TonyE

Cat-a-pult, awesome!

HCE - 2012.005 - 2012/??/?? =========================== - Chg:0002 GE Fix overflow in attack resolution. (Thanks Enrique) http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?/tracker/issue-2-ecm-and-decoys-mathematical-problem/

Most certainly spread the word to old pooners and anywhere else.

A new beta update is available. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3217676

hehe, which is funny, the same artist as digitalmilitaryart.com as included in the Ultimate Edition.

I'm enjoying a lot of the renderings at that site, thanks!

Oh, Windows XP (Mode)? In that case the Access 97 runtime will work pretty well. Let us know if that is the case and I'll put together an instruction document.

Let's see, if you are in the EC2003 or newer battlesets (aka commondb battlesets) you can (and would need to) use the platform editor to strip the THAAD launchers and avenger dudes. Yes, you can change the counts as well. You'll have to be more specific about "can't open the platform editor." It is MS Access based so you either need Microsoft Access or the Microsoft Access Runtime (the game includes the Access 97 runtime but you would be better served looking for the Access 2007 runtime (or newer but the newer you get the harder it is to relax the security enough to use the PE). Brad/CV32 may have to answer the last question there.

CoBrit, why do you prefer DOS HC to the current version? I certainly understand that a person could play the older versions for years and not run out of scenarios. The advancement that the HCDB database allows make the newest version more than worthwhile to me, not to mention the stability and other code improvements. We'll do what we can to help you either way, just curious...

Mark, I think the database description says it all, the changelog as well. Dale's modus operandi is to implement platforms from the paper rules in a way that shadows the paper rules as closely as possible. Strengths: * Consistency between platforms. As Dale updated his calculation spreadsheets, the affected platforms were updated. This helps maintain the relative capability of platforms. * Attention to detail trying to get the computer game results to match paper results. This is different from say Darren and HUD in that Darren leaned more towards 'realistic' results but often the best metric was still the paper rules. Weaknesses: * Few platforms in the database * Dale is sailing the seven seas so he can't always answer questions immediately

haha, so true, didn't really feel the need for the English version, just read the cyrilic.

That is the purpose of the HUD4\Requests/Issues forum. We need to get Gunny a way to more easily track what has been addressed though, especially since we lost the post indicators in the forum software upgrade (not that some people were using them ). I use the term Issue since one person's bug is another person's range off by 0.0001nm so who cares. In either case it is still an Issue.

The platform display and unit display use the sonar model to estimate the range against a set noise-level target so you see different ranges than in the platform editor. The Unit Display should work in local sonar conditions whereas the platform display should use generic background noise. In your Zumwalt example the 9.5 number you are seeing is most likely due to the Zumwalt itself being a quiet platform, hence increasing the range. Yes, I'd be interested if you can reproduce the No Number Passive. Is there any chance the SQS-60 was active at that time (I doubt it, just wondering ).

Microsoft does not support Windows XP Mode in Windows 8. http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/support/faq.aspx Reports from the field indicate XP deactivates itself on machines that are upgraded from Win 7 to Win 8 so not only not supported but also not operational without breaking even more rules/laws/...

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3203647 may help you as well, do let us know if you have other questions. My machine is Windows 8 pro 64-bit and the GE (Game Engine, for playing scenarios). I run the scenario editor in an XP 32-bit VMware virtual machine. Some people grab an old XP machine to run the scenario editor and I can't complain about that approach (Windows 2000 would also be fine there, Win98 and ME would work but I'd say 2000 is better than that, and XP perhaps best).

Hi Emilio, Your Windows XP is almost certainly 32-bit and the SE runs there. The SE is a 16-bit application. It will not run natively on 64-bit versions of Windows. To run it there you would need emulation/virtualization of some sort. As for a new SE, start contributing, time, money, skills. That is the only way it will happen, waiting won't get it for you, sorry.

I moved the post to a new topic since it did not fit in the Release Notes topic.

1. There is a version of Harpoon 3 for Mac but it is no longer officially distributed. That was back in version 3.6.2/3, about a decade old now. Your only other alternative on Mac is by running Windows in a virtual machine and running Harpoon on that. I do that using HC with great success but haven't tried the recent H3 versions though they will certainly work given the right settings and a happy virtual machine (HC only uses Windows GDI graphics calls so it isn't nearly as picky about systems as H3). 2. The smaller scenarios I'll spend 2-3 hours playing. I would say I'm an average pace player. In most small scenarios I'll be from 5x to 30x time compression. That said I usually play larger scenarios over multiple gaming sessions (often I'll luck into an 8 hour session, save, then continue in 2-3 hour sessions after that, often multitasking during play).

Yep, I just verified that the "Zoom to Main Body" went away when the GE (Game Engine/winharp) was converted from 16-bits to 32-bits for Harpoon Classic 97. There are no plans at present to bring it back. Westpac is a challenge there since the map is much larger, the zoom levels don't get you as close in. That effect is less pronounced in the other (smaller geographically) battlesets.

I can speak to the first right away, the AI torpedo dropping needs improvement! The workaround is to manually release torpedoes by plotting a course over the contact and dropping when you see fit, not at max range like the AI likes to do for you.

I honestly thought, based on the topic title that it was going to be about the need for boots on the ground for BDA, if not for making the D itself.

Well, I'm in it for the remarks. I may not always agree with them but I do enjoy reading them. Thank you for taking the time to type them out.

I'm biased but I like the idea of announcing scenarios far and wide but just posting the files themselves here and post the links far and wide so that when you need to do a scenario update you upload it in one place instead of many. As Brad said you still face the very real mountain of attacks and if you can stand them and not be overwhelmed, great!

What is the "devil" on a ship?

Welcome back Jason, I still need to see that SAC museum!