TonyE

Welcome to the Harpoon Classic demo. This demo revisits a storied part of Harpoon's history via the USNI BattleSet. Pooners Brad, Tony, and Ralf, with the help of the beta testing team, have re-made the five original USNI scenarios. The scenarios take advantage of game capabilities added since the original USNI version of the game was released more than 20 years ago! Not only that, but the weapons of war more closely match the real-world weapons thanks to post Cold-War release of information and the hard work of Brad in the DB editing department. These are no longer easy, nor introductory, scenarios, be prepared! In addition to the ten USNI scenarios (there are two versions of each scenario, one for play as the Soviet side, one for the NATO side) you will find twelve scenarios in the WestPac battleset. There you will also find an introductory scenario, "1.0 Beginner Walk-Thru Scenario" that will help you grasp the game controls and some of the new features in HCE such as more variable radar RCS, submarine signatures, and land warfare between tanks and other vehicles. Find a keyboard command cheat-sheet at Keyboard Commands by Location. Also note the excellent "Tactics 101" articles available at HarpGamer that provide both theoretical and game background/guidance. https://harpgamer.com...php?showforum=4 (or do a search for Tactics 101). As you investigate the game and have questions feel free to come ask those questions at https://www.harpgamer.com/, specifically in the Demo Discussion Thread. The game is being actively developed, supported, and expanded by the Harpoon community. Just a few of the many benefits of buying the full Harpoon - Ultimate Edition game: Over 200 more scenarios built in to the game including the classic GIUK, NAVC, MEDC, and IOPG battle grounds. The ability to load user created scenarios and databases. HarpGamer alone hosts 250+ user-made scenarios. These user creations are where the game really shines! Scenario Editor for crafting your own battles, testing your ideas, and sharing your efforts with the community. Database Editor that allows you to modify the platforms used in the game and again model different what-if situations. Battleset Builder for taking your battle to an area of the planet (real or imagined) that isn’t covered by the existing battlesets. System Requirements & Technical Information: The demo runs on Windows 10, 11. Installer size is about 50MB. The installation takes about 150MB of disk space. Installing the demo will not affect your full installs of prior HC versions nor will it affect a full HC install. The demo executes a rudimentary check to see if your system clock has been set back in time to defeat the demo expiration mechanism. Some computers that haven't had clocks set back will not pass this test. The full HC game does not have this check so even if you can't run the demo, you will be able to run the full HC game. Using the uninstaller will remove all files, registry settings, and shortcuts created by the installer. It will also remove all saved games in the HCDemo directory. Downloads: Demo Download: See the attached zip file HCDemo-2025.025.zip

No, H3ANW is not based on the H4 paper rules. It is also based on the version 3 rules. However, ANW has invested more effort in plugging the H4 models into the game than we have with HCE. So HCE has much of the early H4 sonar model but doesn't have H4 radar. ANW implements more of the H4 rules but as stated in the first sentence it is also based on the version 3 rules.

I think you were right with the first approach, that Sparrows weren't set to be VHigh capable in whatever database was used. The absence of Snap Up/Down would have decreased the PH of the Sparrows by 10%, not prevented them from being fired. Just verified speed from the previous post is indeed 1300kts Size is the other criterion for air to air hits, if the target is VSmall size or smaller then the PH of the missile is docked 10%.

None of those are active in HCE. SAMs against incoming missiles do have a modifyier if the missile is fast (1300kts or greater iirc) and that is a 30% decrease in the SAM PH. There is also a PH subtraction if it is a crossing target (a tough shot for the SAM). 3) HCE doesn't know if a target is manned or not. 4) HCE doesn't let you kill planes that are taking off since there was a related bug that would sometimes result in huge groups of aircraft taking off, or just plain game crashes.

We're very sorry if anyone ran into the site the last 10 hours when I was away and the site home page was hijacked. I'll be doing more forensic work later in the day but all of the related passwords have been changed so if it was a brute force password attack the perpetrators should be slowed down.

I forgot to check the "embed db" box, sorry about that and thanks for the heads up. The one I just now uploaded has the DB.

I'm thinking it is a problem somewhere between the chair and the keyboard. There is a Zoom to Main body button only in the Scenario Editor.

Please zip up the commondb.res file (database), scenario files, and battleset (hdsu.res) files and e-mail them to hc3@harpgamer.com and we'll see if anything obvious sticks out.

