Herman

I don't know if the fix is specific to this particular case as the primary target (the air base) isn't destroyed. It is only 30% damaged.

In fact, the normal attack procedure worked against this particular base in order to generate the 30% in the first place. I can't remember, but I think that the strike problem only started happening after the base was damaged.

I'll be sure to check on it once the patch is released.

I tried out this scen and I think that it needs the latest HCDB in order to function properly. One of the red groups has the FFL Scorpio and her presence makes the group impervious.

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?showtopic=2572

Defect Name: T-80 indestructible

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: T-80 indestructible.hph

Long Description: 4 L-39 Albatros attack a single T-80 unit with a full load of 68mm Rockets and autocannon fire. Several hits are registered, but absolutely no damage is incurred by T-80.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Rockets and cannon fire should be able to at least damage, if not destroy, T-80

Expected behaviour: Rockets and cannon fire should be able to at least damage, if not destroy, T-80

Observed behaviour: T-80 impervious to rockets and cannon fire

T_80_indestructible.zip

Defect Name: Red group cannot be selected

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: Red group cannot be selected.hph

Long Description: Red group ZUs cannot be selected for attack because it has "Ghost Ship" Scorpio as the first unit of the group. Ships within the group can be attacked and destroyed by SSMs on Bearing-On-Launch.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Attempt to launch air strike against ZUs.

2. Group will not appear in the target selection window.

Expected behaviour: Group ZUs should be an eligible target for strike creation.

Observed behaviour: Group ZUs is ineligible target for strike creation.

Red_group_cannot_be_selected.zip

Defect Name: Unable to complete intercept of base

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: Unable to complete intercept of base.hph

Long Description: Air group ARa is ordered to attack base ZWa. Proper intercept procedure is followed and group is ordered to close to 60nm to attack. However, the message, "Group ARA completed intercept of enemy units and is loitering in the area." appears immediately and group does not move towards the base. Manual interception is required. Weapons function normally.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Order ARa to attack base ZWa surface units

2. Message, "Group ARA completed intercept of enemy units and is loitering in the area." appears

Expected behaviour: Air group should attack base normally when intercept procedure is initiated.

Observed behaviour: Air group does not attack base when intercept procedure is initiated.

Unable_to_complete_intercept_of_base.zip

Defect Name: Group survivors form improper group

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: saved game Group survivors form improper group.hph

Long Description: Airfield ACb is destroyed. Ground units grouped with the base now form a group called "DL". Two letter designation for a group is improper. All units should have 3 characters. Also, when DL is selected and all units are detached to a new group, EQr is formed (a proper group).

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Select DL and detach all units with F8

2. EQr is formed

Expected behaviour: Proper new group should be formed from survivors of destroyed base group.

Observed behaviour: Improper new group formed from survivors of destroyed base group.

This report is very likely related to other reports regarding the inability to attack damaged units.

Group_survivors_form_improper_group.zip

During the night of May 14th, 1982; SAS commandoes intended to attack the airfield on Pebble Island. The raid was to be carried out via helicopter from HMS Hermes, which had detached from the CVBG during the night to steam towards Pebble Island with a small escort.

While the force was still 6 hours away from their attack, American SIGINT was received which indicated that the Argentinean aircraft carrier Veinticinco de Mayo had evaded British submarines and entered the 200nm exclusion zone.

A unique carrier battle was now brewing....

Author: Freek Schepers

With over 148,000 PlayersDB scenarios downloaded in the last 12 months alone, the PlayersDB has proven itself the unequivocal players' favourite.

Harpoon3.6.3 users can get the

Complete Harpoon 3.6.3 Library

Harpoon ANW users can get the:

Complete Harpoon ANW Library

FilesOfScenShare

Frans Koenz (a.k.a. Taitennek) and I decided to give Pebble Island a try.

This time, I took the Argentine side while Frans played the UK.

