Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by donaldseadog

  1. 199 downloads

    Provide cover for the transit of a small convoy from north of Australia through the restricted sea lanes to Singapore. A 'small' scenario designed to be played at a fast time compression. Aircraft recon and suppression is key operation (or loss of ships). Well planned use of aero-tankers a must. Watch the mines and the long range land based anti shipping missiles. Don Thomas
  2. File Name: transit2 File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 11 Feb 2010 File Category: WestPac DB Used: HCDB-091024 Authors: Don Thomas Battleset-WPac: .scq - WPac - WestPac Provide cover for the transit of a small convoy from north of Australia through the restricted sea lanes to Singapore. A 'small' scenario designed to be played at a fast time compression. Aircraft recon and suppression is key operation (or loss of ships). Well planned use of aero-tankers a must. Watch the mines and the long range land based anti shipping missiles. Don Thomas Click here to download this file
  3. No, they don't actually perform replenishment, but I try to play as realistically as I can, often imposing artificial limitations on my game play. I'm with Brad on this. I think I screwed you guys, so sorry. I'll add 2 days to this soon, or you can too. A couple of extra days would be nice. I've had a few goes at each of the "breakouts" and its always a matter of racing to try and make the deadline but delaying detection and then having enough time to knock out the various (and numerous) land based anti shipping units. One suggestion (because this is one hell of an addictive scenario) is to have more alternative start positions for the anti shipping and long range SAMs, maybe the mine fields too. Not that I want it any harder mind you Don Thomas PS, I've lost boats to that slippery sub too, its very quiet . Once I did get a detection but wasted over a dozen torps trying to get a kill. I couldn't get a reliable exact fix.
  4. Yep, not just the geography, I think quite a refreshing "feel" to the game, a lot of hide and seek and from the blue side (only side I've played yet) a need for caution as well (limited tech weapons). More thinking and less shoot from the hip I guess. I've taken a bit of a hammering often with out an ability to do very much about it once I've gotten myself into trouble. (It's good to know you can get a second chance). Don Thomas
  5. I'm having trouble loading one particular saved game. Game and screen shot showing error message in attached zip file. The saved game is from a custom scenario. I've not changed the data base (HCDB 91024) since saving the game. The game was saved using GE 2009.42. I can't start the saved game from either the initial screens or via "File" "Open". I'm using window XP on a celeron processor laptop. I seem to be able to open other saved games from different scenarios. I can open the scenario in 2010.1, save the game and reopen it. Don Thomas bad_file_open.zip
  6. I'd think that the size isn't so important, afterall if you have a really big list it still won't fit. What would be good is that in all of these sort of lists that the highlighted/ cursor position stay put in the window after a selection command is made until the OK or what ever is pushed. I seem to recall something like this coming up in the windows for selecting units for groups in the scenario editor (or was it somewhere else?). It's the 'snap' we need to get rid of I think? Don.
  7. I've been to Disney. This sounds more like a very sinister weapon rather than meaningful science. Right, so I shouldn't buy an Ipod 'cause we'll soon be able to buy our favourite music coded in the DNA of a virus that we self infect ourselves with and hear the music continously even when the boss is nagging about some cockup form last week? Sound good, where do I put my name down? Don. and music pirates who get illegal copys will die from those music bacterias? Sounds linke something the music industrie ist dreaming of for generations... Ye, great idea. I think we should start filing patent applications now!
  8. The game mechanics you see in the demo are exactly what you get in the real game (except for the march of builds as new patches are released). However the demo does better take advantage of the current state of the game via the rebuilt USNI scenarios than do most of the 'legacy' scenarios. So I can't honestly say every scenario in the full game is going to stack up to the demo. Plus you'll have quite a few user created scenarios here at HG that do take advantage of the recent advancements. Now, my opinion here is very humble but I think the great strength of HCE is in the huge amount of user created scenarios from all parts of the world. I'm curretnly playing some new ones, "Drakes Passage" and the 'easy' version of "Breakout" - "breakout2" I think its called. Quite different from one another and demanding in their own ways. Whether you like fast action or involved planning there are scenarios for you. Whether you live in Nth America, Europe or Australia (yours truely) you'll find stuff in your back yard. I can't see anyone who likes the demo not loving the full version and the variety of user scenarios. GO FOR IT> Don Thomas
  9. I've been to Disney. This sounds more like a very sinister weapon rather than meaningful science. Right, so I shouldn't buy an Ipod 'cause we'll soon be able to buy our favourite music coded in the DNA of a virus that we self infect ourselves with and hear the music continously even when the boss is nagging about some cockup form last week? Sound good, where do I put my name down? Don.
