Joe K

14. Aircraft aborting mission - as extension of "normal maintenance failures" and/or "fatigue" One thing that I sort of "expected" when I started playing Harpoon Classic was that "normal maintenance failures" would affect aircraft readiness and mission aborts, crashes, etc. - same as for failures of shipboard systems... however, this does not appear to be the case. So, I wish for "normal maintenance failures" to also cause effects such as these on aircraft (on both sides): * occasional delays in readying aircraft * occasional "mission aborts" where one or more a/c in a group abort the mission and return to base * occasional aircraft losses in flight due to mechancal failure - similar to the situation of "crashed due to pilot error while flying at Vlow" Of course, the likelihood of these failures would depend on the assumed quality of a/c design, quality of training of the mechanics, war conditions, damage to facilities, etc. Also, "wear and tear" could factor in, too - for all types of units, including bases... that is, the more use they got, the more likely to have failures.

13. Realistic damage repairs - for all units, bases, etc. on both sides It would add realism if all units (including bases) - on both sides - would be repaired over time. This could be enhanced by factoring in things such as: * the overall level of damage of the base, unit, etc. - more overall damage == longer to fix things * the overall war condition - if a side is generally suffering defeat, or has limited logistics, etc. == longer to fix things * assumed availability of repair facilities and materials - remoteness from base, industrial centers, etc. == longer to fix things * etc. etc. Related to this would be the ability to expedite repairs of ships and subs when "put in" to a port... along with factoring in the damage state of the port itself.

12. Larger formation sizes; possibly more "layers" too Sometimes it would be useful to extend the formation size beyond the existing 255nm limit, but at such times, it's often desirable to have another "layer" or three to work with too - that is, keep the existing formation "rings" as-is, while adding some extended areas - for long-range pickets, searches, etc. Perhaps this "ring extension" could (should?) be switchable - enabled/disabled.

11. Position Markers I'd like to have the ability to "drop" general-purpose position markers onto the maps - for various purposes, including: * Marking a position for a rendezvous point, etc. * "Permanently" marking the position of a contact (since the actual contact marker may be volatile) * Marking the position of sunken ships/subs - mainly for "after-action reviews" * "Distance markers" - such as picket points, range markers, etc. * Assorted other purposes I can envision at least two types of markers: 1. Stationary markers - stay put where placed 2. "Tracking" markers - track a defined or projected course and speed (see details at end of post) and a few ways to set them up: 1. Clicking on the desired spot on the map 2. Some order associated with the currently-selected group that "drops" a marker at the group's current position 3. A "Set Marker" menu option 4. Attacking groups automatically "drop" a marker on the last known fixed position of an undestroyed contact when they depart the area (for re-supply, etc.) To set the markers, I'd envision something like this: - Click on the map (or activate the applicable command for the currently-selected group) - Dialog pops up, offering marker settings such as: * Type of marker [Fixed, or Tracking]; for "free" tracking markers, entry fields for course and position as well. * Duration [Permanent, or specified time] * Symbol to use [sunken vessel, "milepost", dot, etc.) To edit or remove a marker, perhaps a right-click on it with "relocate", "delete", etc. options... or some similarly simple action. A 'fixed" marker would stay put at the designated position; a "tracking marker" would move pursuant to a contact's last known speed and direction (and is updated by subsequent new "fixes" on the contact). A marker could be specified to automatically "expire" after a declared time, or to exist until removed. Various symbols could be applied to distinguish among contacts, and/or among markers used for various purposes. Markers could be colored such as to readily distinguish them from other symbols used in the game.

10. Formations for some air groups Some air groups - particularly multi-aircraft ASW groups and groups having EW/jammer escorts - would benefit from having the capability to arrange the group members in a "formation". My primary desire for this is in regards to ASW hunter groups - having multiple aircraft. There is no point in having four ASW aircraft in a single formation when they all drop their sonabouys at the same spot, or cover the same area with their MAD - just one plane would be as good for such a situation. Yet there are reasons for having multi-plane ASW groups: Easier to manage the patrol area Additional number of weapons available More likely detections - if the members could be spread out a bit. Of course, if air "patrol areas" could be set up , they would cover this need to some extent.

