Steven M

1.Was looking around and saw this at http://harpoon-ultimate-commanders-edition.software.informer.com/3.0/. Anybody know anything about it? 2. I can't find the custom database I was using when my system crashed. The D drive where I keep the files is ok, but I had to reload HUCE. I made sure I moved the entire game over to a new folder with a new name. While the scenario editor's platform display still shows the database. I cannot or have not yet found it when running the pf editor. 3. Which leads my to another questions. I recall there being a specific pfeditor execute file which I do not appear to find. I'm using Access by clicking the databasebuld and that gets me into the traditional format but despite importing various database files, no luck. Where is the database file hiding? I don't want to have to recreate the database. 4. What changes are in version 2015-027? Sinking fast, Steve M

If there are multiple mounts, like the MK41 VLS on the Arleigh Burke class, and assuming both mounts will be able to fire at a target, will the AI pick the longest ranged weapon from both mounts? Or, will it go to the first mount listed and deplete the weapons in that mount before going to the second mount? Thus if you have 24 Standard IIIBs, 48 ESSMs in the both mounts will the AI empty the first mount before going to the second or will it fire all 48 Standard IIIBs before it fires the Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles?

I have the following questions: SAMs: The AI handles the air defense for the units. What is the protocol for the air defense? I have had some games where the area defense ships seem not to fire at incoming asms. Or, the targeted unit will wait to fire short range sams and not fire the long-range sams. (I may be mistaken, so if anyone has had similar experiences....) Torpedoes: I've just had a game where an AI Russian sub fired a torpedo with no chance of getting hit. It was apparently a short-range torpedo. If the sub had fired a long-range wake-following torpedo it might of had a chance. Is their a weapons hierarchy? Is the AI set to fire at maximum range instead of 1/2 range, for example. How do these procedures work? Thanks SM

Aim-7Ms acting like Aim-120s: From an F-15 I fired Aim-7Ms at a group of bombers. The program asked me to turn on the radar as the missile is semi-active radar homing. I did that and then turned the radar off. The missiles proceeded to miss the bombers, then they corrected and acted like Aim-120s with self-guidance and destroyed the bombers. This also happened in another game where I shot down all the opposing F-15s after they fired their Aim-7Ms. The Aim-7s did not disengage but continued to track to their targets (much to my surprise). In the database the Aim-7M is flagged as radar guided and semi-active guided. Could it be that it should only have the semi-active flag? If you could point me to the information concerning the effects of the various missile flags I would appreciate it. Thanks

Tony, Brad, et al: Of course, I would pick the exception to the rule! My thought process, or lack thereof, is to try for more realism within the limits of the programing. I am reminded the book "Thud Ridge", about the air war over Vietnam. In one instance the F-105s were armed with "daisy cutter" bombs, if I remember my terminology correctly. The 500lb bombs had a nose extension on them so they would explode creating shrapnel. Very good against infantry but useless against the dirt road they were sent to bomb. Tomahawk cruise missiles ejecting bomblets are useful against area targets, but not against hardened targets. Currently ARMs don't work against radars/ships that are not radiating, as they should be. Although.... 1st generation vs 2nd etc The thought being that increased target/weapon categorization makes all those loadout options more necessary,useful and enjoyable. Anyways just wondering...... Steve M

Tony, et al: I was reading an article regarding “bunker buster bombs” and the specific uses for them. It led me to wondering how the “specific use” concept could be adapted to HCE. Currently most target defense is based on a numeric value, for example; a large airbase may be valued at 9500 defense points or a tank unit at 10. Deliver enough damage points in your attack and the target is destroyed. When attacking a target it doesn’t matter what type of weapon you use as long as that weapon can attack that type of target. For example, when attacking an airfield you can use any anti-surface weapon. The effectiveness of the weapon is based on accuracy and damage points. It doesn’t matter if you use a SLAM missile or an anti-runway weapon. Thus, when attacking an airfield, the requirement for anti-runway missions vs. long-range precision missions is moot. If you need to destroy an “underground command facility” you don’t need bunker busters, anything that can hit the target will work. The exception is SEAD missions as the ARMs track radar emissions. What if? There has been talk of creating ECM categories. Each ECM system would have a rating level that represented its state of the art. What if targets had a similar rating reflecting the types of weapons that would be effective vs. weapons that would be ineffective. Thus when attacking an airfield you would need to use anti-runway weapons rather than anti-tank weapons. When attacking bridges, PGMs with large warheads would be required in order to get sufficient damage. Tanks and armored vehicles would not be attacked by SLAMs. Attacking a bunker complex would require bunker-busting bombs, not JSOWs. The list goes on…… Just a what if?