  10. Well, I understand there's a rather pretty mountain range somewhere with that name, so perhaps we shouldn't get *too* hasty here ... Sounds like a great place for drinking the beer, now where's that esky? Don
  11. Been there, done that too many times to count. I hate the 'cascade' button. I'd be happy enough if we got rid of it or replaced it with some other useful feature, like the 'window lock' you mention. Looks like a wish list item, eh. I haven't found a single program in which I like cascade, in fact if it wasn't for the great Australian beer by that name I'd reckon the whole word could be done without. Don.
  12. Well I'm not the most knowledgable but I'll have a stab with a few questions... Which beta, I'm currently using 2009.0.4.9 and not seeing any problems related to the formation window. I guess your using the 'formation' button or the F4 key, these should only operate if the 'group'window is active and doesn't seem to show up the formation in the 'unit' window. Does it happen in all games? Does the game keep playing? If the game is saved and reopened is the problem still there? Can you do a screen print to show what's happened? Don Thomas
  13. I had no particular trouble with Red air, including the Su-35s, but keeping my carrier from getting hit by ASBM is another matter. Trying to pop the ballistic missiles is hard. I assume it's because of their height and a lot of AAMs and SAMs can't get to them. I put fighters out beyond the ships' SAMs range and try to get what ever is coming in with mnimal expenditure of the shipboard missiles. I can't get the ASBMs like this. Against the fighters I achieve most success by using the stealthiest fighters I have and patrolling at very low altitudes with some EW planes further back and up high. (If I haven't been pelted with anti ship missiles I keep radar inactive all through the ship group formation.) When incoming fighters are detected I send in a small fighter group (staying very low) and let them decide when to fire, add a few extra missiles and get out flat chat (afterburn high altitude). Often have to then get back home for fuel so if I sent off all my longer range AAMs (and got good kills) I don't mind. The best I've done is to run out of time with most of my ships afloat and all red bases to the west destroyed along with large numbers of SAM and SSM sites destroyed. Some of these take a huge number of anti radar and decoy missiles to kill. I've been close to what I think are the straights of Malta. While the initial assault (once your surface group is detectd) is pretty full on, if you survive it then its a matter of detect and destroy surface installations and planes. The planes tend to die off, even if you don't kill hundreds. If you're game tweek the scenario to put the mobile units in multiple start locations and make the aircraft patrols continuous and in larger unit, it really gets hard! Don.
  14. Hmmm ... perhaps it would work better if the player put each land unit in its own group? ...or stick units wit longest range out in front?? Knowing what is out there (and might shoot back as soon as you're in range) seems pretty important. If you have the range advantage go in if no aircraft are available, other wise run and hide. That's my approach. Don
  15. donaldseadog

    Bad News

    Some of those Harpoon enemy can sure creep up on you, but crashing you're hard drive is underhanded if you ask me! Best of luck getting an early replacement, any chance there's one in the xmas stocking?? Don.
