Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Fix Accepted By Reporter'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The HarpGamer Forums: General Quarters
    • New at HarpGamer.com
    • Forum Guidelines
    • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
    • Military History
    • Current Events
    • Shore Leave
  • Harpoon Classic/Commander's Edition
    • General
    • Scenario Design & Discussion
    • Database Design & Discussion
    • Wish Lists
    • Defect Tracking
    • HC Beta Testing
  • Harpoon (Paper Rules)
    • General
    • Scenario Design & Discussion
    • PBEM / MBX Wargaming
  • Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations
    • General
    • Scenario Design & Discussion
  • Stratsims
    • CIC (Combat Information Center)
    • CIC MP01 (Warfare Plotter)
  • Other Wargames
    • General
  • Harpoon 3/ANW
    • General
    • Scenario Design & Discussion
    • Database Design & Discussion
    • HUD4

Categories

  • Harpoon Classic/HC/HCE/HUCE
    • Databases
    • Scenarios
    • BattleSets
    • Tools/Mods/Docs
  • Harpoon 2/3/ANW
    • Databases
    • Scenarios
    • BattleSets
    • Tools/Docs
  • Command
    • Scenarios
  • SimPlot
    • Scenarios
    • Maps
    • Application/Tools/Mods/Docs

Categories

  • Ships
  • Submarines
  • Aircraft
  • Land Vehicles
  • Installations
  • Mounts
  • Magazines
  • Sensors
  • Weapons

