosted by broncepulido on 08 December 2017 - 01:59 AM Regrettably, I see the same problems in 2017.016 after a while testing. Playing standard HCDB2 The Middle East. Error messages in attached file, crash at each scenario start, EXCEPT the very simple test scenario labeled yesterday as "GOOD", what is the only one working fine. A pity, but thanks Tony! Issue-206-2017-016-crash-at-start.pdf 1980-5 LEBANON.zip AL MADINAH ATTACK 2017-1.zip HARPOON TEST 2017-12-8.zip TEST RED SHIP NO CHANGE COURSE 2011-11-21 GOOD.zip TEST RED SHIP NO CHANGE COURSE 2011-11-21 SECOND ATTEMPT BAD.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000004 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 0000.000 Fixed in "I like it" limitationsPosted by broncepulido on 07 December 2012 - 04:42 AM By the same reason as the downloading scenario issue I post here this issue about the new web site. Each time I want to mark some comment, post or link as "I like it" in the Facebook symbol (errr ... I see now apparently it's not a "I like it" for Facebook), I dont realize it, and I get the message "You've reached your quota of possitive votes for today". This issue is present from the start of the new website. Issue-004-_I-like-it_-limitations.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000002 Issue Type Issue Severity 3 – Medium Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.066 Fixed in 2009.069 ECM and decoys mathematical problemPosted by broncepulido on 18 November 2012 - 01:52 PM I've detected a big problem yesterday in the mathematical model of the ECM and Decoys in HCE. When editing the Battle of Baltim scenario, as I'm not very satisfaced with the very low levels of ECM and decoys, and also I've lowered the SS-N-2a Styx to a probably more realistic 35%, and employed Decoys Level 2 with a value of 40% (as historically in Latakia and Baltim ALL the Styx fired were decoyed with ECM or decoys, and none get his target, and I want to essay that outcome in the game). Doing that, my prediction was the Styx targeting value will be as a negative -5% (PH=35%, minus ECM or Decoy Value=40%, as result a negative PH=-5%), and it will never hit the target. But after some tests and variations, the outcome is THE OPOSSITE !!! The Styx EVER get his target!!! I've obtained with more test consistent results, as in this table: ECM problem: SS-N-2a 35% Decoys 40% PH=251% SS-N-2a 35% Decoys 35% PH=0% SS-N-2a 40% Decoys 40% PH=0% SS-N-2a 39% Decoys 40% PH=255% SS-N-2a 30% Decoys 40% PH=246% SS-N-2a 40% DECM 45% PH=251% As consecuence, if the ECM or chaff value is higher than the missile PH, the Game Engine rest the missile PH from 256, and the resulting number, as in the example by far higher than 100% (as 246%), is the very very high PH of a very primitive missile as Styx when the target is defended by advanced ECM !!!!! I fear this will be embedded in the Game Engine and of not easy solution .... I can only keep very low the ECM and decoys values, and higher the missile PH, to avoid the case .... Issue-002-ECM-and-decoys-mathematical-problem.pdf ECMTEST.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000011 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.050 Fixed in 2009.076 Order of Battle Unit Field Too ShortPosted by miller7219 on 06 March 2013 - 04:30 PM This is a cosmetic "bug", but the Order of Battle window doesn't allow enough room to fully display the name of the unit. Likely the line length just needs to be increased. Start any scenario and then got the Order of Battle form the Reports pull down menu. Example (from HDS III GIUK, Suprise in the Snow scenario): Group Unit Airfield: AEa 00:AFld Jan Mayen/Jan M......cut off Submarine Group:AHU 00:SSN Valiant/Conquero...cut off The Unit box doesn't allow enough space for the platform class/name. Also, the Group box could be widened a bit, or a column ecpander added between the Group and Unit windows. Notice how some of the names are hidden behind the Unit portion to the right. None of this is a show stopper, but it's bothered me for years Issue-011-Order-of-Battle-Unit-Field-Too-Short.