  16. I noticed this in 'The Australian' newspaper (november 24th). The link to the www article is: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/natio...f-1225802738569 The summary: OFF-the-shelf military purchases offer big savings and reduced risk for taxpayers compared with do-it-yourself, but come with a major trade-off -- a potential sacrifice of the nation's defence self-sufficiency, a federal government-backed security think tank warned yesterday. The article mentions some of our recent less than ideal R&D and design/ building efforts and compares them to some recent success with straight purchases such as USA battle tanks. Considering we don't even make our own washing machines anymore I'd think it obvoious that we shouldn't be trying to build submarines and the like, but who am I to know these things. Don Thomas
  17. That would be my initial thought as well - something related to formation patrols using radar. I wondered about that too, but, the radar pickets I sent out were only 4 of the 8 Hawkeyes in my group. I would think that the game would put a new plane on station before removing the one that's already out there. The other Hawkeyes I kept as replacements and didn't use them. T6Simtek did a saved game and report in issue tracker (thanks) so I looked at this and did a counter test save game and posted in issue tracker. I made no concrete conclusion but seemed to relate to the main group not having any radar burning. Last I looked it was into capable hands so I guess we'll know soon. Don Thomas
  18. Confirm phantom air group (it was enemy aero tanker) requesting landing no longer occurs. (seemed fixed before 2009.36?) Don Thomas
  19. The counter-fire situation is fixed. I was able to fire a torpedo, but not guns. Nice work . When looking at B142 it may help to run the test save from the issue report in the demo to understand what it going on. That may give insignt on how to strip Middleweights (I think that's the root scen) to test with the non-demo build. Re B142, I thought it was being within 3 miles but with weapon range of less than 3 mile, I've seen that lots of times, so I tried to re build the same thing for HCE (even used the same base in westpac with similar extra structures etc. However I can't get the same refusal to attack, I've used 2008.44, 2009.36, 2009.44 & 2009.49. I've tried moving targets in the formation by small amounts and seem to have had the correct distances apart but can't duplicate the action. I used rockeyes of zero range from A6E Intruder. Anxious to see this duplicated. Don. (edited Don) I had another go, this time stripping down Middleweights (that is the scenario-in westpac) and using 2009.42, but still couldn't get same behaviour as in the demo. I'm beat, step forward some guru please. Funny thing, when played in the demo game the 'destroyed' SAM site never disappears from the unit window and is still available as a target in the 'attack' window (repostion attacking plane to the west of target base), this behaviour doesn't seem to happen in the full game version?
  20. Yeh a good trick, any means by which you end up with tankers in separate units (ie more than one tanker unit in the group) will give you this. If the tankers are of mixed platform (different aircraft types) then you can do it when putting your group together for launch. Also if launching from a pair of cariers in the same surface group, I think if you take tankers from differnet carriers they end up in separate units. The tanker unit of lowest unit ID number (last added to the group when putting 'launch' together) will refuel first, so put you're tankers of shortest duration (range) in last. Also if the group has multiple units for refuelling, say antiradar units and precision units, put the shortest range units in last (they will get the lowest ID unit number) as they take the first lot of fuel. Don thomas
  21. I'll have a look too to see if it fits with what I know. I've seen tankers split twice, I've set them up to do so. If the tankers are in different units refuelling seems to take place from the loweset numbered tnaker unit (all tankers in unit), when more fuel is needed later tanker units do the job. (I sometimes split tankers and rejoin the group to get them into separate units) I suspect that if two carriers are in the one group and tankers are selected from each carrier (at the time of launch) they would end up in different groups too. As you say tankers are a world of their own and difficult to understand. Don Thomas (edit Don Thomas, in reply to self) Yep, the tankers are in separate units (different tanker platforms). The lower ID unit refuels first, then a bit later (when refuel trigger occurs again) the second tanker unit refuels). I found this some time back when doing a lot of refuelling and set up a number of tests. Other aspects seemed to work OK.
  22. It ain't easy being the guy at the top who takes the final can! Even worse when you don't think the guys under you know their job! It happens, eh. Seems to me a lot of your points are perhaps items for the wish list. If you haven't yet wondered through that part of the harpgamer world, I'd suggest have a look and start your own. You might even find a lot of your items there in one form or another. Wish list items can end up being implemented, I guess the more time the coding guys have to attend to the sharp end of development the sooner they do, that's my guess anyway. HCE has certainly changed since my encounter with the old DOS harpoon version 1, and I agree that in some ways behaviour of units isn't always better, but I'm convinced the game as a whole is a huge improvement. I don't know if the 20th anniversary package is available yet, but if you get it and start running through games in the older version working up to the current, I don't think you want to go back to the old for too long, other than for nostalgia, 'least I don't. Don.
  23. Try "downloads"/ "harpoon classic" / "tools/mods/docs" (or something pretty close) There is also plenty of info in the HC Beta Testing section in the Harpoon classic/ commander edition section from the main harpgamer window, have fun. Don.
  24. Hey, maybe Tony's rich good looking woman (when he finds her) has a sister for you, or are you catered for already in the companion department? (hmmm, abit personal there of me, maybe no need to answer). Thanks for the help especially in view of your work, one of the things that makes harpoon really good to get involved with, those that know helping those who want to Don.
  • Create New...