Load up EC2003 IOPG 5.0 Edit the Group ABb Delete the unit Base - Diego Garcia. The above shouldn't be possible yet it is. The Delete Unit button should be greyed out when the installation is selected. 2008.064 SE

Thanks Brad, that save provided the needed trigger. When considering whether to add a flight of planes to the Air Intercept dialog range requirement is different than what might have been expected. I glossed over it when testing myself but Brad's save demonstrated the point. Consider your target 315nm away. The code says you need 315nm x 4 fuel in order to be added to the Intercept list, not 315nm x 2. There is a possibility it is a bug (I find no H3 paper rule referring to this situation and naturally the code isn't commented). Both Brad and I agree that it may also be a good estimation of fuel required for a combat intercept, expecting that you might accelerate and use more fuel than on a ferry mission over the same distance. It also accounts for the situation where the target plane is heading away, not towards you, providing some buffer. This particular code for inclusion in the list isn't considering where the target is travelling, only its current position so the extra fuel helps prevent wastage of planes that couldn't possibly make an intercept (while at the same time listing some planes that may have been omitted from a pure intercept calculation. Those planes become handy if the target turns towards you). So what do you think? I'm of the mind that we leave it as is and now we know the mechanism behind what was before an inexplicable exclusion from the Intercept list. Note to Tony, Staffo.c ~826: time = TimeToDistance(range_nm,(short)lspeed); if ((r < (NM100*4)) && ((time<<2) < unit->Air->Endurance))

Definitely Pete. If you have a good 'shooter' available that isn't more critically needed elsewhere, stick it in with the Carrier or other high value unit. The Tactics 101:Naval Formation - Part 1 topic reinforces that very point. This was also in large part covered in Part 1. Ships in the AAW ring try to maintain station, ASW ring sprint-drift, and picket ring also sprint-drift (I'm taking Brad's word for this one, I don;t honestly recall). You can certainly ask one ship to cover more than a 45 degree slice and also cover more than one ring. Click the first location, then hold down shift and select the other bounding location. Sometimes you have to use some trickery (i.e. counter-clockwise instead of clockwise or vice-versa).

Right on Pete. Some torpedoes are also going to be limited in available search patterns once they go active. If you say go active at 1nm activation may be soon followed by a descending circular pattern so the torp would never reach the target. You certainly mention the danger of the target detecting the torpedo's active sensor. I wonder how important that is if chances are good that he hears the torp's high speed propulsion anyway. In the end I expect activation point comes down to how confident you are in your TMA and balancing all of the other risks and rewards of each activation point. I also think we could really use one of the Real Life ASW people to speak up and set us straight.

There is every possibility that I'm the only one who took the time to try it other than you. You saw the issue, I didn't so I just need to know how to reproduce it and a saved game is a drop dead sure way to reproduce it.

This is rapidly becoming more trouble than it's worth. Since I seem to be alone in having the problem, I'll just order the intercepts manually and bypass the situation. Buddha Please don't, we're here to advance the game and fixing problems is one way to do that. All it takes is a saved game where the Hornets in formation have enough fuel for the intercept. Ideally it would be a small test scen but we can fight about that later . Zip up an appropriate save and attach it to your reply.

Now I'm confused. Did you recreate the scenario? I still think you need to do that and make sure your SE is using the same database as the GE you are then trying it in. You shouldn't be able to click Groups in the Unit window, only units.

