donaldseadog

Thanks very much, Don, for taking the time to produce an AAR. That is always appreciated. As for the challenge, I'm still waiting for someone to match the accomplishments of Captain Michael Barkai (Yomi) and his men. I must admit I've played this a few times since my first 'win' and always lost. The difference is that the first time around I was lucky to start just after midnight, and came across a merchantman in the right spot to hide in his shadow. I got the work done before daylight and was able to sneak in often to within gunnery range (didn't need to light up my radar for missile guidance) for quick kills. Yes the actual historic situation was a real accomplishment, as "Harpoon" illustrates. Don

I guess we're just never satisfied Staff assistant, even as he stands, is pretty good in at least you get a chance to look at what is what and plan how to go about a response. There is the 1:1 button and that does bring us back to reality, if in the real situation we've got all sorts of stuff coming at us we do only have real time to sort it out, make decisions and issue orders. However it would be nice to be able to make group selections, issue orders and alter window focus while being bombarded with assistant's messages and the zero time compression would do it. The 'zero time compression' is a very powerful tool, being able not only to pause the AI but allow selection of units/ groups, group windows and focus, and issue commands for course/ speed/ attack etc. Don

I noticed somewhere there's a hot key to the (new) "zero" time acceleration (pause, but can still use windows and issue orders etc) in the beta GEs. The hot key is alt ctrl P. In case you haven't noticed it it is very good for those hectic moments when you have been cruising along at high game speed but suddenly need the world to stop NOW. I wonder if it could be twiddled to work from the assistants advise box, you know the sort where he says, something like "every known missile is headed towards you, would you like to turn on your radar?" Don

SPOILER ALERT (Note played in latest beta GE 2010.019, that might make a difference) Opening the game (playing blue) paused: it is just after midnight in calm conditions with three surface groups of patrol boats comprising 2 groups of three Saar (gabriel SSMs 12 mile range) and one group (AAS) of two Dabur ("pop-guns" only) cruising about 45 miles out from Latakia, the two Saar groups being close to each other and about 20 miles north west of the Daburs. No enemy are detected other than Latakia but intelligence indicates two or three fast missile boats (long range styxs SSM) are deployed. The Saar groups are both conducting a similar curved patrol taking them in a loop to within about 25 miles of Latakia, the Daburs conducting a tight patrol. One Saar group (ACS) is re-directed on a generally easterly direction to provide some extra cover for the Dabur. At 0233 keen lookouts on Saar unit Hanit (group ABS) spot an enemy P-4 5 nm out bearing 28 degrees. Its estimated doing 8 kts away from us (closing speed ~ 6kts). No threat in its self but may have more potent escorts and may detect us. Radar kept off and course altered to close. Group ACS redirected to North East heading to provide further cover if needed. ABS close to 5 nm and at 0235 open fire with 76mm/62 compact main guns. P-4 confirmed sunk. Group ABS course modified to run closer to ACS, lookouts maintained. 0303: ABS unit Saar lookouts spot merchant man (neutral) heading south east at 10 kts, group course altered to east of south east to run under cover of merchant. 0332: ABS course altered to cross close astern of merchant man and continue patrol towards Latakia. Enemy MCM T-43 detected by ESM from both ACS and ABS giving triangulation good position at 7nm ENE of ABS and 11nm NNW of ACS within both missile's range. Enemy headed towards ABS at full speed with radar on. ABS considers it is likely to have been detected and fires SSM salvo (radar on for guidance) then changes course and speed to shadow behind merchantman. One missile self destructs one miss, fire 6 salvos main guns, one hit and enemy reduced to 7 kts, two SSMs fired and one hit, mine sweeper sinks, most importantly its radar is sunk. ABS: Radar off, continue to hug merchant man. 0355: ABS leaves shadow of merchantman passing ahead and changing courrse towardsLatakia. 0416: ABS 10 nm from ACS, both groups heading 14 kts approx NE and East respectively with SSM overlap and about 20 nm out from Latakia. 0424: one Komar class PTM spotted by lookouts, 5nm easst of Saar Herev (group ACS) cruising NW at 8 kts. ACS radar on and 2 SSMs away and commence salvos from main gun, first round hits and PTM sunk but 6 Styx are in bound. Two more PTM detected Ossa and another Komar, ACS engages two SSMs a piece and salvos from the main guns. The smoke clears, two more enemy PTMs to the bottom but loss of three Saar (ACS wiped out). But with three enemy PTMs sunk we get a victory... but go on for more. ABS comes up to 25 kts and heads easterly intending to proceed down to AAS and escort survivors home... But no more enemy units so we are granted a win.... Don

Heh, I remarked today on IRC that if anyone can come through unscathed, I will be impressed. There, a challenge for ya! Hah, a challenge, and a challenge met (to some degree). I don't know if GE vers 2010.019 was a help (no red window open though) but we did get through with three losses and five enemy sunk. see AAR separately. I did have a piece of good luck though... Don

