TonyE

2024.001 posted, be extra cautious and careful, back up your files and tuck them away in case I accidentally introduced new issues.

HCE - 2024.001 - 2024-03-29 =========================== - Chg:00000 GE Somewhere along the line, the differentiation between ATA and DATA was muddled (Defensive Air to Air rating). Fixed up the code to straighten them out again. - Chg:00000 GE Code cleanup - Chg:00000 GE Extended beta expiration to 2030 - Chg:00000 GE Added submarine flag UF_A2_nonmagnetic. If a submarine has this flag then it is not valid for MAD detection - Chg:00000 GE Added submarine flag UF_A2_nocavitate. It was in the PE but not in the game. There is no logic to take advantage of this flag yet (unused). - Chg:00000 PE Export magazines to annex_mags.csv again instead of the errant annex_magsEx.csv. - Chg:00000 PE Re-numbering of magazines uses a more logical sort now so that it is easier to compare annex_mags.csv files between exports. Appended SORT BY clause tPlatformMagazine.SortID to qOMagazineRenumberList. (thanks donaldseadog, eeustice, enrique) https://harpgamer.com/harpforum/topic/33209-ships-magazines-error/ - Chg:00000 PD Add Submarine/A2 annex flag Non-magnetic hull by adding a row to tPlatformCodes. Annex=3, ID=11, Description=Non-magnetic hull - Chg:00000 DU db_make changed header row capitalization for annex_mags.csv field Wepid to wepid.

Correct, upon first export with the updated PE you may find the magazines assigned to a platform may be sorted differently than before but after that the ordering should be consistent and of course assigned to the correct platform in the game as in the PE.

The annex_magsEx.csv bug was introduced in 2022.009 so it is possible databases/pfData files that haven't had an import since then don't have the corruption. I say 'possible' since the sorting issue has existed since the PE was created. HCE - 2022.009 - 2022-07-29 =========================== - Chg:00000 PE No longer uses the MS Access Import and Export Specifications, imports and exports are now done with file reader & writer and DAO.recordset. This works around Microsoft breaking the import and export spec functionality. As a side effect, it makes it easier to modify the structure of the database.

Amazing work on this issue by many but especially @donaldseadog! From what we've all learned, last night I blew off my normal responsibilities and applied some brain power to the PE. I made two modifications to the PE which are testing well for donaldseadog and myself. He tested more thoroughly than me. 1. PE exports to annex_mags.csv again instead of the errant annex_magsEx.csv file. I introduced the bug when switching from MS Access Export Specifications to VBA code to create the .csv files. That was driven by data size limitations and more importantly a Microsoft patch that broke export specifications. 2. PE sorts magazines differently when re-numbering them. This is what is intended to ensure the ordering of magazines doesn't go awry. The sorting is now by Annex, then tPlatformMagazine.ID, then tPlatformMagazine.SortID (SortID was previously not part of this qOMagazineRenumberList ORDER BY clause). If nothing nasty shows up in additional testing, I'll release it with the next build. The bummer is that this won't fix existing corruption of magazines, it only prevents new corruption on future exports.

So, within the existing DB structure one could add a Biologic or perhaps 'non-magnetic' flag to the Submarine annex, there is room in the submarine flags. Perhaps a wishlist item? maybe a... #define UF_A2_nonmagnetic 0x0400 // ALE 20240327 added because someone thinks MAD gear shouldn't detect whales, sheesh!

ATA is supposed to indicate the unloaded air to air maneuverability whereas DATA is supposed to be more about loaded maneuverability (hence also seeing it in the loadouts annex). For the next build (2024.001 ETA TBD) I've fixed a few bugs in this area thanks to your posting.

Hmm, are you guys saying that the Targets value is being ignored when firing SAMs against aircraft? How about if your SAM only has the Semi-active guidance flag? How about if your SAM has Semi-active and mid-course? Inertial I would think you can fly as many birds as you want, it would be a terminal homing limitation (once the missile in the basket and needs those continuous updates). Radar guided I would think you can fly as many birds as you want.

Agreed that a Sparrow (dependent upon reflection of radar waves off of the target) shouldn't be able to be fired against a non-localized target. Also agreed that some AAMs can be fired BoL (inertial guidance in the DB). Also agreed that AAMs with onboard seeking (active radar, infrared, optical) in many real world cases could be fired without an exactly localized target.

I don't recall an issue but can provide some related information. Effects.c::FireGuns(...) only allows guns to fire against units >= SeaLevel where SeaLevel is the next altitude band above Snorkel. In other words, the code won't fire guns at Snorkeling submarines. That could be changed, I would imagine one would want a lower hit chance for a snorkeling submarine as compared to a surfaced sub. See H3 paper 4.2.3.2 Periscope Depth for a description of this depth. The base H3 paper rules do not accommodate gunfire vs. submarines. I did not check any of the addons nor the H4 nor H5 rules.