The first part of any battle is reconnaissance and counter-reconnaissance. Both Frans and I took tried to hunt down and blind each other. Several engagements were fought from sporadic radar contacts. However, not all battles were clear-cut affairs. Often, I would move in to intercept his Harriers and hope to ambush them when they would suddenly turn around and send Sidewinders right down my throat.

A furball quickly ensued over the South Atlantic involving Harriers, Skyhawks, and Super Etendards. It was a total mess. In the end, 4 Harriers had been shot down for the loss of 3 Skyhawks/Etendards. It could very easily have been the reverse.

Frans kept trying to hunt down my helos. A pair of Etendard were sent to deal with this persistent pest. As they were coming up on his six o'clock position, the 'prey' suddenly turned around and unleashed a volley of Sidewinders at the ambushers. Final score, 1 Harrier down for the price of another Etendard.

After re-arming my Skyhawks with 1000lb bombs, I still had no definitive position on my elusive target. A radar contact had been spotted 3 hours earlier, but, since then, not a peep from the British task group. So, I surrounded the area with helicopters and Trackers and kept them hovering at low altitude until the bombers arrived on the scene. I fully expected him to shoot down a few of my recon assets, but I was willing to pay the price if it won me the intelligence I so badly needed.

As soon as one of the helos turned on his radar, the British carrier was found 40nm away from where I originally projected it would be. My six Skyhawks dove in from the stoop and made their ingress on the deck.

They popped just in time to release their 1000lb bombs on the Hermes. However, even their low level daring did not prevent the lost of one bomber as it was hit by a SAM. The other 15 bombs flew through the air and several hits were registered on the carrier as the Skyhawks turned to flee for their lives. SAMs would claim two more before they escaped. Unfortunately, one Harrier remained between them and the safety of their own carrier.

Two Etendard were already hunting for her and it soon turned into a case of the hunter himself being hunted. [The image that comes to mind is the cartoon of a small fish being pursued by a bigger fish who is, in turn, pursued by yet a bigger fish ]

Before the Harrier could kill my surviving Skyhawks, he was caught unsuspecting from behind by my Etendard and shot into the sea by Magic 2 missiles. As the Skyhawks returned to the carrier, the Hermes flooded and sank and victory was awarded.

Thanks to Frans for a really great game and to Freek for another fun scenario.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

AoA and I like this one so much, that we decided to try it, again!

Now that we had an idea of each others Order of Battle, we were more cautious. I sent my helos up early and found him in the same location as last time, the SW quadrant. As I had not bombers ready, I went back to trying to blind my enemy by shooting down his Trackers and helos.

One was caught easily in the NW, and another one chased in the SE when I stumbled upon Super Etendards. Two were quickly dispatched with Sidewinders, but a pair of A-4 Skyhawks were also present. These aircraft also carried Sidewinders just like my Harriers. I accidentally blundered into one of them and lost a Harrier.

I was incensed by the loss and chased his surviving Skyhawk all over Pebble Island with 3 Harriers. His Sidewinders kept me from closing and he couldn't break past his 3 pursuers to make it home to his carrier. The one to first run out of gas would lose the contest. Unfortunately, that happened to be me!

I don't know if it was intentional or accidental, but AoA had reversed my 'Sandwich attack' and now had caught my Harriers returning to base and low on fuel and nearly out of AAMs. He took full advantage of it and shot down all three while only losing a single Super Etendard. Damn, he used my own trick against me!

To add insult to injury, he shot down one of the two additional Harriers I hd sent to 'rescue' the embattled group. Now, out of 6 Harriers for CAP, I only had one survivor. The situation looked dire as my bombers became ready for operations.

I gambled and sent them to attack his carrier. It was a long-shot. He had many surviving fighters and I expected them to maul my strikers, but, as the SAS goes, "Who Dares, Wins". I immediately launched the bombers and sent them in at low altitude to evade radar. The range was only 70nm so they put the pedal to the metal in hopes of catching the Skyhawks still re-arming on the deck.

