Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'op: broncepulido'.
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000001 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 91 – Duplicate Version 2015.028 Fixed in 2016.002 Undetermined problem finishing scenarioPosted by broncepulido on 13 March 2016 - 02:14 PM Just when I was finishing the building of a great scenario, something is wrong and now the scenario can't start (it only lacks delete some US submarines, add paths and speeds to submarines and add other chinese ships). I was thinking the problem was the Stennis Group (AEC), but I'm not sure (perhaps after change variable start points, but I don't see it clear). Too late in the day to find it now! (see attached file).
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000006 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 20 – Fix Postponed Version 0000.000 Fixed in Scenario Editor Victory Conditions math problemPosted by broncepulido on 06 January 2013 - 01:56 AM When I put as victory condition in the Scenario Editor (I use the last version of it) 300 planes shot-down, I see after reflected as victory condition in the window only 44 planes shot-down. After a short testing,I think I shaw the same problem as with the missiles and decoys some weeks ago: if I put 255 or less planes shot-down as victory condition everything is OK, if I put 256 the victory condition showed is 1 plane shot-down (i.e., apparently the final values Y are the result of X-256=Y if X>255). Issue-006-Scenario-Editor-Victory-Conditions-math-problem.pdf
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000079 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2014.010 Fixed in 2014.010 Formation air patrols "created" by the Game EnginePosted by broncepulido on 19 July 2014 - 11:17 PM Testing my own finished Manila Galleon 1988 scenario, I saw an issue almost detected in other scenarios not designed by me, when I asked myself how someone can design strange and many AEW patrols with helicopters devoid of radar. As this was designed by me, I did some research on it and clearly: - In the Peleliu and Trípoli groups, the formation editor creates, show and operates a lot of AEW patrols with 1xAssault helicopters each, never created with the formation editor when designing the scenario. - The concrete patrols are of 1xCH-53E or 1xCH-46E with Assault loadouts, or 1xUH-1N with Patrol loadout. - Playing the Red side and using the cheat mode, I observe the same AEW patrols in the Blue side played by the AI. You can see with the Scenario Editor as the patrols are not created on the scenario, but they are created and formed just at the scenario start. - The patrols are not formed if CH-53E is changed to Ferry loadout and CH-46E and UH-1N are changed to Cargo loadout. Issue-079-Formation-air-patrols-created-by-the-Game-Engine.pdf 7FT2.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000158 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2016.007 Fixed in Game Engine errour changing altitudePosted by broncepulido on 14 August 2016 - 07:25 AM Demo scenario to be played in the GIUK Battleset, 1980-2016 standard database. I did take-off with 2xF-35 from the Blue Base (launched with orders to attack Red Base). When trying to change height from Low to Very Low, errour messange and Game Engine stops (tested many times). When in other essay I did lauch 2xF-35 in patrol (with the idea of after they reach patrol point change height to very low and attack Red Base), almost immediantly launched same errour message (probably when changing height). Adjunt files are test scenario and errour message. Issue-158-Game-Engine-errour-changing-altitude.pdf CLIMB TEST 14 AUGUST 2016.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000183 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2017.007 Fixed in 2017.007 Very slow game engine?Posted by broncepulido on 07 May 2017 - 03:40 PM I'm not sure, but think something strange on the Game Engine, playing the latest Patrick scenario, apparently not a big scenario, the game is going very slow, see attached file (Same with my Bubiyan scenario some days ago, also a small scenario). Middle East map. Issue-183-Very-slow-game-engine.pdf autosave1.