First GE crash for a while. No saved game so I don't know if the screen shot is helpful (with C++ complaints) but included it. (four warning windows appeared, copied three as in jpg) GE vers 2010.19, DB HCDB 090726 BS ec2003 GIUK/ inbuilt scenario #2 Had just split one plane from group of two and issued new course, instant crash. Don

More detail please, targeted (i.e. tiny) scenario/save game with instructions if possible that I can use to reproduce your findings. sounds a bit like my previous report. I noticed the behaviour when playing red but haven't tested it playing blue, I'll have a look. Anyway maybe try the saved game in my upload AI-sonar.zip a couple of posts back: http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...ost&id=1174 Don

1. re # 20101030 Red autoformation patrols setting ignored http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=181 (tony's GE sides open items), it seems that the formation patrols setting at game start effects the blue side even when playing red. try the scenario file in attached zip, open as red player and use formation patrol setting on/ off and see the on/off effect on blue surface group. 2. Also problem with sonar detection: Playing red (use the saved game in attached zip) you soon pick up a detection of the blue group from a sonar drop by blue helo. That is the player gets a sonar contact using AI sonar bouy. Don sorry, should have noted used GE V-2010.19 for game save, HCDB 090427 in GIUK-2003 BS To demonstrate sonar buoy problem, open saved game (playing red) and make sure you have a blue group screen open and active. Soon the box appears announcing detection by sonobuoy, 'push' "select". You might need to press key board key 'C' to focus on the blue group which has a helo in formation patrol and it has dropped a sonobouy which appears to have detected one of it's own group ships. AI_sonar.zip

Tony, I think item '20101123 Platform Display' (my initial report) in your GE sides open items has been attended to. Also I think that: # 20101205 Can only play as Blue, when selecting Red player, most of the button bar is inactive like the player is Blue. # 20101104 Can't play as neutral, crash http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showbug=184 are also both fixed. Can play red with all buttons seemingly normal, can play neutral and open a new game via ctrl-N. Don

24. gray out (make not selectable) the very low altitude button in the speed setting window for aircraft that crash when flown very low. 25. Logging for ESM. 26. AI can split off a unit(s) from a group to execute a defensive action. EG a long range air strike with fighter escorts could peel off some of the escorts to intercept a threat, or a slow surface group with say an oiler could peel of a couple of fast destroyers for same purpose. I guess the planes RTB after intercept but I don't know how to handle the ships unless they return to parent group and rejoin.

Yes started in 0.19 saved the game, stopped the GE and restartet it again. Getting a Mem Allocation error. The BS is my Falkland BS. I had no problem with the saved game. I used GE 2010.19, DB 95to10db110112 (didn't have the 110107 used for saved game) and your Faulklands BS. The game opened and ran. I saved the game as a new name and 'opened' the newly saved game which ran with no problems. Could it have been the version of the database? Don (later note) I had a play in the saved game and its funny but RED side (AI) seems to be making no defensive or offensive moves against my air or surface assets even thought it can see them, so maybe something is wrong???

I don't think there are that many true bugs (fault in code or code logic). There are some true bugs come to light now and again but I'd think that most of the severe ones get fixed pretty quickly. I also think you have to delve pretty deep and keep a very well peeled eye to catch a bug these days. There is not so far as I have found a single scenario that doesn't play pretty much as intended and with the exception of beta versions it's a long time since you got game crashes. Some aspects of play you have to allow for (ships grounding?) and make your play accordingly, some times you might not play certain types of scenarios as you don' t like their style (sub hunting might be thought boring). However to make a broad statement that the game is rubbish, why make the statement? Do you want it not to be rubbish (in your mind) but think the guys fixing stuff are clairvoyant? Do you just want to slag off at those of us who like it? Are you just a bored tiresome person filling in time? If you want the game to work better for you, join the community constructively, go the the wish lists and start adding your wishes, go to the issue tracker and see if you can do something to help with some of the outstanding bugs, ..... Don Thomas

You certainly need the latest DB, ( I thought I did have), I played for about three hours, the action was so constant that it took that long to realise I kept sending out bombers from Clark AFB but they were instantly landing, the latest DB fixed that so now I can get on with the job (now with a bit more hope Don

Hind sight makes everything so obvious (I worked as a Patent Attorney so this statement gives me a giggle) Here's an example, once you figure it out it will be obvious, I'm sure. Game save is from scenario (both in zip) played 2010.017, hcdb 101022, EC2003 giuk. from the scenario the 'plane group ADA has been split (F8) from formation patrol and assigned to attack teh red base, then it has been given a course to follow but won't take any direction orders. So far as I can tell the unwillingness to take orders (going AWOL?) seems to only occur if the unit has been split from a formation and given an attack order in the initial "do you want to enter a course for the new group" window, but I'm not certain if this is the only circumstance where it happens. If this doesn't show up much give me a yell and I'll look at it further to try and get better tests. Also note the position of the airbase (in the group windows) moves around 'averaging' the unit positions rather than staying put in the true position of the base. (OOps, I better upload the file hehe) Don Thomas notcommand.zip