With visions of Midway in their heads, my pilots screamed in just above the wavetops. One Super Etendard was detected to the North, but, hopefully, it would not be able to make the interception before I released my bombs.

It was going to be a damned close race. Only one of the bombers was shot down on Ingress. The other five lofted their bombs and ran for their lives. The Super Etendard did make the interception and shot one more down before they escaped. Now, if I could hold on, victory was mine. However, AoA had plans of his own.

He had sent his own planes for a little payback. They had taken a circuitous route to my CVHG, but had been detected at maximum SAM range. SeaSlugs immediately took them under fire and did very well. Luckily, the ECM was keeping my ships' position hidden from him so the SeaSlugs, SeaCats, and SeaWolves ravaged his formations.

For a moment, it looked as though the attack had been beaten off. It was a false hope as AoA was only using the lull to bring in more Recon assets to localize my ships. Through great handling, he eventually closed to bomb range and let loose on two escorts, Alacrity and Broadsword. Both were severely damaged. It was small consolation to shoot down the rest of his strike because there was no way that either side could now win.

One the bombers were expended from both sides, we decided to call the game a draw since neither side could fulfill their ViConds. A superbly fought battle. I recommend that nothing be changed for this scenario. It is fun and challenging exactly as it currently is.

A really superb scenario. Thanks for a great game, AoA.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

Try this:

1) Plot course for Group (if there isn't one already entered)

2) Select Edit and the Previous button to move back to Point zero.

3) Enter speed at this point

Should work fine, now.

Eds finally found time to try and finish off Fish Stick Theory, made with the Harpoon community's favourite database, the PlayersDB.

After killing the Thai ships equipped with long-range Harpoon SSMs, it was time to close on the rest of them. However, they were still quite capably armed with CSS-N-4 Sardines and Exocets. The range may be reduced, but they would still be a prickly porcupine to deal with.

So, there we were. Staring at one another after we had each shot down a few planes from the other side. Ed's high-performance Falcons clearly out-matched my subsonic Hawks. However, I had my planes over my ships which were supporting them with radar coverage. Basically, it was a Mexican stand-off in the air. However, on the water, Ed was at a disadvantage. I was closing on his landing ships and he had to do something about it.

He tried to make attack runs at full speed, but we simply fired missiles at each other before retreating. Only when we both made manoeuvring errors did we end up inside each other's missile envelopes and get shot down. After a series of engagements, Ed only had 2 Falcons left while I had 6 Hawks and 4 Skyhawks.

With local aerial superiority, I ordered my Hawks in to strafe his squadron. They were lucky and managed to kill 2 missile boats and heavily damage a third, but the crippled boat was able to fire off it's CSS-N-4 Sardines before it sank.

Luckily, the targets he fired them at were either gunboats without significant missile armament or else had already fired off their SSMs, previously. Even though his boat was sinking, the missiles worked just fine and another Malay frigate and missile boat were soon blown out of the water.

Thinking that I had the situation well in hand, I ordered all my ships to flank speed to close with the enemy and destroy him with missiles and gunfire. Unfortunately, in modern warfare, things can change in a millisecond.

As I closed the range, I decided to use some of my Exocets to take care of his ships armed with long-ranged guns. Unfortunately, the Exocets refused to comply and kept tracking on ships already burning and sinking. Ed's guns had no such tracking problems. They promptly started blasting everything they found out of the water. One boat after another died under the hail of gunfire. As my ships turned to flee, I was awarded victory. Evidently, I had sunk enough ships before my started blowing up. Another 10 minutes under the iron flail and I am certain that victory would have been awarded to Ed.

Great game, Ed. Frustrating as all hell for me, but good tactics on your part. Thanks to HarpGamer for the hosting it on their server.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

Jerome (a.k.a. AngleOfAttack) and I tried out this hypothetical carrier battle between Argentina and Britain. TonyE watched us from the sidelines. Jerome took his usual side, Argentina.

