donaldseadog

Thanks, Uhm, I guess the short answer is no. (Didn't know about that one). I'll have another go, in the meantime plenty of room for others to make Brads list of industrious testers. Don well thanks to broncepulido (and much learning) I can confirm that the sonars work (quite realistically) in loadouts. I removed the dipping sonar from a sea king and placed it in the load out, went hunting subs and it detected them. Operates as normally (ie doesn't turn on via the sensor switch but by the period button or when hovering low/very low. I also used a logging report to look at some sonars attached to fixed wing planes. While they appear to function they don't seem likely to detect anything, a value that comes up in th logging - "interference" is very high and I suppose that comes to reason even at loiter if the dipping sonar is doing 90 knots (bder Don!!) Don.

Thanks, Uhm, I guess the short answer is no. (Didn't know about that one). I'll have another go, in the meantime plenty of room for others to make Brads list of industrious testers. Don

Can confirm air search and surface search radar works when included in a load out: <snip> Don I'm not getting a result with sonar. I've tried UMS 4249 fitted to Alize and BSY-2 fitted to Atlantique 2. Neither are available to turn on/off in either group or unit window although they show up range rings in the unit window under some speed/altitude conditions. Although both show in the PE as being both active and passive capable, the UMS show only active range rings and the BSY shows only passive range rings. I hunted a sub (running full speed at shallow depth back and forth under the planes) but no detection occured by either sonar (Atlantique MAD got detections). I'm giving up for now, leave it to someone better. Don.

Can confirm air search and surface search radar works when included in a load out: I modified a few planes so as to disable their normal radar and included the same radar in one loadout, but not in others. I also included radar in one loadout of respective aircraft with no radar normally installed. Radar operated normally in the loadouts with radar but no radar available in the other loadouts. Confirmed that respective surface and air targets detected. Note, in the scenario editor the included radar doesn't seem to show in the "display" window for the loadouts. I've not succeeded with a successful sonar. I've tried a 'shark tail' towed sonar in an Alize. It doesn't seem to work (I'll look at it more and get back- I assume I've done something wrong) Don

Correct .. the sensor (radar or sonar, and not a sonobuoy or jammer) has to be added to the actual loadout of the aircraft (like a weapon). You're probably quite right to observe that no aircraft in the HCDB (I assume that's what you tried to use) has such a loadout just yet. I don't think I've added any. I don't think either of those has a suitable sensor in their loadouts. I had planned on creating the appropriate loadout(s) this weekend, and testing the code myself, if no enterprising beta tester beats me to it. Oh boy, a challenge!! I'll have another go in the PE editor (gulp) If no ones hears from me again I've been sucked into that dreaded world (the PE editor) where I fear only gods go without fear. (I had a very bad esperience one time, I think it was to do with opening a file not in the main HCE directory- eek, maybe I won't try). (coward) Don.

Rest assured that in no time at all some of the more knowledgeable guys here will come to your rescue faster than a supersonic surface skimming missile. I wish I had some idea myself, PS welcome to the HCE world. Don.

That's kind of what I'm thinking. We've over the last 8 years eviscerated the vast majority of the unfair advantages given to the AI (some were accidental, some were required for the game to operate on the systems of the time). My opinion (just that as I'm not seeing the example save games either...) is that most such complaints of phantom planes and such are as a result of the increased width of inputs to the radar and sonar models. Going from 3 or 5 RCS ratings (depending upon how you count them) to over 100 is certainly going to impact the game and make some planes less detectable than others. Similar deal with sonar. The WestPac intro scenario demonstrates both of these quite specifically and obviously. I'm with Brad, if you want a better product take ownership of your gripes and turn them into saved games and something we can use please instead of general complaints with no backing except your word and the anti-evidence of ourselves and others not having similar issues. The game isn't perfect and I think you'll find us incredibly open to constructive complaint but your posts are reading as gripes and nothing more. This is a hobby for us and we'd like you to be a force to move the game forward, not a force driving us to leave the game. I hope your back-woods 'friend' isn't the Herminator Hi guys, (I've just come back on line after a while busy looking after my sick dog), I've read this thread from start to finish and I'm wondering if any one is getting anything out of it, are you? My interpretation of Tony's advise is that individual problems be targetted and a saved game showing the problem be sent in for us all to look at. In my experience any problem I've had and gone to the trouble of doing this has produced a result. In some ways I like to play more at the top end of the command, looking at strategies and not so much the micro management, but considering that Harpoon deals in very real life quantities (I know of no other such game that comes close to the realism) I think it does a very good job of dealing with the micro stuff and what admiral is going to dream up some big plan where the smaller detail isn't doable? Don