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

  1. In the group window the ID for neutrals isn't showing. GE 2023.008 incase useful a small scenario attached in zip pack, westpac BS, hcdb2/170909 DB. NeutralIDsHCDB2Westpac.zip
  2. super slueth TonyD has found a number of older scenarios don't open in GE 2023.006, but can be opened in the current SE, saved with no changes, and they run. I've attached a zipped scenario that shows this defect. GE.log included, runs BS Medc2003, DB HCDB 150621. Don ge_OldScenWontOpen.zip
  3. GE crashes with out any warning. This has happened several time in about the same spot in the game. I have included the last 5 game saves 1 second apart. If more saved games are needed please let me know. The zip file includes GE log, db and saved games. let me know if you need any additional information. GE Crash 2023.006.zip
  4. After leaving TonyD and I alone for 15 minutes we found an issue with the 2023.003 version of the SE. When selection weapons on a plane at an air base the SE Crashes. When selecting Sensor on a ship or a sub the SE crashes. Crashes verified by TD and myself with various db's and scenarios. Included in the Zip file is a small scenario, latest db and the SE log file. 2023.003 SE Crash.zip
  5. Upon loading a saved game using the 2023.001 GE scenario crashed. Starting a new game with scenario and db loaded fine. Opened scenario in the SE without any issues. Attached is a saved game, GE log file, latest db. If you need anything else please let me know! 2023.001 Update Saved Game Load Crash.zip
  6. When using the autotest batch files against 2022.021 and 2022.022 Release builds, I'm getting assertions thrown in Stubs.c line 351, GetPtrSize. Even if I ignore the assertion, the GE exits soon afterward without warning. Instead of an exitcode of 0 (clean termination of the GE), I see an exitcode of -1073741819. I thought this might only be when using the AutoTest batch files where multiple copies of the GE are running simultaneously so I ran just EC2003 MEDC in single-file (one scenario at a time, one copy of GE running at a time) and still see the exitcode of -1073741819 for 50% of the scenarios (8 clean exits, 8 errors) so far. Error scenarios: EC2003 MEDC 3.0 Blue EC2003 MEDC 5.0 Blue EC2003 MEDC 7.0 Blue EC2003 MEDC 8.0 Blue EC2003 MEDC 9.0 Blue EC2003 MEDC 12.0 Blue EC2003 MEDC 2.0 Red EC2003 MEDC 4.0 Red EC2003 MEDC 5.0 Red EC2003 MEDC 6.0 Red EC2003 MEDC 7.0 Red
  7. Attached is a simple scenario for westpac BS HCDB2 DB that was used to produce the screen shots, one from scenario editor, one from game. Looking at the weapon LS-6 in the appropriate loadouts for the JH-7B aircraft in Scenario editor it is listed as surf (attack) while in game it is listed as land (attack) and won't attack sea targets. This makes it possible for the scenario writer to send out patrols that are not appropriately loaded for the intended target. MSBS-Loadout.zip
  8. I've not been able to reproduce from saved games but runtime error for type-aa is occasionally occuring. see screen shot I'll continue to try for a reproducable saved game, it seems more likely to occur in larger rather than smaller scenarios.
  9. During aircraft operations TonyD and I are receiving this message. If you ignore the message the GE doesn't crash. TonyD found that it occurs with multiple db's. At this point neither TonyD or I have found it affects game play.
  10. Hey TonyE Was playing the Block 2 Mediterranean Scenario and came upon a BOA crash event. Version 2022.006 Scenario Block 2 Battleset Med 2003 DB 15928 Upon launching a group or Growlers with decoy I launched them at a base with the expected results. I also did the same with a group of F18E with slammers with the expected results I then tried to use BOA attacks of which both ordinance I believe are capable of. In both case the believe attached png was the result and upon clicking any button shut down the game. I have attached a test scenario for testing. I simply launched both set of aircrafts to attack red base directly. I then use a bearing only attack at the base and receive the error provided in the test file provided. Thanks TonyD testmald.zip
  11. The attached (zipped) example uses westpac battleset, HCDB 150929 database and GE 2022.0.0.4 open test scenario BadPatrolSector.scq, select blue base, open formation editor (F4) set an air patrol but when clicking the mouse to set the sector have it over the edge of the extreme perimeter of the formation pattern. You can get a selection that is a complete pie section including the inner circle (which is wrong). See the BadPatrolSector.jpg graphic for the effect you're after. Where the boxed air icon sits is where I clicked the mouse to set the patrol. Execute the formation. This will then be similar to the zipped saved game. In about 50 secs the game will freeze. BadPatrolSector.zip
  12. GE 2021.009 I tried HCDB and HCDB2, three separate scenarios within westpac battleset, two custom and one battleset scenario (#1), all consistent crash. Air units either in a patrol around a base or as '0' unit in an air group, select in unit window and select "speed" button and game crash every time. (rather disappointing as I got very excited when I saw it )
  13. I have ran three scenarios which were created for EC2000 Norwegian Sea and then tried again converting to EC2003 GIUK. The results for each scenario were different depending on what side you ran it from Red Or Blue. Converting to 2003 had no differ results. Here are my results with the three scenarios attached for testing. Time compression and DB for 2003 had no different affect. Cv32 did not stop responding when ran from either Red or Blue side. You_And_Me_Against_The_World would stop responding when ran from the Blue side but would run fine from the Red side. Eurofed 1 would stop responding for both Blue and Red sides. This was identical behavior for the other Eurofed, Altfed, Medfed and IOPfed series. I am attaching the three scenarios which were tested by Me and Eustice with the same results. The scenarios stopped responding anywhere between 5 and 10 minutes into game time. You_And_Me_Against_The_World.zip EuroFed1.zip cv32.zip
