Geoaegis

Thanks Tony.

OP: Geoaegis, UNFILED, VerRep: 2025.25 I did a fresh install from the comprehensive patch to make sure any of my tinkering on the database does not cause a/the problem. There are some differences in unit loadouts, so I will repeat the issue I am seeing with the current loadouts. There is a Kongo class destroyer (BMD option) stationed northwest of Iwakuni, Japan. I included an E-3C at Iwakuni in case the Kongo radar did not pick up the incoming missiles. There is a RED unit located at the southeast tip of South Korea. The unit includes two TELs: Hwasong-5 and Hwasong-6. The current database has Hwa-5/6 traveling at Very High altitude. The Kongo has onboard both SM-2MR Block IIIB and SM-3 Block IA. Since the HWA-5/6 are not traveling at suborbital, I would not expect the SM-3 to be used to engage. With air and surface search radars on, the Kongo picks up the incoming at about 51 nm. The Kongo shoots a series of SM-2s. However, as the HWA-5 and 6 are traveling at 3999 knots, after the second volley from the Kongo, the SM-2s cannot catch up to the HWA-5 and 6. The Kongo though keeps shooting the SM-2s. The SM-2s then appear to self-destruct and then another volley from the Kongo. This cycle repeats until the Hwa-5/6 hit Iwakuni. I would expect the Kongo to stop shooting once the HWA-5/6 could not be run down since the ship is then just wasting its onboard loadout. Test scenario and saved game attached. Out of curiosity, I went into the database and swapped out the SM-2MR BIIIB's in the 29 cell VLS on the Kongo BMD with SM-6 ERAMs, changed the speed of the SM-6 to 4500 knots, then repeated the test. Considering the velocity of the revised SM-6 could overtake the HWA-5/6, I would think the AI would choose the SM-6 at some point. However, the AI just continued shooting the SM-2s. Missile Test.BKq Missile Test.scq Missile Test.scq.xml missile test.hpq

Dawned on me as I was about to send the scenario that I was running on my modified database, which has a number of updates that include the units and weapons involved. I'm in the middle of updating several countries (Japan, DPRK, ROK) in my database to represent post ~2000 and omit previous years. Will shift gears later this week and remodel the scenario with the current game version database. If I have the same problem, will advise and send. 👍

Hi All, Been away a while. Appears I have a bunch of catching up to do. Wanted to share a brief summary of a problem to see if anyone has had the same experience. Will upload a scenario to demonstrate the issue over the weekend. Issue: Two pairs of SCUD missiles are launched from a RED land unit over water. Target is a BLUE airfield. The SCUDs are traveling about 3800 knots at VHIGH altitude. I have an AEGIS equipped Kongo class (BMD capable) loaded with SM-3 Block 1A slightly north of the SCUD travel path with both air and surface radar energized. The Kongo initially shoots three SM-3's with the targets about 68 nm out. Usually, the 3 SM-3's hit one of the four targets. The Kongo will next shoot 3 SM-2MR Block IIIA's. I assume the switch to a SM-2MR missile occurs because the SCUDs are within the SM-2MR envelope at this point. About 60 percent of the time there is one hit. Afterward, because the SCUD's velocity is higher than the SM-2MR and the SCUDs are passing the Kongo, a SM-2MR cannot catch the SCUD. As such, I would think the model would switch back to the SM-3. However, the Kongo will continue to fire 3 SM-2MR's at a time, which apparently "self destruct" as soon as they are launched. The occurs until the SM-2MR inventory is used up at which time the Kongo would again start using the SM-3 or the SCUD is outside the range of the SM-2MR and then the unit would start using the SM-3. Any ideas? Scenario to follow. Thanks in advance and Happy May. George

Thanks Don. I see weather systems pop up from time to time but it's difficult to test performance as it's not possible to predict the weather. ⛈️ 🙂

Hi All, Thanks to Tony, Don and Eric for working on the next update. Lots of enthusiastic chat on Discord. Question - any insight on how weather affects the performance of aircraft and weapons? I'm working on a planning tool and trying to figure out if I should degrade estimates for hit percentage or range. Thanks much! Geo

Came across the attached while looking for another reference. Thought interesting enough to share. Wondering if HUCE modeling would be consistent with the results in the attached. Geo IJIDSS0303-0408PAULO.pdf

Working on developing my first battleset, which includes modifying the database to include current weapons, aircraft, etc. Pretty confident I am modeling aircraft, ships and subs consistent with the game rules/metrics. Also figured out how to manage mounts and weapons. However, struggling to find a good source for how to assign damage points to weapons, namely missiles. Found historical methods for calculating such as warhead weight x 0.2 = DP. Also found a NPS thesis (circa 2009) "A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COMMERCIAL OFF-THE SHELF NAVAL SIMULATIONS AND CLASSIC OPERATIONS RESEARCH MODELS" that runs through various parameters and assumptions. Do recognize there are several variables that go into calculating the base lethality of a missile and there are also several factors that affect the PH and end result on the target on impact/detonation. However, all read - not sure I have a good reference for assigning DP and PH. For facilities, can't really find a rationale after reviewing the existing database. Found an old reference that equates facility damage point assignment to the number of 1000lb bombs it would take to make the facility inoperable. However, when I look at assigned damage points in the database, seems there is a pretty large spread. For example, looking at airfields with 1 runway that can handle VLarge aircraft, damage point assignments ranged between 2500-9000. Any guidance or rules of thumb? George