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000206 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 90 – Not an Issue Version 2017.016 Fixed in 2017.016 2017.016 crash at startPosted by broncepulido on 08 December 2017 - 01:59 AM Regrettably, I see the same problems in 2017.016 after a while testing. Playing standard HCDB2 The Middle East. Error messages in attached file, crash at each scenario start, EXCEPT the very simple test scenario labeled yesterday as "GOOD", what is the only one working fine. A pity, but thanks Tony! Issue-206-2017-016-crash-at-start.pdf 1980-5 LEBANON.zip AL MADINAH ATTACK 2017-1.zip HARPOON TEST 2017-12-8.zip TEST RED SHIP NO CHANGE COURSE 2011-11-21 GOOD.zip TEST RED SHIP NO CHANGE COURSE 2011-11-21 SECOND ATTEMPT BAD.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000004 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 0000.000 Fixed in "I like it" limitationsPosted by broncepulido on 07 December 2012 - 04:42 AM By the same reason as the downloading scenario issue I post here this issue about the new web site. Each time I want to mark some comment, post or link as "I like it" in the Facebook symbol (errr ... I see now apparently it's not a "I like it" for Facebook), I dont realize it, and I get the message "You've reached your quota of possitive votes for today". This issue is present from the start of the new website. Issue-004-_I-like-it_-limitations.pdf
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000002 Issue Type Issue Severity 3 – Medium Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.066 Fixed in 2009.069 ECM and decoys mathematical problemPosted by broncepulido on 18 November 2012 - 01:52 PM I've detected a big problem yesterday in the mathematical model of the ECM and Decoys in HCE. When editing the Battle of Baltim scenario, as I'm not very satisfaced with the very low levels of ECM and decoys, and also I've lowered the SS-N-2a Styx to a probably more realistic 35%, and employed Decoys Level 2 with a value of 40% (as historically in Latakia and Baltim ALL the Styx fired were decoyed with ECM or decoys, and none get his target, and I want to essay that outcome in the game). Doing that, my prediction was the Styx targeting value will be as a negative -5% (PH=35%, minus ECM or Decoy Value=40%, as result a negative PH=-5%), and it will never hit the target. But after some tests and variations, the outcome is THE OPOSSITE !!! The Styx EVER get his target!!! I've obtained with more test consistent results, as in this table: ECM problem: SS-N-2a 35% Decoys 40% PH=251% SS-N-2a 35% Decoys 35% PH=0% SS-N-2a 40% Decoys 40% PH=0% SS-N-2a 39% Decoys 40% PH=255% SS-N-2a 30% Decoys 40% PH=246% SS-N-2a 40% DECM 45% PH=251% As consecuence, if the ECM or chaff value is higher than the missile PH, the Game Engine rest the missile PH from 256, and the resulting number, as in the example by far higher than 100% (as 246%), is the very very high PH of a very primitive missile as Styx when the target is defended by advanced ECM !!!!! I fear this will be embedded in the Game Engine and of not easy solution .... I can only keep very low the ECM and decoys values, and higher the missile PH, to avoid the case .... Issue-002-ECM-and-decoys-mathematical-problem.pdf ECMTEST.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000021 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.076 Fixed in 2009.082 Neutral Green Truck detects Red Katiuska sitePosted by broncepulido on 23 May 2013 - 11:02 AM A Green neutral truck detects for the Blue side the placement of a Red Katiusta site. See the attached file, Red Katiuska site is detected 3 nm W of the Green truck (I perceived this effect building the last week-end the Drone Scenario). Issue-021-Neutral-Green-Truck-detects-Red-Katiuska-site.pdf AGSATST.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000080 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2014.010 Fixed in 2014.012 Scenario Editor 32-bits: problem with formation editor.Posted by broncepulido on 26 July 2014 - 03:22 AM Error message when clicking upon a formation (ships) and try to open the formation editor. Cliking "Reintentar/Retry" and the formation editor works as usually, without apparent problems. But later when in the formation editor each time I clik in each individual ship to change her position in middle of the group, I receive the same error message, doing the work cumbersome (press "retry" each time to change from a ship to another), and at last the program is freeze (error message on attached file). Issue-080-Scenario-Editor-32-bits_-problem-with-formation-editor.pdf 7FT332.zip TESTSE32.zip Harpoon Scenario Editor 32 Alerts and Bugs 2.doc Harpoon Scenario Editor 32 Alerts and Bugs.doc -
Scenario Editor: problem placing bases on scenarios
IssueMigrator1 posted a topic in Defect Tracking