We both started off cautiously as we didn't have many forces on hand. I think that both sides were trying to blind each other because we went after one another's recon assets right away. AoA got off to a good start by shooting down one of the helos I was using for reconnaissance and, to add to my humiliation, he also bagged the two Harriers I sent to avenge it! (I still don't know how he did it.)

I evened up the score by downing a pair of Super Etendards. It was a beautiful ambush as I had him nicely sandwiched between two flights of Harriers.

Other helos survived long enough to get a good idea where his carrier was so I launched my meagre strike assets. I only had 6 Harriers configured for bombing. As I know that I had not shot down all of his fighters, the appearance of a single Etendard or Skyhawk could easily shoot my strike force to ribbons so I had to detach 2 of my four surviving Harriers as escorts. It would prove to be a wise decision.

I took a long circuitous route to the target. The cost in fuel was, hopefully, going to be recouped in avoiding detection and opposition. I was successful on both accounts. Only when I was within 30 nm of the target was I detected and, by then, it was almost too late. However, one interceptor did manage to close on the escorts before exchanging missiles. Both Harrier and Argentine plane went down. However, the escort fulfilled his duty and freed up the strikers for a clear run to the target.

They quickly identified the carrier and lofted their 454kg bombs from maximum range and dove to the deck to evade. Black puffs filled the sky from the anti-aircraft fire, but no planes were lost. However, as they made their way back towards the carrier, they were jumped by another Argentine plane and one was blown from the sky before anyone knew the enemy was even around. The Harrier escort avenged him with a single Sidewinder and the rest of the trip home was uneventful.

The Veinticinco de Mayo flooded and sank on her own and I was awarded victory. A really superb game. The limited number of forces really demands that a player maximize his assets. The loss of even a few could mean the loss of the game.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

Defect Name: Manual interception required

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: Manual interception required.hpn

Long Description: When ordered to attack a ship with an air group, the message "Close to attack with cannon fire?" is displayed. However, if the air group is already in range of the target, the weapons allocation window will appear normally. Manual interception is required.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Order ARa to attack YEs.

2. Cannon fire message appears

3. Move ARa next to YEs then repeat attack order.

4. Weapon allocation window appears normally.

Expected behaviour: When ordered to attack, automatic interception routine should be allowed.

Observed behaviour: When ordered to attack, manual interception is required.

Manual_interception_required.zip

The Harpoon ANW community welcomed a new member, tonight. Ed (Higgins742) has been playing since the paper rules first came out and never tried MP. We met up for his first session and he asked me to take it easy on him... just before he proceeded to nearly clean my clock! :clown: We looked through the list of scenarios distributed by Matrix, but couldn't find anything that was even remotely functional. So, we chose Dawn Patrol, Whose Islands are These?, and Matrix Siege, all made with the Harpoon community's favourite database, the PlayersDB.

In both "Dawn Patrol" and "Whose Islands are These?", we played great games of cat and mouse. Only by the sheerest luck did I energize my radar systems at the right time to detect Ed's ships and get off the first salvo. Even then, Ed returned very effective fire. Only pure chance allowed enough of my ships to survive thus awarding me victories in both games.

The last game of the night was truly the best. Ed learned very quickly. (Too damned quickly, if you ask me...)

We played Matrix Siege and it matched his USN FFG and DDG against a polyglot force of European missile boats. Ed manoueuvred expertly and kept my forces at arm's length as he proceed to pick off my missile boats one at a time. His ships danced and wove in between my forces and hid behind neutral ships as I tried to close the jaws of a trap on him, but he kept his distance until the very end all the while whittling down my attacking ships.

Finally, I managed to get close enough for a full salvo of Penguin, Harpoon, and Exocet missiles. Most were plucked from the air, but one managed to strike his Burke destroyer. The ensuant flooding doomed the vessel and granted me another victory, but my poor missile and torpedo marksmanship ended with me sinking 4 neutral fishing vessels. Thus, victory truly and justly belongs to Ed.

A superb lesson in seamanship. Thanks for a great bunch of games and thanks to HarpGamer for hosting it on their server.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

A superb topic of discussion. Once they fix this bug in ANW, it's going to be very pertinent to scenarios.