Looking at an escort jamming example where a Prowler is trying to prevent a Bear from localizing some Tomcats: 105616 Search.c:1307 - Unit EA-6B Prowler ICAP II, lngECMRange = 1000 105616 Search.c:1590 - ECM Escort ECM=0, ECMTmp=0, ECMTmpE=0, RadRng=230, JamRng=100, JamRadRng=266, TarRadRng=221, JamTarRng=46 105616 Search.c:1637 - ECM ECMRadRng=266, ECMTarRng=46, ECMTarRngTmp=0, RadTarRng=221, ECMRng=100, RadRng=230, Rng50=48, ECM=0, ECMTmp=0, ECMTmpE=0 105616 Search.c:1650 - ECM Emitter=Tu-95RT Bear D, Target=F-14B Tomcat, ECM=EA-6B Prowler ICAP II Bear's radar max range is 266nm, Prowler ECM max range is 100nm, Bear is 221nm from Tomcats, Prowler is 46nm from Tomcats, Prowler is 266nm from Bear The ECM isn't providing any benefit to the Tomcats in this case indicated by ECM=0 Here is a case where a Flanker radar's range is reduced 6% vs some missiles thanks to a Prowler: 105641 Search.c:1307 - Unit EA-6B Prowler ICAP II, lngECMRange = 1000 105641 Search.c:1565 - ECM Direct ECM=0, ECMTmp=6, ECMTmpE=0 105641 Search.c:1590 - ECM Escort ECM=0, ECMTmp=6, ECMTmpE=0, RadRng=65, JamRng=100, JamRadRng=78, TarRadRng=32, JamTarRng=68 105641 Search.c:1637 - ECM ECMRadRng=78, ECMTarRng=68, ECMTarRngTmp=0, RadTarRng=32, ECMRng=100, RadRng=65, Rng50=49, ECM=6, ECMTmp=6, ECMTmpE=0 105641 Search.c:1650 - ECM Emitter=Su-27S Flanker B, Target=missile, ECM=EA-6B Prowler ICAP II

I just had a Guest user send a moderation request on this scenario and wanted to explain here since I don't know if that user as a Guest will see the moderation response. Anyway, the .zip file includes a file with the .RDp extension. That MCML.RDp file contains the orders for the Red side (ReD orders file for the EC2003 IOPG aka .??p BattleSet). The file extension just happens to be the same as that for remote desktop connection profile .RDP definitions. MCML.BLp is the Blue side orders MCML.RDp is the Red side orders MCML.SCp is the scenario file itself.

Winharp32.exe -l ecm That will turn on ECM logging which goes into the ge.log file.

My screenshot is from pfBuild2005.mdb but you are correct, the actual data lives in pfData2005.mdb (indicated by the little blue arrow to the left of the table name. that arrow means it is a linked table). That doesn't change the task. Is there a further question or concern I can address? We seem to be miscommunicating on this one.

Editing the loadout type names is a little more low level in the PE/Microsoft Access. You open the lPlatformSubTypes table and edit the Annex 27 (loadouts). See also in case you accidentally lose the original meaning of the loadout. No matter what you name Annex 27 ID 49, the game will treat it as ANTIRUN.

Hmm, there should not be a crash, can you zip and attach your commondb.res file and let us know which plane to use? Then I can hopefully see why the SE is crashing and perhaps fix that.

Correct effect4.c CheckGroupECM you can see the ECM modifier by turning on ECM logging in which case you will get entries like... ECM Point Defense ECM=20 Defender=F-16C

Missile DATA is set to 0.5 in Combat3.c Also in Combat3.c we have AirToAirResolution. 1. The difference in ATA is calculated, diff = attackerATA - targetATA 2. If diff < -2.0 then PH is set to 5. If diff < -3.0 then PH is set to 1. Otherwise, PH is set to diff*10 + 30. 3. If target is fast, subtract 30 from PH 4. If target is small (VSMALLAIR), subtract 10 from PH 5. If target is vLOW, subtract 10 from PH (yes, these are cumulative, you could very well have a negative PH by this point) You can see the end result by turning on missile logging, you will get entries like... "AirToAirResolution Ph: 30, Roll: 40" which would be a miss since 40 >= 30. The die roll must be lower than the PH for a hit.

Sounds good

Agreed on minimize and maximize. Once I dig back into this ExportDLL's code, I'll modify the window management. The big number has no meaning. For a while I was modifying the game to use meters but removed the code from the game but not the ExportDLL so you see that non-sensical altitude. I'm not sure when I'll work on the ActUnitReport code, probably not in January. What do you most want to see this one do?

From an earlier comment It would be altitude in meters if we hadn't rolled back the additional of altitude measured in meters. In other words, it is meaningless. As to unmanageable, true enough but again, the ExportDLL doesn't provide much of any value add at present, is it worth using?

Nice conversation guys :). I agree that ideally one would have electronic warfare gear as part of the loadout and zero out the aircraft level entries. However, if there is a value in the aircraft level ECM entry, it will be used. If the loadout ECM value is greater than the plane's, then the loadout ECM value will be used. On a single plane, there is only one ECM strength value (i.e. they are not combined); however, two planes both doing standoff jamming will be better than a single plane doing standoff jamming. I'll also point back to the following for additional information.

Hmm, works here as in it isn't crashing the game. Can you be more specific on what it isn't doing for you?

I'll check it out Sunday if not before, keep in mind the ExportDLL doesn't do much. Is there some critical functionality you are seeking?

Here is a very old tutorial video that may help, https://youtu.be/4yHAXxGep6w?si=FyQvmnKJc6Tx3mIe .SCv indicates the Middle East BattleSet Understanding HC/HCE File Names - Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) - HarpGamer For "China in the Horn" you will also need to grab the HCDB2 database. HCDB2-170909 (1980-2025) - Databases - HarpGamer You picked a challenging start in terms of game setup ;). It is entirely too difficult to load scenarios that don't come with the game, making it easier is one thing on a very long list of things to improve.