You've stumped me here (how easys that), I assume we need an aircraft without built in radar or sonar but having same in one of the load outs. I can't find any such aircraft. So I figured I'd make one in a modified database. I tried but I guess either what I picked as being a radar was something in the radar catagory but not really a radar because in the game engine and scenario writer it didn't show up in the 'display' for that aircraft. I await with held breath to learn what this is all about. Don.

I might be border line cheating but on the basis that aircraft ordinacne is limitless I try to kill every thing I can with planes and keep ship fired weapons for last ditch efforts. (In my first attempt at breakoutUK I found (too late) that my AAW boats were out of SAMs. It got pretty grissly soon after.) I don't know how many long range AGMs I fired off but I'll be stuffed if someone plugs the bottomless pit that is the current magazine. I figure that in this case a little stretching of fair play is OK? Don

I had a similar experience with 'BreakoutUK'. The DF-21 anti-ship ballistic missile is one nasty piece of kit. I have edited both of these, gently, to buy you some time in the beginning.I still have the original versions if you like. Does any one know if there is a half speed time compression setting, I get tired of going from "0" to "1". Also I'm thinking the ctrl alt S setting could be called "satellite view" instead of cheat mode, it would sure be handy. As a matter of interest (and possible envy) has anyone got out? I've got about 30 hours game time to run (if I remember right) and I'm only about 50 miles from where I started, I've lost two ships, a few planes and copters and claimed a base, a few SAMs and SSMs, over a hundred planes and about ten ships and three subs, BUT they still keep coming. Do they ever stop? Don (with pegs keeping eye lids open) Thomas

Just a quicky to thank you guys that put all the information into this site. Things like Brad's tutorials and things like the help files. So many places just can't be bothered to do a decent job with the "boring stuff". I actually went to the help files and found what I was after (and a lot more). Don Thomas

File Name: OK_Coral (HCWW BS) File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 24 Oct 2009 File Updated: 5 Feb 2011 File Category: WestPac DB Used: HCWW_090925 Authors: don thomas Battleset-WPac: .scq - WPac - WestPac The gun fight at OK coral atoll. (Its in the west (west pacific), but no Wild Bill Hickock). A small scenario for anyone that is hesitant in diving into the world of WWII naval gunnery. Being small it gives an idea of what is happenning and how you might manage your assets. Uses Brad's HCWW 90925 (or better) database. Don Click here to download this file

File Name: 65 Spy File Submitter: donaldseadog File Submitted: 24 Oct 2009 File Updated: 2 Mar 2010 File Category: Caribbean Basin DB Used: HC_65to80_DB_091010 Authors: scen author Don Thomas Battleset-Carribean Basin: .scs - CDB - CDB This uses database HC_65to80_DB_091010 (by "divefreak"), find it in the database downloads (and don't forget to pick up the matching commondb.rsr file in the database section [picture file for HC_XXtoXX_db] for the pretty pics) A rather slow llittle scenario in which subs and EW planes sneak past Cuba to spy on who's doing what, and try not to get clobbered. Meanwhile Cuba sits like a spider and pounces out if you get too close (and are detected). Just had to do something with this growing database. New file added 2 march 2010 to correct time limit and victory conditions (Thanks for feedback) Don Click here to download this file

That sounds fine to me. By the way, has anyone seen planes with air to air cannon exhibit the same desire for blood at all cost? Perhaps (I had this thought while talking to my goats) there can be some sort of setting introduced that the scenario author can make when writting the scenario, perhaps when setting up a group to launch (could also be available for player) Could be maybe a strafing capable toggle or a defensive/aggressive balance value (I'd like that). Maybe tie in with the warning re entering AAW range (AI just scarpers if not close to fire point)?? Don (jumping and happy I can still strafe flak in my beaufighter)!! AND that means Brad gets all the work and Tony can put his feet up (Sounds sus to me Brad, did they gang up on you?)