It seems as though you are trying to discuss both VertRep [with helos] and UnRep [underway replenishment between ships] at the same time.

With regards to the PlayersDB, the VertRep poses some problems. These problems are also present in its progenitor, the HUD-II. By creating a loadout for helos i.e. allowing helos to carry ## Harpoons for transfer from the ammunition ship [AE] to the CVN, you inadvertently transform the helo into an attack platform because it can now be used to launch all those Harpoons at the same time. This has always been one of the big problems for trying to simulate VertRep. There might be a way around it, but none of them appear to be easy to implement.

The UnRep process via cables sounds like it is able to transfer a far greater volume of stores in a single operation since they are all pre-assembled on pallets. Now, the question are:

How long does a normal UnRep evolution take?

How much gets transferred in that time?

I knew of one man who served on AOE HMCS Protecteur. I hope that I can contact him for some help on this topic.

Very good points have been raised.

The weather is a particularly good point, but I don't think we can do anything about it in Harpoon since the game allows every boat and plane to fly even into hurricanes.

Gloating from his victory yesterday, Eds came back looking for a repeat performance. We wanted something quick, so we chose Fish Stick Theory, made with the Harpoon community's favourite database, the PlayersDB.

I played the Malays. I knew that he had to be in the general vicinity of my island airport, so I tried to get in sneaky first attack. I sent all my A-4 Skyhawks out under the escort of 4 Hawks. Radar and FLIR picked up my targets and soon had them classified. I was going to take out the Harpoon-armed ships since they had a longer range than my own Exocet armed vessels. I fired 9 Maverick at one frigate and was rewarded by a tremendous explosion. Unfortunately, the surviving vessels managed to shoot down one Skyhawk on their egress.

Meanwhile, the escorting Hawks were playing their own game with the F-16 Falcons sent aloft to defend the ships. Luckily, they managed to bring down an entire flight of 3 without any loss. When they tried to attack a second flight, they got not a single hit and were lucky to escape with their lives. Unfortunately, this meant that the Skyhawks were undefended and four were shot down in quick succession.

As they approached a second group of ships, they were taken under AAA fire, once again. The lead Skyhawk took a near miss. However, when flying only metres above the ocean, there are only seconds in which to respond. The Skyhawk's port wing touched the water and the plane cartwheeled to its destruction. The surviving four planes released their Mavericks and ran for home. All four missiles struck home, but could not kill the ship outright. I was not totally without luck as the burning vessel sank of her own accord not long after and took another load of lethal Harpoon missiles down with her.

As a second flight of Hawks appeared for CAP duty, they tried to approach a flight of Falcons that seemed to be circling lazily. They turned off their radar and ran in at high speed and on the deck, hoping to surprise the high performance jets. Instead, they got the surprise of their lives! Suddenly, Hawks just started exploding around them and all four were shot down before any type of response could be made.

After that disastrous aerial encounter, the naval tried to attack the surviving Thai gunboats. There was still a missile boat armed with CSS-N-4 Sardines so she was attacked with 4 Exocets. As my luck was running definitely cold today, the 4 missiles locked onto and sank the two accompanying gunboats instead of the infinitely more lethal missile boat who, soon enough, loosed her salvo of Sardines. Only by the grace of God (and the piecemeal allocation of missiles) did my little groups survive the barrage.

At this time, we decided to call it a night in hopes of completing this scenario next week. Thanks for a fun opening and looking forward to the conclusion. Thanks also to HarpGamer for the use of their server.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

This is confusing the issue. Allow me to re-state:

The issue is that all three target types are known to be in the surface group, yet only 2 types appear when the aircraft are ordered to attack. All three types DO appear when you move the air group a bit, but not initially.

That is the crux of this particular defect report.

The behaviour you describe is something you would like to see. If implemented, it might improve game, but I am sceptical. At a glance, I think that there are too many potential problems it might create such as escorts not launching if the order that a strike group is launched is significant because they have no ASuW weapons...