Greetings All, Have two questions about software performance. Not sure if problems, or not. First, when I export the database (build 2024.001) I get the following screen. My scenario(s) seem to work okay, but not sure if "the system cannot find the file specified" is an issue. Second, in the scenario editor, my unit screen is tiny even though I have clicked the 1x setting. I ran the window resize tool available here and reset the windows in the game engine but the scenario editor unit window remains super small. The unit window shows up in the upper left of the group window. Any ideas? Geo

Thanks Don. Great inside into the mind of the AI. I am pondering how to include a NEUTRAL in a conflict that really is not NEUTRAL. In my scenario, looking to include an element of a proclaimed NEUTRAL attempting to distract and disrupt. For example, JAMMING and FONOPS. I will run several test scenarios to see what I can work through.

Hi Don, The battleset is one that I created. But, I found some bugs in the original battleset, as I created the battleset then installed the 2024.001 update. I've redone the battleset at this point but only the map and some narrative. The battleset AO supports a DPRK-ROK-Japan conflict that is a prelude to China advancing it's interests. RUS also has their spoon in the soup, which results in some "hypothetical" equipment availability for DPRK. Working on the first scenario while in parallel learning how the HCE AI functions, identifying and testing newly added weapons/mounts/ships and validating availability of the armament, aircraft, etc.. Please let me know if I can provide an other files to help your investigation. Geo

Thanks Tony. Files attached. Also, operating with DB 2024.001 Test Unknown.zip

Greetings All, I am noticing possible errors in how the game engine designates an icon for unknown contacts and/or allows attacking unknown contacts. Apologies if these are known issues. I still have a bunch of reading to do in the forum. Also, once I figure out what test scenario files to upload, will do. Examples: Small RED surface contact - BLUE platform: Bunker Hill class (Monterey (CM)) radiating air and surface radars. Sonar is in passive. - Weather report is perfect with visibility at 19 nm. - A small surface contact is identified by passive sonar at 22 nm. In the scenario the unit (Najin) is designated RED. The unit is not radiating and is beyond visual range. - Initially, the contact icon is yellow (no positive position fix). - Subsequent to obtaining a position fix with radar, the icon becomes red and weapons range circles for the contact are shown in the GROUP and UNIT maps. However, the target description remains small surface contact (unknown). - It would seem the contact icon should remain yellow without range circles until a unit is identified (not in an unknown state). - A couple of screen shots follow below to illustrate the narrative. Large NEUTRAL (GREEN) surface contact - BLUE platform: Bunker Hill class (Monterey (CM)) standard interval for intermittent radiating surface radar. Air search is off. Sonar is in passive. - Weather report is perfect with visibility at 19 nm. - A large surface contact is identified by radar at 22 nm. In the scenario the unit (Udaloy) is designated NEUTRAL. The unit is not radiating and is beyond visual range. - Upon identification, the unit icon is GREEN even though the unit is still unknown. Appropriately, there are no weapon range circles. - Also, observed that I cannot attack the contact when the icon is GREEN even though it is unknown. - When Monterey radar switches off, the contact icon becomes YELLOW. I can now attack the unknown contact. - It would seem the contact icon should be yellow from the beginning, with ability to attack, until a positive unit identification is made. - A screen shot follows below to illustrate the narrative.

Greetings All, I have a bit more time on my hands (and keyboard) these days than when I engaged with Harpoon oh so many years ago. Starting off by trying to digest HCE database contents and structure and how to use the scenario editor. Based on Tony's recommendation, kicking off this wish list to capture what I come across. Oh - just downloaded and installed the 2024.001 beta. Best I can tell took care of the reload problem I was having with DPRK missile bases. Thanks!! 👍 Okay. Wishing away.... - (1/2025) (SE) Provide a method for viewing and editing opords/attack orders for bases in the scenario editor. At present, you can revise targets for existing orders but you cannot view and change the entire order (e.g., time to initiate). - 2/2025 (GE) Provide a means for including over the horizon surface search radar in fixed facilities and mobile systems. Current system limits surface search radar distance to line of sight. - 2/2025 (SE) When adding a new base, the dropdown list is searchable on "Base" name. Would prefer the dropdown list to be searchable on "Country" e.g., like aircraft/ships. - 2/2025 (GE) Include aircraft cruise speed with maximum speed on unit display pop-up. Would help out quite a bit in mission planning.