My interpretation of a loaded (assume Load2) F-15E takeoff roll using military power. F-15E uses Turbofans and has a cruise range of 2400nm. Given High altitude and cruise that equates to 17,525 seconds of endurance in a clean configuration (3.3.6.2). 3.3.4 Aircraft climbing more than 50% of maximum rate cannot accelerate at the same time. 3.3.4 Climb rate for loaded high performance aircraft is 500. I understand both 3.3.4 stipulations to be per 15 second movement phase since the earlier 3.3 rules apply per movement phase, not per 30 second engagement turn. Acceleration at V/Low Military power is 0.1 (10%) * 2.0 (Loaded ATA) * 660 kts (military top speed) = 132kts per 15 second movement phase. At this point I'm lost (didn't make it very far did I?). I can't find an specific guidance for taking off from a land base. So I jump right into 3.3.4.2 which says the plane will be moving at 25% of its maximum speed, altitude 100m. That means the F-15 is doing 165kts @ 100m. Fuel usage, military power uses 4x fuel per second compared to cruise; then consider Load2 @ VLow means we use 3.33x fuel per second; fuel usage is 13.3x base consumption. So we used 200 seconds of fuel in our first 15 seconds leaving 17,325 seconds of fuel. 0:15 165kts @ 100m 17,325s Now we accelerate for 15 seconds 165kts + 132kts = 287kts @ 100m 0:30 287kts @ 100m 17,125s Next we start a gentle climb and continue acceleration 287kts + 132kts = 419kts climb rate 250m/15s -> 350m 0:45 419kts @ 350m 16,925s Continue climb and accelerate to 493kts 419kts + 74kts = 493kts climb rate 250m/15s -> 500m 1:00 493kts @ 500m 16,725s Reduce throttle to Cruise, max out climb climb rate 500m/15s -> 1000m fuel usage Load2 @ VLow 3.33x, 3.33 * 15 = 50 seconds of fuel 1:15 493kts @ 1000m 16,675s Continue climb 1:30 493kts @ 1500m 16,625s Continue climb 1:45 493kts @ 2000m 16,575s Continue climb into Medium altitude band fuel usage Load2 @ Med 2.5x, 2.5 * 15 = 37.5 seconds of fuel. This is cheating, our movement phase starts in Low and should use Low's fuel burn modifier but since we're only 1m away, I cheat and use the Medium band fuel burn rate for Load2 Turbofan. 2:00 493kts @ 2500m 16,537.5s Well, that's my uneducated run thru takeoff and climb with no turns. imho going thru the fuel usage calculations really shows how important fuel management is to the entire mission process. Imagine going into afterburner at 12x or 24x rate depending upon your plane!

You need to prove it, provide us with the files to verify what you are seeing. I could not replicate the situation. I'm not saying it isn't happening, just maybe that the Hornets don't have the gas to do the job I had GP loaded Hornets in fomatiion in GIUK 6.0 and they were listed in the Intercept dialog).

placeholder for http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?showtopic=3420

I hope to play with the takeoff and climb to altitude section of the rules tomorrow. What I do know is that an F-15 doing 100kts is one quickly approaching the ground for a crash (under stall speed).

Your group ABR on Iceland is indeed short a unit or two. Perhaps you can give it another go? I would suggest deleting that group and re-creating it. I was able to click your ships (left-click on them in Unit window) and rename using SE 2008.064.

I cannot see any untoward behavior. I took IOPG 6.0 for a spin and indeed was prompted to intercept with S-3 and F-14. The S-3 is correct since they have Sidewinders. In the attached test scenario (South America battlest, play as Blue, HCDB-081124) the planes without AAMs are not prompted to intercept the Red Mainstay. I'm considering this not an issue unless someone puts more legwork into it. Also be aware that sometimes a longer ranged yet less capable plane will show when the target it not within range of the more capable fighters. ASWATA1.zip

Wombat, if you don't mind, please also add your findings to the 2008.064 release notes thread. I don't know what the future holds for this thread. Hopefully Rene will keep it up to date but we still should have the individual 'proof' on each release notes thread for archival purposes.

Keep at it Akula. I've marked this as testing complete but I'd really still like a good repeatable example to add to Rene's test files.

If I may summarize for a moment. What I'm reading are two distinctly different ideas. 1. Siloed approach to each component of naval warfare. i.e. 7 scenarios dealing strictly with ASW, then 4 scenarios dealing strictly with surface warfare, then 6 scenarios on air warfare, etc. 2. Naval warfare progressing from a light work-load single or multi-faceted scenario and progressing to a complex environment that nobody can fully control. I think the first approach naturally leads to the second but the second can exist without the first. Personally the first approach appeals to me as the more unique approach thusfar. As for tying any of this in with the SE, the pessimism is way to great to ever expect that to work (getting participation at any level). I would like to see a number of video lessons of the SE though, maybe it is easier to pass on the word of mouth knowledge that way than typing which ships go into the group first to optimize SAM response and so on and so forth.

It is the first two letters of RPG, so Role Playing (Game). The related threads are somewhere here on HG, don't have them handy at the moment (Shore Leave iirc).