TonyE

HUD3 1.6.1 http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=657

In your HC20\DH00154A\ directory, replace HARPOON.OPT with the attached HARPOON.OPT (you'll have to unzip it). You should then have sound. Let me know please. HARPOONOPT.zip

HCE - 2011.008 - 2011/08/30 =========================== - Chg:B209 SE Formation editor shows rings correctly again. (thanks Enrique) http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=209 - Chg:0000 GE Game Engine is now compiled with Visual Studio 2010, VC++ 2010 runtime may be needed. http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=5555

HCE - 2011.008 - 2011/08/30 =========================== - Chg:B209 SE Formation editor shows rings correctly again. (thanks Enrique) http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=209 The GE operation should not have changed but I did switch to Visual Studio 2010 to compile it. If the GE doesn't run, please install the VC2010 runtime from http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=5555

HCE - 2011.007 - 2011/08/28 =========================== - Chg:0000 SE Scenario Editor compiles again without error.

HCE - 2011.007 - 2011/08/28 =========================== - Chg:0000 SE Scenario Editor compiles again without error. Testing requests: 1. Load, Edit, Save pre-EC2003 battleset scenario 2. Load, Edit, Save EC2003 or newer battleset scenario 3. Load, Edit, Save user-created scenario 4. Create new scenario, Save 5. Exercise the platform display 6. Load the modified scenarios from 1-4 in the 2009.050 (or 2009.054) GE and see if they seem to run okay Extra credit... 7. Load the scenarios in 2011.006 GE and see if they run as expected. Thanks!

Sorry, I didn't read your post well enough. You'll want to contact Matrix support since the serial number verification is a component they provide, I don't have the code or ability to help you out with that message. If they don't respond within a few days holler back here and I'll see about getting their attention.

LOL, so we drove straight through to get home, on the road by 8:15am from Yellowstone and pulled in the driveway shortly after 5am. Yes, I will be working on the SE today now that I've had some sleep, am unpacked, and am working through the mountains of laundry. Great trip, pictures later!

An alternative response is, "Who doesn't run virtual machines yet ". Please add your iPad wish here, I'll be removing it from Pipe Dreams (that area is for responding to targeted dreams, not to state new ones).

The quickest way to get rolling is to navigate to the HUCE installation directory (by default C:\Matrix Games\HUCE\) and run Winharp32.exe once from there. After that first run you should be able to start it from the 20th Anniversary menu if you so desire.

Unfortunately I didn't get a SE build out today. Tomorrow we leave on vacation to Grand Teton National Park. Have fun while I'm gone!

Another one of those rotor layouts that just shouldn't work! Saw the HH-43 Huskie at the USAF museum that has a similar layout and can't really believe it works either even though obviously it does.

So the idea is to: 1. When adding aircraft, have the list of aircraft classes to a host platform (base, ship, farp,...) stay on the selection it was on before adding the aircraft. This is the issue report item. 2. When moving to a different host platform, the aircraft list will go back to the top. This is to prevent a crash if you go from a VLarge airfield to a ship and the current position of the list is now well beyond the available aircraft classes. (VLarge airfield may have 1000+ possible aircraft classes, ship may have 20, if you were at position 250 in the list before clicking the ship, a crash is possible). 3. When you select those F-15s you just added to Keflavik you won't be able to add more planes until you select Keflavik again. Sound like a plan? I should have time to work on the code more Friday evening.

Well, I thought the issue report suggested the list going to the top would be 'fixed' as part of the changes but I guess I can understand the confusion.

And further, how much of the software integration they do. Still, I might take a T-50 at $100 million JSF even if the T-50 doesn't have fully fused sensors and systems.

See: http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=206 Question: I have half a mind to make it so that you can't add aircraft to the base by selecting an aircraft at the base and then selecting Add Plane, should I do that? So you would still be able to add aircraft to Keflavik if Keflavik were selected but you couldn't add planes to Keflavik by selecting F-15s already at Keflavik. This goes to future capability to have units carrying other units, the current behavior would not meld with that. Looking for opinions

Could just be where the LCS plugs in for refueling and towing

What a beauty, can't we bring the YF-23 back as a F-111 replacement, pretty please?

I think we are looking at two ships of the same 'class' rather than a super long ship? Square stern to maximize cargo capacity.

Olga the plane attendant must have been looking F I N E fine

Just finished a modern picture book. Modern Air-Launched Weapons by Martin J. Dougherty. Harpoon databases are more accurate than his book but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

At a bare minimum one answer is submitting a proper issue report with saved game and ideally a small test scenario and a saved game. But that's just the idea answer

Man, Honeywell in the news again, first F-22 OBOGS, now F-35. They are a hometown company too, hope they pull it together!

Well, what can I say, I almost have my new programming environments set up. Nothing like programming in three worlds (16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit) and I think we're up to 10 different languages now for HC (though C, Access+VBScript, and Delphi are the main ones). Moving to a different main computer is tough but this one seems fast enough that I've been setting up the programming tools in two virtual machines so they should transfer to a new computer more easily next time.

1, 3. What is the value of in-game versus third-party? I happen to prefer in-game as well but that does eat programming time. 2. I assume you mean this as well in a shared fashion (my overlay 1..n, shared overlay 1..n), each named. 4. I hadn't thought of this, good idea, and good idea to have a timer on it, can't spend all day planning and then never play (saw that happen at Origins!). 5. I like this too, again limited in duration. By the time you are through 4 and 5 it should be apparent who has the stable connections and who doesn't . 6. What is the justification here? To give the player a fair chance to rejoin without missing any action? 7. Amen to this one! imho it is a real pain in ANW MP to save the game, have everyone disconnect, meet back up in the lobby, have every join the saved session, then start playing again. 8. Saves are indeed key. Programmer time and patience will dictate how secure a mechanism is used (I lean towards the honor system). 9. Thankfully multiplayer in general forces a model the game was originally built upon, that of handling most everything through a queued Harpoon event system. So if you queued all of the events you had them in a format that could be replayed if they were saved instead of discarded as processed. There is the whole matter of creating the viewer or mechanism to make the GE replay the saved events but overall this is easier than it would be in other games. Thanks Mack!