Tony or Brad: Are there specific instructions on how to utilize the battleset builder program. Via trial and error I've figured out part of it but I can't get my test battleset to be read by the scenario editor. It created a HCBS file but that appears to be incorrect. I'm trying to create a Hawaii battleset with an embedded database as a test. I got the map to work under the "my battleset" and the scenario editor sees that battleset. However, the battleset I'm trying to create, "test 1" with a Hawaii map (rsr file ?) and with an embedded database. Something was saved as a HCBS file, but it is not read or accessed by the scenario editor. 1. When embedding data bases will any data base (res) work in a battleset? 2. When it asks for an rsr file does that refer to the map file you want to use? 3. Is the battleset program backwards compatable: ie once a battleset is created is it permanent and non-editable in the program? 4. I have yet to fully understand the nature of the res and rsr files. I assume the rsr is the map and graphics and the res is the database structure? 5. Has anyone else asked these questions? Some clarification on how this is supposed to work would be helpful. As always thank you, Steve M

I don't know what I did but I reloaded and everything appears to be working now. Steve

Need more info, Steve. What error msg are you seeing? I'm not getting an error message. The SE program and PE program will not load at all. I've downloaded the update twice and reinstalled with the same result. Is it possible I need to go to 16 bit color? I've tried to load off the menu as well as directly via the all program files. Should there be any issues regarding the database. I also noticed when I was in the "play" game portion that the platform display had incorrect pictures for a number of ships/subs etc. A corruption of some sort? Steve

Tony: I've downloaded the update to 2008.044 but I can't get the scenario editor or the platform editor to run. What am I doing wrong? ???? Thanks, Steve

Well, there $2 billion worth of junk. Based on the reporting it makes me wonder if we rely too much on computers. Perhaps there should be an override switch in the cockpit. But, all things considered, it probably wouldn't have made a difference in this case. ??? But then again in the future when every aircraft is a computerized UAV..... I feel safer already. Steve M

A couple of other wish items: 1. Better SAM engagement rules including ability to break lock and more altitude effects for horizon and target at time of impact. (see prior postings). AI program could include RWR check and altitude adjustment for targeted aircraft. 2. Passive sensors: While air-to-air IR is dealt with in the game, what about the new generation of air-to-ground passive sensors? For example, the Sniper pod in the game appears to do nothing. While in real life it extends the detection and targeting ability of the attacking aircraft, without being detected itself. Include in this "wish" generational air-to-air IR detection "pods". The F-4B/C IR detector is not nearly as good as the Mig-29 or newer detection systems. 3. Carrier and base magazines. While I like to shoot a thousand Harpoons at the Chinese fleet and keep reloading I think I use up the entire US supply in the first 30 minutes of the game. It changes your approach when you have to limit your weapons expenditure or fly into the "whites of their eyeballs" range. Steve M

Brad wrote: "If you keep in mind that the HCE code/model is overall a relatively simple one, and that its now a far sight better than it has ever been, you'll probably stay a happy Harpooner. " I do sometimes forget the program was written almost 20 years ago. I do appreciate the effort and results that have gone into improving the the game. In that regard I'm a very happy Harpooner. Just a thought, would there be an easy way to insert a sub-routine that would make the following check? When missile reaches target if target is within altitude parameters of missile then calculate hit percentage as currently done. If missile reaches target and target not within altitude parameters then missiles misses (ie 0% hit probability). Is something like this done with ASW torpedoes or will they hit surfaced subs but not surface vessels? I think ASW torpedoes will hit subs that have surfaced. But I'm not sure. See Happy Harpooner! Steve M

" the altitude restriction is only a launch restriction.... As far as i remember..." OK, As I understand it: If at any time an aircraft is detected within the altitude parameters of the SAM. the SAM will have lock on and the missile will track regardless of the target moving above or below the altitude parameter of the missile system. I haven't noticed this yet, but if a SAM site or ship is hit by an ARM or destroyed while the missile is in flight does the missile self-destruct? I am referring to semi-active homing missiles. Air-to-air missiles (semi-active) do self-destruct if their launching plane is shot down. Which leads to another matter: If 12 F-4s fire 12 Aim-7s (ie 1 each) and while the Aim-7s are in flight, 11 F-4s are shot down, shouldn't 11 of the Sparrows loose guidance? Still having fun, Steven

I was just playing a scenario where the red side was equipped with SA-5 SAMs. The SA-5 apparently detected the blue aircraft at medium altitude and at a fairly long range. The SAM fired. The missile was detected and the blue unit was ordered to a low altitude. At the range in question the blue unit should have broken radar lock as it was below the radar horizon. The missile should have failed to guide. In addition the SA-5 has a minimum altitude rating of medium so it should not follow the blue unit down to low altitude. Correct? However, it did and shot down one the blue unit aircraft. Are the altitude limitations working? Steve M