The newly requested feature might be classified as one of those with "too little additional benefit to justify potential problems", IMO.

Eds came looking for another NATO vs Warsaw Pact matchup, tonight. We decided upon The Duel, from the Harpoon Classic GIUK Battleset and made with the Harpoon community's favourite database, the PlayersDB.

The fighting over Keflavik has been so heavy that what remains of the airfield, currently held by NATO, is unusable. At the same time, the fighting in Europe has placed demands upon available resources that preclude either side sending long-range aircraft to attack or defend Iceland. The fate of Iceland will, therefore, be decided by a decisive surface battle.

Two Surface Action Groups seeking each other for battle in the Norwegian Sea is a pretty tall order as there is a lot of water to hide in. SSN Splendid made the first detection on the Russian group and closed with it. She thought that she had found a hole in the screen so tried to move in between a pair of escorts. Although she appeared to have successfully penetrated the outer ASW screen, she was detected before she got in range of the high value units like BCGN Kirov and CG Slava.

Hearing a torpedo in the water chasing her, she elected to fire on the solutions she had rather than the perfect targets she desired. Her Mk24 Tigerfish torpedoes were fired on the two destroyers as she tried to make her escape. Unfortunately, luck was not with her as the torpedo caught her at a depth of 500 meters. It was small consolation to learn that her torpedo also managed to sink one of the destroyer escorts.

SSN Topeka, having been notified of the general location for the Russian SAG tried to circle around the escort screen and attack from the rear. She thought that she had gotten around it and changed course to move in on the heavies. Unfortunately, I had mis-calculated and, in my haste to execute the attack I had cut the corner and was detected at a range of 15nm -- tantalizingly out of range. She fired her torpedoes on Bearing-Only Launch [bOL] and vainly tried to evade. With a swarm of helos hovering over her and BCGN Frunze firing SS-N-14 Silex after her, it was only a matter of time before one tagged her. Sadly, her Mk48 torpedoes did not exact revenge on the Russians.

I had been hope that the subs would be able to whittle down the phenomenal SSM strength of the opposition before I engaged with my own SAG. However, luck was not with me, tonight. I would have to do it the hard way. My SAG set an intercept course and soon came under fire from the much longer-ranged SS-N-10 Shipwreck and SS-N-12 Sandbox SSMs. It was like sitting on the bull's-eye of an archery contest with the enemy raining SSMs down on my head. It could have been described as, "beautiful", if I hadn't been so busy trying shooting down all the arrows.

The AEgis cruiser did a superb job fending off the SSMs, but there always seemed to be more. The number of missiles shot at me was sickening. Soon, enough leakers managed to get through to sink 5 frigates. Just as I was getting into range of the Russians, the game awarded victory to Ed. So close, yet so far. That'll teach me to rush a submarine into attack position.

Thanks for a fun afternoon of Harpoon war and the first MP game of the new year. Here's to many more matches to come. Thanks also to HarpGamer for the use of their server.

Anyone looking for an MP game can drop a line here or look for us on HarpGamer pHp chat room or the HG mIRC chat room.

DOA has 4 F16s with an Intercept loadout.

The question should be "Why are subs a target for fighters?" rather than "Why aren't all three platform types listed".

I disagree with that question.

This is the same situation as when you originally launch a strike against a group known to contain all three unit types (ship, sub, plane). The target type window always shows you all three types so that the player can select the one he wants. If he inadvertantly selects "Ships" and then only launches Fighters with Intercept loadouts, the game then tells him that it cannot intercept. IMO, this is the correct procedure -- allow the player to make his choice and only tell him when there is a problem.

Therefore, all three target types should be displayed even if they cannot be attacked as there is already a mechanism in place to deal with targets that cannot be attacked.

No, I am running the "Mark II" version of the scenario. The first one was judged by everyone to be faulty from conception. I am testing with the 'hand-crafted' second version built from scratch. That's why I now believe that it is a legitimate problem.