If I were behind the gun I guess I'd take a stab at calculating what effect my pea shooter will have on the target in question, what value will the enemy place on the target's loss/damage and what's the chance it will shoot me. If it 'looks good' I'd go in and shoot, otherwise I'd scarper. Is that logical and is it simple enough for the AI. Brads suggestion that AI doesn't go hunting with weapons of less than a critical DP would be a good start if the code can't handle anything better, but if we want realistic scenarios where some important targets are soft and we don't waste limited and expensive ordinance on them then I'd like to see AI have a go at them. There are some neat scenarios with lots of land units (Phillipine Crunch in westpac is one I think) that I played late last night and got a whole new result - flanker fighter took out one of my tanks or APCs. Brad's HCWW database (well scenarios written to it) is quite different being able to use escorts to take out flak and slow, if not sink, torpedo boats etc. Also I've seen harriers with antiradar loadouts come in low and fast (as they should) my SAMs trying to knock of the sidearms are unable to reload fast enough to hit the plane which then inflicts damage with cannon, in some cases finishing off the minimal damage done by the sidearms. I just think its well worth persuing, especially as it will take Tony's mind of beautiful, rich and smart women. Having said that I'm not sure there isn't another problem which seems to crop up sometimes with other short range ground attack wepons and that is the attacking plane going backwards and forwards seemingly not able to get close enough for a shot. Has any one come across that and knows what's happening? Don.

Hehe, thanks for the kind words guys. As you recognized, I don't, couldn't, and wouldn't do it alone. Now if someone would just provide me a smart, rich, attractive (real) woman to marry we could really build a nifty wargame. ............ So if we get you a smart attractive rich woman,....... I don't think you'll be spending more time on this harpoon game, my friend!!! Don.

Probably because that generation of computers was more reliable! The most reliable system is still the Eyeball Mk I. Funny as it sounds, an old Bofors 40mm with visual guidance is not going to fail you on air defense, even if the computer and radar completely fail. So in some ways, older ships are more dependable, if less survivable. Yep, if you're going to go down, you may as well have something to do while you wait. In the same way it's nice to have some (unreliable?) radars, computers, SAMs, rotary canons etc to have something to watch as well. As to the reason for keeping old computers for fire control and the like, probably a pretty easy job for a computer and the old ones do it fine. I think original fire control computation was done by mechanical computers a bit like large adding machines (a small room full of gears and shafts), I think it was one of these units I saw shoot down a towed target with a 4.5" gun back in the early 70's. Don

I'd say concise, not simplified. That is I guess what I was trying to get to. I perceive that AI seems to do this better than your own side (with out micromanagement), but not sure. Where it does act with caution it does seem to linger (until bingo) when perhaps it should retreat home. Also does any of this pertain to naval vessels, eg surface craft in range of SSMs/artillary, subs in range mortar/ torpedo. Also how much of the info is really available (in reality)? You might identify a ship by electronic or visual methods, and therefore know what it should have, but it might be out of suitable ammo. (EEk, where does it end?) Don Don