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000023 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.080 Fixed in 2009.081 GetAnnex Error: ANNEX_SHIFT(12325 [0x3025]) = 3, annex=5Posted by eeustice on 09 June 2013 - 07:31 PM Received a GetAnnex Error while playing edited Westpac Scenario. Game crashed. Was able to repeat the crash multiple times. Crash occurs at the same point of the scenario. Crash occurs after the North Carolina fires a 16in round. Attached are the edited scenario, db, GE log, and the saved game file before the crash. Note from Tony: See Effects.c ln 502. Code is not checking for guns vs aircraft and it should be. If you need any additional info please let me know. Issue-023-GetAnnex-Error_-ANNEX_SHIFT(12325 0x3025)-=-3,-annex=5.pdf GetAnnex Error.zip HC2009.081GEpre1.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000021 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.076 Fixed in 2009.082 Neutral Green Truck detects Red Katiuska sitePosted by broncepulido on 23 May 2013 - 11:02 AM A Green neutral truck detects for the Blue side the placement of a Red Katiusta site. See the attached file, Red Katiuska site is detected 3 nm W of the Green truck (I perceived this effect building the last week-end the Drone Scenario). Issue-021-Neutral-Green-Truck-detects-Red-Katiuska-site.pdf AGSATST.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000015 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.076 Fixed in 2009.078 Unable to Add additional Groups Blue or Red in 2009.072 SEPosted by eeustice on 05 May 2013 - 01:01 PM In the Westpac Battle Set Scenario 9 The Backyard I have reached some kind of maximum limit in the SE of how many units I can have. I can not add anymore ships/subs, plane groups, bases or air defense units to bases. If I add anymore units In the SE it takes away a sub away from sub group ASU (sub group just north of the red CV group by China). Happens if I add a Red or Blue ship/sub air group or AD unit. Attached is my edited db dated 130504. I also included the edited West Pac scenario as well as the report from the analyze scenario screen. All files are in the zipped commandb. zip file. I was unable to add any ASW helo's the to the DD's, DDG's and FFG's in groups AMC and ANC. I am testing a way to fly MH-60R's (ASW-LR) aircraft with a Wake Island class BBLHA with 70 helo's for transfer to outer sector DDG's, DD's and FFG's during the game as a fix for this problem by detaching the ships from the group and flying the helo's to the ship during the game. Once I start the scenario with the GE I am able to divide the real large air groups up to smaller ones with different load outs. There are 140 F35B's on Guam to ferry out to the Wake Island later on in the game if needed. This is not a show stopper for this scenario, however if there was a lot more red side subs it would create a major problem for Task Group protection. Thanks, Eric Issue-015-Unable-to-Add-additional-Groups-Blue-or-Red-in-2009-72-SE.pdf commondb.zip

Issue Information Issue ID #000027 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.050 Fixed in 2009.083 Scenario THEM crashes 3 minutes into the simulationPosted by RoRo on 04 July 2013 - 11:54 AM The scenario THEM issued by CV32 is utmost interesting, but it keeps terminating 3-4 minutes into the siimulation. I have the correct DB, refreshed the down load many times, nothing works. Issue-027-Scenario-THEM-crashes-3-minutes-into-the-simulation.pdf

Issue Information Issue ID #000031 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.082 Fixed in 2009.086 The Return of the Memory Allocation FailurePosted by eeustice on 22 July 2013 - 07:48 PM Tony, The Memory Allocation Failure has returned. I was cleaning up my HDS9-10 scenario for release and the Memory Allocation Failure reappeared when I tried to add ASW helo's to TG AAC. I was able to recreate the problem several times. This is with the standard db since it is an original Harpoon Scenario. I am using the latest version of the SE. Pleas let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Eric Issue-031-The-Return-of-the-Memory-Allocation-Failure.pdf Memory Allocation Failure Returns.zip Memory Allocation Failure Screen Shot.zip