I also used the original test scenario in GE 2010.17 and all seemed to work as expected. (so long as the sub stayed surfaced) Harpoon available and allocated, short range asw available and allocated, guns available and allocated when in arc. One question, is it reasonable for one 76mm shell to sink the wisky and should it be reported in the message window as: 30008 DP applied (that seems a lot or is it that the shell hit for 28 or more DP which is enough to sink her)? who cares about playing red, I'm hanging out to play Green, double the targets Don Thomas

If anyone manages to keep onto their Mersey I'll be surprised, a bit mean I know putting her in there but its only a game There is a fair bit of luck as to what planes you get but you seem to have done pretty well, after lots of testing (with a fair bit of cheat mode) I couldn't stick it out to actually complete an unassisted run so you might be the only one to get an honost victory so far, Admiral Brad. Don

Its a good idea to give us some more detail about what you did. Which database version, where did you place which files? Did you open the game using HCLauncher (this makes it easier with database management). What happened "it won't seem to open"? Could you see the battleset in selection window or not, etc I note there are two "faulklands" battlesets, as TeTeT says, use divefreak's battleset "Faulklands/southatlantic, (not the "Faulkland island War" battleset). That might be the problem? Don Thomas

[This started in what is now archived but I can't find an upload window in the original (I suppose because it is in archive?)] Any way the problem relates to victory conditions using aircraft subtypes with multiple numbers of kills required. The attached has two scenarios, the vic conditions are slightly different, one requiring 4 kills of aircraft subtype ASW, the other 5 kills. these are minimum conditions. There are also kill 2 subtype EW (all are OR conditions) min condition. blue base has 25 ASW and 2 EW planes in formation, the ASW will get hit first by FA-18s. In the subtyp4 (requires 4 kills) scenario almost always (but not quite) red gets minimum vic once it has killed the ASWs. In subtyp5 (requires 5 kills) scenario blue gets away with loosing the 25 ASWs with out red getting vic, if blue moves the EWs to a vulnerable sector red will generally (but again not always) get the victory once the planes are downed. I advise playing at about 5 min to the sec time acceleration. HCDB 101022, GE versions 2010.006 and 2009.042 both tested same result. Don Thomas subtypeairvic.zip

There is if I can find an upload window??? Don

Might this effecte EW escorts masking detection, has anyone looked at if this? I'm not very good at this stuff but in a test I did with a pair of prowler I wasn't getting what I expect (very handy have both sides view point to pick up this sort of thing). Any tips on how I can test it (and learn more about EW escorts) Don Thomas

A couple of other things happening, but I did waste a bit of time drawing Panama Canal (which of course won't work as ships will just run aground). Certainly it is working for the texture views so that's something. I'm thinking about my Sydney harbour mini sub attack, I'll try shifting my 'harbour' in the texture map out over sea and see how the game plays. Don

Tony, you might have gone beyond the call of duty in improving detection, I got a missile reporting a visual contact. I tried a game save (though probably pointless after the event) but the save seems to crash the program when I try to open it. The missile was a single HARM approaching an SA-5b. GE version 2010.015 (from zip file, but shows as 2010.0.1.4 at mouse hover), DB hcus 101209. I'll try to reproduce the visual and the crash. Don

These two still need verification. Note the second has a related issue report that will need updating. Thank you Chg 0000 GE tanker landing problem: confirm aero tankers land on carriers (choice of two) according to player direction (tested OK GE version 2010.015) Chg B142 GE no retarget of multi unit group with weapons <= 3nm. Confirm situation now working, test GE 2010.015 GP loadout hornet correctly attacks four unit mobile group, attacking each unit in turn till group kill or low ammo. Don Thomas

For fine tuning of coastal regions, adding panama and suez Channal, adding rivers etc, editing the NesBSElev will be required at some point. And if i understand Donlad correctly, he wants to add a (big) harbour bassin/dock etc... editable texture map would be nice as could add country boundaries and add geographical/ political names etc, but as I understand it ships will run aground or float according to the heightmap so Divefreak is spot on as to my thinking. I agree with him that this is something we will be wanting in the future, at some time. How about we stick to the editing of texture map for now, when you have that usable (can be messy for now) some of us can fiddle with that and see if we can make some use, and then we can get back to the heightmap when other things are sorted out? Don

So I'm assuming that the correction is made in the replacement battleset files that came with 2009.42 release? I have checked 2003 Medc scenario 8 (battleset resident) against the 'test' "straits.zip" found in the posts. The vic conditions check out identical. I assume this verifies that scenario. I'll keep going with the other two. Don. Right on in strategy, thank you for taking a look. I'm also not trying to be a pain, it just generally isn't good practive for the person who inserted the scenario to check for it. I think most of us assume if you ask for something there's good reason. Have now checked with same methodology GIUK 1 and 2 (EC2003) against the ones supplied in the forum string and they are identical. So EC2003 GIUK scenarios 1,2 and MEDC scenario 8 confirmed updated. Don