I'd like to lobby hard for something to solve this problem... because it's gotten to the point for me that I lose nearly as many aircraft to unreported fuel exhaustion as I do to any "legitimate" causes. I know what you mean I cat my vote with you. Seems to be a few conditions that can cause problems, if I'm in doubt instead of just ordering return to base I set a course to a point next to the base then insert the land command in the course. A bit fiddly but I have to make a lot less cap in hand visits to next of kin. Don Does that actually make the BINGO message come up when it's appropriate? I was thinking that I tried to do that awhile back, but it appeared that any course which included a return-to-base leg would cause the BINGO report not to come up (and the planes would crash), regardless of whether there were course legs other than the return-to-base, or if that was the only leg. I know for sure that the warning doesn't occur if the return-to-base is the only leg, and I'm pretty sure that it also does not appear if a multi-leg course includes a return-to-base leg... so I just assumed that the presence of any return-to-base command in the path would suppress the warning. (?) I'll have another look but I think it works, got to have return to base right at the end. I haven't exhaustingly tested it though. Would still be nice if as you suggest the warning came up at bingo no matter what. Don ..... Here's an autosave showing what I mean, the hornet is coming home on military and will run dry before home but calls in reporting at bingo and requesting ordered home, reply yes and she goes onto cruise and glides in. Don autosave.zip

I've been away and now I'm crying, snip (Don goes away and plays scenario while sobbing).... OK , I've run the scenario, the AI planes come in , launch missiles then close to attack with cannon. Not a good Idea but is this a problem of air 2 ground guns or a problem re any mix of long and short range ground weapons? Surely the same thing would happen if you had antiradar loadouts that included guided bombs, (I haven't tested I'm guessing)? This is a land target that AI will only attack if scenario writer instructed an attacks, is that correct, how will it go if the target is a surface ship group? (I'll test). The AI can be pretty dumb, is this just another example? As some one greater than I said, "I'll be back" Don. Here's my test, now I'm not saying Brad doesn't have a valid point, he does cause the planes act like kamikazies, but I don't think it's cut and dried. Test is similar to Brad's, play red and use "show all" to launch blue planes. Try the antiradar loadouts and attack or patrol right over the red surface ship group, watch. If you turn on your radar you get HARMed (he,he) leave it off till you see the whites of their eyes and SAMem. In the end you'll be hammered 'cause the carrier will rearm with standoff ASUW and blitz you. You might see the situation where the planes are loitering about seemingly wanting to come in and gun you, but apparently worried about your SAM and just turning back, is AI that smart? If it is then AI needs to know when its in stalemate and go home. If blue planes are sent in one at a time red has a fair chance of getting a few, but if the initial attack is four planes its hard not to get done straight off although you should shoot down something. I'm interested in what everyone thinks Don. attktst2.zip

I'd like to lobby hard for something to solve this problem... because it's gotten to the point for me that I lose nearly as many aircraft to unreported fuel exhaustion as I do to any "legitimate" causes. I know what you mean I cat my vote with you. Seems to be a few conditions that can cause problems, if I'm in doubt instead of just ordering return to base I set a course to a point next to the base then insert the land command in the course. A bit fiddly but I have to make a lot less cap in hand visits to next of kin. Don

I've been away and now I'm crying, I was having so much fun taking out flack with zero fighters. I hadn't had time to look much at modern databases (just one scenario which seemed to go OK) It seemed not only was air 2 ground guns working but with multiple targets (eg a number of flack units) planes were going from one target straight to the next without sitting like mullets in the middle asking what to do next. It seems generally worth persuing if can overcome this hurdle. Don. (Don goes away and plays scenario while sobbing).... OK , I've run the scenario, the AI planes come in , launch missiles then close to attack with cannon. Not a good Idea but is this a problem of air 2 ground guns or a problem re any mix of long and short range ground weapons? Surely the same thing would happen if you had antiradar loadouts that included guided bombs, (I haven't tested I'm guessing)? This is a land target that AI will only attack if scenario writer instructed an attacks, is that correct, how will it go if the target is a surface ship group? (I'll test). The AI can be pretty dumb, is this just another example? As some one greater than I said, "I'll be back" Don.

An interesting situation because in the extreme cases different countries have such differences in maintenance and operator skills that the same platforms are totally different in ability. Perhaps sometimes duplicates (with appropriate ATA/DATA and PH values) would be worth while. Don Thomas