Issue Information Issue ID #000075 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 0000.000 Fixed in 2014.020 Scenario Editor: problem placing bases on scenariosPosted by broncepulido on 01 July 2014 - 01:33 PM I think I saw this effect from a time ago, but only report it now because many changes or not changes on the Scenario Editor file, and/or usally I pick generic bases and rename/replace them for the scenarios. But now I'm clearly trying to build a conventional scenario and ... In both sides Blue and Red (and Green too), in the attached file, the first base placed is automatically and erroneously renamed to "Bagram", and the sucesive bases renamed also erroneously to a sucesive name of base in the DB. I think it's easier to see it on the attached file: - Cam Ranh Bay is changed to Bagram (the first Red side base placed). - Da Nang is changed to Cam Ranh Bay. - Clark AFB is changed to Bagram (the first Blue side base placed). - Subic Bay is changed to Clark AFB. Issue-075-Scenario-Editor_ problem-placing-bases-on-scenarios.pdf 7FT1.zip -
Issue Information Issue ID #000020 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.076 Fixed in 2009.082 Has been deleted the air-to-ground capacity of aircrafts guns?Posted by broncepulido on 23 May 2013 - 10:53 AM I think this capability was deleted some few years ago, but today I constated the air-to-ground guns are not showed in the 2009.76 build. Test scenario attached, with many planes with air-to-ground guns modelled as guns, and some others with the guns modelled as ordnace, doing his job as usual. The targets are SE of the airbase. Issue-020-Has-been-deleted-the-air-to-ground-capacity-of-aircrafts-guns_.pdf AGSATST.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000120 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2015.017 Fixed in 2015.020 Blue planes shoot-down, plane group persistsPosted by broncepulido on 15 October 2015 - 02:39 PM I send a saved game playing the Tesseract scenario. Two of my Vietnamese Su-27SK are shoot down by the Chinese in the air group BLA (composed only by those two Su-27SK), but the group persist in the map with none aircraft presente. Issue-120-Blue-planes-shoot-down-plane-group-persists.pdf 0 PLANES IN GROUP.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000129 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2015.024 Fixed in 2015.025 Real sonar range not showed in "Unit Window/Full" in GE.Posted by broncepulido on 02 November 2015 - 07:26 AM When you select an individual unit (ship or submarine sonar-equipped) in the "Unit Window" and click on the virtual button "Full" unit to see the unit current characteristics, you now view only the theoretical sonar range (both active and passive) of the unit, not the altered/extended sonar range of the unit because the particular circumstances of that sea, environment and time. Issue-129-Real-sonar-range-not-showed-in-Unit-Window-Full-in-GE.pdf
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000127 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2015.024 Fixed in 2015.026 GE errour or rare DB errour???Posted by broncepulido on 31 October 2015 - 10:03 AM Just when everything looks fine, great undetermined errour. Employing Build 2015.23, when playing the Clash of DDGs scenario, I get strange lectures when clicking in a unit in the "Group Map", later "Display", later "Platform Display/Active classes only" (ships), in this limited scenario, with ship classes limited to Burke IIA and three Chinese types, the window show eight types of ships (with impossible types as Spruance or Belknap!), only the Burke present in the original scenario! (some examples in the attached zip as Test DB errour 31-10-2015 1 and 2). Also, playing the Latakia 2015 scenario I get another errour (attached as Test DB errour 31-10-2015 3), when showing the scroll list with "Platform Display/Active classes only" (aircrafts), you get a list with "no-aircraft" types, as SA-5b, ELINT site or Russian warships names! At first I was thinking it could be a number compilation errour in my personal customized HCDB, but loading the standard HCDB by Brad I get similar results (those showed in the attached files). Issue-127-GE-errour-or-rare-DB-errour.pdf Test DB error 31-10-2015.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000137 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2015.027 Fixed in 2015.028 Uncapable to open in progress of building scenarioPosted by broncepulido on 18 December 2015 - 11:28 AM I'm not sure what I did wrong, perhaps a blank surface groups, but I'm almost sure that's not the case. Issue-137-Uncapable-to-open-in-progress-of-building-scenario.pdf BLACK SEA 2015.