9. Search patterns for patrol missions / default terminal settings of courses When launching an air patrol, it would be nicer to be able to designate a patrol "area" by some means - as opposed to just setting a single patrol destination point. In other words, when launching a patrol, there would be some way to designate the bounds of the patrol area - sort of along the lines of the way the patrol sectors work in formations - where the patrol area is designated, then the game automatically manages the motion and sensors of the patrol group within that area. This would be much easier than manually setting up a patrol's course - especially in the case of setting up recurring patrols; it would also be much superior to just setting a single-point terminus for a patrol group's launch. This sort of feature would also be helpful if it could be set as part of the course for an in-flight air group, a surface group, or sub group as part of its course orders - so that setting a patrol area would not be limited to air groups nor have to be set only at launch time. Sort of related to this is the issue of the "default" terminal orders for a patrol group - that is, the orders that are set for the terminus point by default. In particular, the default orders for interceptor patrols is to put them at medium altitude, but I prefer to "stage" many of my groups at low altitude - particularly when they are not actually patrolling, but are being stationed in an area for some other use - such as an ambush. The default setting for these groups (i.e. - loitering at medium altitude with sensors off) seems to be a rather odd combination - that subjects these groups to being "blind targets" - that is, easier for the enemy to detect, yet unable to do anything except visual detection themselves. So, it would be helpful to be able to change the default setting and/or at least to be able to modify each groups' default setting at launch time.

8. Set up coordinated multi-group attacks. It would be helpful to have some way to more easily set up coordinated attacks on a target - because trying to manage such attacks via "micro-managing" is almost impossible, and usually results in some failure or mis-cue(s). I'm not quite sure how to implement such a feature, but perhaps there would be a new order available for desigating a group as part of a coordinated attack, using its designated target to associate it with other groups that also had orders for a coordinated attack on that particular target. Perhaps the individual groups that are to be coordinated could have their courses set to the points where they are to attack from and the "coordinate" order would be issued at that waypoint in their course. The "coordination manager" would then use the involved groups' respective positions, ranges to weapons launch points, and speed of weapons to determine when to start each group, and at what speed, in order that all weapons would be brought to bear simultaneously. There's probably an easier way to set this up, but off-hand, this is the only thing that comes to mind...

7. "Grey out" ineligible targets, bases, etc. In the various pop-up dialogs, it would be handy to have bases and targets "greyed-out" if they are unattainable with the current fuel range, or not attackable using the available weapons, etc. For example, if there are some landing bases that are within the un-refueled range of an in-flight air group and other bases that are beyond this range, it would be helpful to have the out-of range bases greyed-out (yet still selectable) in order to remind me that re-fueling would be required to reach those bases. Similarly, when ordering an in-flight air group to attack, the available targets would be marked accordingly. Also, when launching, targets or bases beyond the un-refueled range could be greyed-out as a reminder to add tankers, or that re-fueling would be required, given the available fuel range. In all these cases, any bases or targets that are beyond the available fuel range of a group that is not capable of being refueled would be omitted (or similarly greyed-out, or designated in red, or some other indication). It might be appropriate to use some other means of indicating targets that can't be attacked with the available (or remaining) weapons, but it would be along the same lines as for fuel. This feature would also help to avoid the launch of groups that subsequently languish because they can't attack the designated target due to inadequate fuel or wrong weapons... although that particular issue seems more in the nature of a bug that could be resolved by other means.

6. Show flight paths and courses of enemy (AI) groups I'd like to see "projections" of the current courses of enemy groups, along with "hour markers" along it showing their projected positions at "now + x hours". What I envision is that in addition to the course direction arrows that currently exist on all moving groups, that a time-based "projection line" based on the group's current course and speed would be activated when an enemy group is selected. This would be somewhat similar to the course lines that appear when a friendly group is selected, except of course it would be only a single "leg" based on the currently-known course and speed of the enemy group. Having it appear only for the selected group would avoid "clutter" - although it might be nice to have the option to turn on these projection lines for all groups - in order to show a "convergence pattern" - in certain instances.

5. Realistic supplies of arms for air groups - instead of unlimited Instead of having unlimited resupplies of air group ordnance, it would be more realistic - as well as lending itself to more creativity with scenarios - if the available supply of each type of air arms were limited so that it could become exhausted. Along with this would be the ability for these magazines to be re-stocked by unrep, or on a time-delay and damage level basis in the case of land bases... or even by use of cargo planes sent to the bases from other bases, thus transferring the stock from one base to another. Cool! A further extension could be an overall limit on the number of arms-of-type that are available in the scenario... and a natural offshoot would be the ability to attack a base ("supply dump") in order to reduce the enemy's resupply of weapons! Lots of scenario possibilities here!

4. Unrep for surface and sub groups - similar to refueling for air groups, but for armaments It would be nice to actually use resupply ships to provide their intended function, particularly in terms of reloads of missiles, torpedoes, etc. where applicable. This would allow ships and subs to remain viable - rather than just becoming targets when they've depleted their magazines. It would also create real reasons to attack the enemy's re-supply ships. Note that a natural ancillary function of this would be the ability to automatically rendezvous the re-supply ships with their "target" groups - as with tankers and air groups in Wish #1.