Read the description for the unit/carrier Mitchel where you find those planes:

Mobile offshore basing. Faced with the loss of its forward basing in Europe and a perceived need to deploy USAF assets in theater the U.S. Navy developed on a fast track the CV Mitchel. Built to commercial standard these large barge like ships have the ability to embark a reinforced USAF fighter wing. Only capable of 10 knots these aircraft carriers are designed to park in an isolated area and act like a stationary airfield. As originally designed the CV Mitchel was to have point defense only, but the reality of anchoring a Tico and pair of Destroyers to the Mitchel caused the Navy department to find additional funding for a 61 cell VLS Block and the associated Spy-1A radar system. The CV Mitchel also provides one other function for the forward deployed force: its cargo storage capacity and commercial container handling capability allow the Mitchel to act as a cargo distribution point and maintenance tender. These ships are vulnerable to submarine attack so all efforts should be made to establish an ASW barrier.

It's a hypothetical platform. I don't believe that it is either a bug or an accident.

I've run through this, again. I note that there seem to have been a number of changes. It's still a fun and challenging scenario.

Your removal of the ECM support for NATO is significant. It really changes the 'flavour' of the scenario. I'm not saying that it is bad, but it certainly has serious impact on how the game plays.

Also, unless I am mistaken, the F-16s that you have added now can carry the AMRAAM with 60nm range (I don't remember seeing that capability in the earlier version.) This makes the scen quite a bit easier for the player. When I only had 40nm AMRAAM, dueling with Flankers who had longer-ranged missiles was much riskier.

I don't know if the Bear AGM strike was present in the earlier version, but it darn near caught me off guard to wipe out Jan Mayen. Too bad about the current behaviour wherby the Bears follow their missiles in and get slaughtered, though.

Overall, it's still fun, but I think it might be a bit easier than it was before.

I have one suggestion. The PhibRon might be a bit too far from the Striking group to be covered by them. Not a big problem, but it was quite daunting to see both groups bearing down on Iceland. I think that the strike group may have outrun the Amphibs.

Thanks for making it and sharing it. Sorry that I cannot add much on how the AI makes/controls attacks.

Defect Name: Ineligible target type

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: Ineligible target type.hph

Long Description: When ordered to attack a surface group known to contain ships, subs, and aircraft, only subs and aircraft are offered as target types.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Order DOa to attack ZRc.

2. Only Submarine and Aircraft show up as eligible targets

Expected behaviour: All three platform types should show up on selection menu

Observed behaviour: Only two platform types show up on selection menu

Ineligible_target_type.zip

I think that I have to resurrect this report. Larry insists that he didn't use improper technique in creating this [second version of the] scenario. He says that he built it from scratch, so there should not be any hidden problems with file formats.

Subs are now being detected right through an island and at extreme range. These aren't noisy subs, either. Once contact is with an Akula.

Defect Name: LR sub contact

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: LR sub contact.hph

Long Description: Sonar contact from Burke is at ultra-extreme range. It should also be blocked by the island of Iceland.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Burke shows sonar contact on the other side of the island

Expected behaviour: Sub contacts should not be behind an island and at extreme range

Observed behaviour: Sub contacts are behind an island and at extreme range

Extraordinary_sonar_range.zip

Defect Name: Runway too short for Harrier

Build: HCE 2007.000

Repeatable: Y

Operating System: XP

DB used: HCDB-071223

Scenario used: Runway too short for Harrier.hph

Long Description: Beachhead Charlie, AAp, allows some versions of the AV-8 Harrier to land on it yet prevents other Harriers. I think that all Harriers should be the same type of aircraft utilizting the same landing restrictions/requirements.

Sequence to reproduce:

1. Attempt to ferry Harriers from ship group AIs to AAp

Expected behaviour: All Harriers should have the same landing requirements.

Observed behaviour: Harriers have different landing requirements.

Runway_too_short_for_Harrier.zip