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000156 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2016.003 Fixed in 2016.007 Name long issue in GEPosted by broncepulido on 24 July 2016 - 11:44 AM As a joke for René Haar, I usually name some of the civilian vessels in the Baltic as "Sea Tow Flensburg". In the Montrose BALTOPS 2016 scenario: http://harpgamer.com...story-scenario/ The civilian yatch is clearly and correctly named "Sea Tow Flensburg" in the Scenario Editor, but the name is truncated in the Game Engine to "Sea Tow Flensbu" !!! Issue-156-Name-long-issue-in-GE.pdf Sea Tow Flensbu.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000182 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2017.005 Fixed in 2017.007 Programmed Air Attacks Total FailurePosted by broncepulido on 24 April 2017 - 02:25 AM Working in Build 2017.006 (not 005 as in the right menu). When build a new scenario, I programmed a series of air attacks from UK to Spain, Spain to Morocco, etc After the attacks no arriving, I see the problem is the aircrafts take-off at the indicated time for the air strike, but inmediatly returning to their bases! I did build a very little scenario in the Mediterranean 2003 Battleset, with the last DB, and is showed the same isolated result. Scenario is attached, they're programmed attacks in both sides, from RAF Marham against Zaragoza, and from Zaragoza against Monte Real, at some 10 minutes intervals. You can see the aircraft lauched and returning inmediantly to the base with the cheat mode Ctrl-Alt-S. Issue-182-Programmed-Air-Attacks-Total-Failure.pdf AIR ATTACKS FAILURE TEST 24 APRIL 2017.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000186 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2017.009 Fixed in 2017.013 "Circling Aircrafts" problem in composite flights?Posted by broncepulido on 28 May 2017 - 03:29 PM This is a strange situation found when building the Operation Opera 1981 scenario. In the historical Operation Opera one of the flights was not 2xF-15A, it was 1xF-15A+1xF-15B, a special F-15B with a undisclosed type of offensive ECM. My idea was to simulate it with a "composite" flight with a F-15A/B Baz 81 and a F-15A/B Baz 85, the late equipped with a stand-off jammer. No problems apparently programming the composite flight from Etzion as Long Distance Air Patrol. But when playing Red side to verify the programmed Long Distance patrols worked fine when Blue side is played by IA, all the other programmed behaviour as programmed, but the composite flight is keep flying in circles over its airfield! Also, if playing Blue side I manually set the same composite air patrol of F-15A/B Baz 81 and a F-15A/B Baz 85 the outcome is the same, both aircraft don't go to the patrol zone, and keep flying in circles over the airfield! Later I saw the behaviour is not apparently generated by the composite flight, as forming the patrol only with the F-15A/B Baz 85 (57255, classified as "intercept", as in the F-15A/B Baz 81, but with ECM). You can reproduce the events with the attached scenario test file. Issue-186-Circling-Aircrafts-problem-in-composite-flights.pdf I186_Circling.zip TEST COMPOSITE F-15 PATROL.zip TurnShip.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000205 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2017.015 Fixed in 2017.016 2017.015 Crash at startPosted by broncepulido on 06 December 2017 - 03:48 PM In my PC 2017.15 crashes inmediatly at scenario start. Issue-205-2017.015-Crash-at-start.pdf Captura de pantalla 2017-12-07 15.18.55.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000109 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 13 – Awaiting Feedback Version 0000.000 Fixed in Point Defence DEBUG?Posted by broncepulido on 02 May 2015 - 10:49 PM When playing the Mareks Tigris Incident scenario, testing the Phalanx facing (facing and related ammo expediture works fine), I get attached message, but I don't see any effect in the game (but I suspect Point Defence perhaps is doing any hit), the bizarre expression is "DEBUG Farragut PointDefence Got'em all". Issue-109-Point-Defence-DEBUG_.pdf Point Defence DEBUG.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000110 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 13 – Awaiting Feedback Version 0000.000 Fixed in Victory Condition ErrourPosted by broncepulido on 02 May 2015 - 11:03 PM When playing The Maersk Tigris Incident scenario I was glad to see the Iranian missiles hitting by errour one and other time a passing neutral merchant but ... In the scenario is determined Minor Iranian Victory if a Blue ship is damaged 50%. The passing Green neutral merchant is damaged 54% (not any damage in Blue ships), and the GE determines Minor Iranian Victory! I did't save the game because only later I find the explanation, but I think perhaps is easy to locate the errour in the GE ... Issue-110-Victory-Condition-Errour.pdf