3. Ability for tankers themselves to be re-fueled - where applicable It would be nice if tankers could themselves be refueled - where they have the capability, such as F/A-18s, etc. This would allow more "creative" tanking missions, but more importantly, would overcome the problem where tankers stay with their escorted groups beyond the tankers' BINGO point before refueling the escorted group, and thus the tankers crash on their return trip - and can't even be saved by sending another tanker to rescue them (because tankers hemselves can't be refueled).

2. Ability for tankers to dispense multiple refuels - if they have adequate stores Another issue with refueling that annoys me is the fact that a large tanker depletes its entire refueling stores in a single refueling op - for even a single small plane - rather than being able to refuel an escorted group multiple times, or to split off after refueling one group and then go on to re-supply other group(s); it would be great if tankers could re-fuel multiple groups! And semi-related is the weird issue where a tanker will "self-refuel" at about 35% BINGO, actually dumping its refuel stores, and heading home. This is very peculiar and, IMO, makes no sense - no to mention really fouling up the plans if that tanker is waiting for a starving air group that's heading home!

1. Ability to automaticically send refueling tankers to join in-flight air groups - at any point in their flight. One of the biggest hassles that I find to using re-fueling is the difficulty with rendezvousing the tankers with the "refuelee group" - because of the "micro-managing" required to calculate where the rendezvous point should be, then getting the groups there and joined up. I would be a whole lot easier if it worked the same as sending a fighter group to intercept an enemy group, where you'd simply tell the tanker group to "attack" (using the intercept example) the "refuelee" group, and the game would automatically manage the "intercept" course (including responses to any subsequent changes of course of the "refuelee" group) and when in range, would ask for confimation to join the "refuelee" group, and then would eventually commence re-fueling using the normal refueling point criteria. I can even conceive of this action being an order that could be applied to a tanker group's course - so that the "refueling intercept" run would not commence until the tanker had reached the point of the order in its designated course.

As a long-time Harpoon "Classic" player and current HCG player (can't seem to obtain HCE yet ), here are my wishlist items: 1. Ability to automaticically send refueling tankers to join in-flight air groups - at any point in their flight. 2. Ability for tankers to dispense multiple refuels - if they have adequate stores 3. Ability for tankers themselves to be re-fueled - where applicable 4. Unrep for surface and sub groups - similar to refueling for air groups, but for armaments 5. Realistic supplies of arms for air groups - instead of unlimited 6. Show flight paths and courses of enemy (AI) groups 7. "Grey out" ineligible targets, bases, etc. 8. Set up coordinated multi-group attacks. 9. Search patterns for patrol missions / default terminal settings of courses 10. Formations for some air groups 11. Position Markers 12. Larger formation sizes; possibly more "layers" too 13. Realistic damage repairs - for all units, bases, etc. on both sides 14. Aircraft aborting mission - as extension of "normal maintenance failures" and/or "fatigue" 15. Easier way to specify number of weapons to fire, number of aircraft to launch, etc. 16. "Mouse-hover" pop-up information displays, and context menus - for various informational puposes 17. Easier way to re-position map windows; also to "hold" window scroll position 18. A way for player's ships, subs, or planes to "auto-evade" torpedoes, missiles, enemy groups, etc. 19. More control over gunfire (start/stop/number of rounds to use, etc.) 20. Better switching between Group and Unit windows 21. Better fuel info/management for air groups consisting of a/c having different fuel status 22. Outlines on base, group and unit icons - for better visibility on topo image maps 23. Some means of more easily determining visibility conditions (daylight, weather, etc.) 24. Visual cues for water depth 25. Log where ships, subs are sunk - for "after action reviews" 26. Detection of aircraft, sonobouys by subs - to help with evasion measures 27. Add Return to Base and Set Course option buttons to "Awaiting Orders" dialogs 28. Add a 'bypass" method to the Set Sensors dialog sequence 29. Get BINGO fuel warning even when air group is already returning to base 30. Have a means for a scenario to have the probability of unit inclusion dependent on the outcome of the previous scenario 31. When a group is selected, if it currently has a designated target, highlight that target. 32. Modifications (tweeks) for the Ready Aircraft displays 33. Highlight (or default) the originating base when the list of bases is offered upon splitting a tanker from a group 34. When a group completes its attack on a target (expends its weapons or destroys the target), offer the option of returning to base 35. After a group expends its primary weapons, offer the option of continuing with alternate weaps, or returning to base, loitering on site, etc. 36. Modify the automatic behavior of attacking aircraft so they don't "over-fly" their own missiles 37. Have some means of determining how much refuel a group needs compared to how much a tanker type can supply 38. Ability to set a "shadowing" course relative to a specific "target" group 39. When the popup for automatic attack on missile groups appears, allow new options for manual allocation of weapons and suppression of further messages for that particular attacker/target combination 40. Change the logic of the Weapons Allocation Popup so that the shortest-ranged missiles (that are in range) will be allocated first