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000142 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 13 – Awaiting Feedback Version 2015.026 Fixed in AP rounds remaining = 65445Posted by broncepulido on 07 January 2016 - 03:48 PM Revisiting gunnery and the WWII DB (I've returned to build 2015.26 in some recent update, but I don't know how). Details of the events in the adjunt files (in progress saved game, and text file with capture of detailed windows of the saved game): - Game in progress, Battle of River Plate. - Playing Red/German, with the Admiral Graf Spee. - After the 280mm forward triple turret of Graf Spee has expended his 60 AP rounds, remaining rounds are = 65445 ! (I think we observe this errour some months ago, but I don't find it (I use my customized DB with 100xAP rounds in each 280mm triple turrets, but in the original Brad's WWII DB the number of AP rounds is 60). As side question, it's possible to make the "allocate" virtual button in the "attacking/targeting" window capable to be pushed continously, and not one and other time for each asignation of gun rounds to each target? (i.e., if I want to assign 100 AP rounds to attack the British warships in this scenario, I must push the "allocate" virtual button 100 separated times!!!). Issue-142-AP-rounds-remaining-=-65445.pdf ERROUR RIVER PLATE 8 january 2016.zip Errour AP ammo number 8 January 2016.doc
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000188 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 13 – Awaiting Feedback Version 2017.007 Fixed in Playing Red, sonobuoy errorPosted by broncepulido on 31 July 2017 - 03:24 PM Testing an almost finished scenario (GIUK, latest HCDB2). - Playing red. - Red has only submarines on its side. - Red is informed (Just at this moment) a submarines has been detected by sonobuoy. - But ... Red has not any aircraft or sonobuoys on its side! - Also (if important), the submarine detected MUST be Green/Neutral, as Blue/Enemy has not submarines on its side. See attached file a few seconds after the "detection by sonobuoy". Issue-188-Playing-Red,-sonobuoy-error.pdf SONOBUOY ERROR.zip
-
Issue Information Issue ID #000026 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status UNFILED Version 0000.000 Fixed in Chaotic SAM rate of firePosted by broncepulido on 30 June 2013 - 09:04 AM I think a long time ago we wrote something about it, but I don't remember it very well. I was messing with the Cold War DB, thinking in the relation of posible SAM fired from a Beam Rider system (hypothesis, 1xilluminating fire control radar and telecommand system), a SARH system (hypothesis, 2xFCR), a NTU system (hypothesis, 3xFCR) and some AEGIS/PAAMS systems (perhaps 4xFCR, but PAAMS doubles as FCR with less performances). How I've not clear what was the relation SAM rate of fire/bursts per turn, I did a little test, and I get only almost chaotic results !!! Employed as test platform the 2223 entry and her simply 59422 SM-1MR single-arm mount, as in the attached scenario. I don't write the preliminary tests, but these are the main outcomes: First outcome: the number of missiles fired it's not number of rail dependant (I tested the modified launcher with 1, 2 and 4 rails). Second outcome: the number of missiles fired it's not number of possible targets dependant (I tested the modified launcher with 1, 2, 3, 4 or 8 possible targets, perhaps late it can affect the number of planes shoot-down when the missile group reaches the plane group, but I've not tested it). Third outcome: mount type, rail or cell, is indifferent to the number of missiles fired. Fourth outcome: only the modification of ROF number in the mount affects the number of missiles fired, OK, that do the issue simpler. Fifth outcome: apparently the game engine solution is to fire a SAM burst each 30 seconds, and the number of missile fired ROF number dependant only (but sometimes launches one only SAM 10 seconds after the main burst). For me is a good and simple solution, but actually his behaviour is very chaotic .... Issue-26-Chaotic-SAM-rate-of-fire.pdf MSLROFTS.zip