  14. I have encountered a hypersonic Rafael in the You and Me Scenario created in the 2000 Norwegian Sea Battleset. In the test scenario provided I have a blue base in UK in which a single SR71 is based and a second blue base in Norway. The red base contains Rafael C which are put on patrol in the formation editor. Upon launching the SR71 to ferry to the Norwegian base and activated the radar the Rafael C soon goes hypersonic to intercept the SR71. Further testing shows this does not happen with the B or M version of the Rafael. It was brought to my attention that in the 2000 BS the platform display for these three are similar aircraft varying in only the top speed which for the Rafael B and M is 1147 while for the Rafael C 9696 which is the speed show in the test scenario. Similar test were ran with the Rafael M and C all versions in the 2003 version GIUK but no similar hypersonic activity was observe. Though the event seems not occur in when scenarios are converted from the 2000 BS to it comparable 2003 BS being able to play with scenario as originally created adds some variables to it. testC.BKm
  15. I have a a re occurring crash with GE20019.001. I have narrowed it down to the second. Saved game GE 2019.001 SVG 115 crashes when opened. Saved game GE 2019.001 SVG 113 and 114 open correctly. They are 1 second apart. As long as I keep playing the scenario it keeps running. If you need me to go back several more game seconds please let me know. I have included a copy of my fictional db and saved games files 113,114, and 115 in the zip file. If you need any additional info pleas let me know. Have a great day, Eric GE20019.001 GE Crash.zip
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. Issue Information Issue ID #000011 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.050 Fixed in 2009.076 Order of Battle Unit Field Too ShortPosted by miller7219 on 06 March 2013 - 04:30 PM This is a cosmetic "bug", but the Order of Battle window doesn't allow enough room to fully display the name of the unit. Likely the line length just needs to be increased. Start any scenario and then got the Order of Battle form the Reports pull down menu. Example (from HDS III GIUK, Suprise in the Snow scenario): Group Unit Airfield: AEa 00:AFld Jan Mayen/Jan M......cut off Submarine Group:AHU 00:SSN Valiant/Conquero...cut off The Unit box doesn't allow enough space for the platform class/name. Also, the Group box could be widened a bit, or a column ecpander added between the Group and Unit windows. Notice how some of the names are hidden behind the Unit portion to the right. None of this is a show stopper, but it's bothered me for years Issue-011-Order-of-Battle-Unit-Field-Too-Short.pdf
  19. Issue Information Issue ID #000023 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.080 Fixed in 2009.081 GetAnnex Error: ANNEX_SHIFT(12325 [0x3025]) = 3, annex=5Posted by eeustice on 09 June 2013 - 07:31 PM Received a GetAnnex Error while playing edited Westpac Scenario. Game crashed. Was able to repeat the crash multiple times. Crash occurs at the same point of the scenario. Crash occurs after the North Carolina fires a 16in round. Attached are the edited scenario, db, GE log, and the saved game file before the crash. Note from Tony: See Effects.c ln 502. Code is not checking for guns vs aircraft and it should be. If you need any additional info please let me know. Issue-023-GetAnnex-Error_-ANNEX_SHIFT(12325 0x3025)-=-3,-annex=5.pdf GetAnnex Error.zip HC2009.081GEpre1.zip
  20. 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
  21. Issue Information Issue ID #000015 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.076 Fixed in 2009.078 Unable to Add additional Groups Blue or Red in 2009.072 SEPosted by eeustice on 05 May 2013 - 01:01 PM In the Westpac Battle Set Scenario 9 The Backyard I have reached some kind of maximum limit in the SE of how many units I can have. I can not add anymore ships/subs, plane groups, bases or air defense units to bases. If I add anymore units In the SE it takes away a sub away from sub group ASU (sub group just north of the red CV group by China). Happens if I add a Red or Blue ship/sub air group or AD unit. Attached is my edited db dated 130504. I also included the edited West Pac scenario as well as the report from the analyze scenario screen. All files are in the zipped commandb. zip file. I was unable to add any ASW helo's the to the DD's, DDG's and FFG's in groups AMC and ANC. I am testing a way to fly MH-60R's (ASW-LR) aircraft with a Wake Island class BBLHA with 70 helo's for transfer to outer sector DDG's, DD's and FFG's during the game as a fix for this problem by detaching the ships from the group and flying the helo's to the ship during the game. Once I start the scenario with the GE I am able to divide the real large air groups up to smaller ones with different load outs. There are 140 F35B's on Guam to ferry out to the Wake Island later on in the game if needed. This is not a show stopper for this scenario, however if there was a lot more red side subs it would create a major problem for Task Group protection. Thanks, Eric Issue-015-Unable-to-Add-additional-Groups-Blue-or-Red-in-2009-72-SE.pdf commondb.zip
  22. Issue Information Issue ID #000027 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.050 Fixed in 2009.083 Scenario THEM crashes 3 minutes into the simulationPosted by RoRo on 04 July 2013 - 11:54 AM The scenario THEM issued by CV32 is utmost interesting, but it keeps terminating 3-4 minutes into the siimulation. I have the correct DB, refreshed the down load many times, nothing works. Issue-027-Scenario-THEM-crashes-3-minutes-into-the-simulation.pdf
  23. Issue Information Issue ID #000031 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.082 Fixed in 2009.086 The Return of the Memory Allocation FailurePosted by eeustice on 22 July 2013 - 07:48 PM Tony, The Memory Allocation Failure has returned. I was cleaning up my HDS9-10 scenario for release and the Memory Allocation Failure reappeared when I tried to add ASW helo's to TG AAC. I was able to recreate the problem several times. This is with the standard db since it is an original Harpoon Scenario. I am using the latest version of the SE. Pleas let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Eric Issue-031-The-Return-of-the-Memory-Allocation-Failure.pdf Memory Allocation Failure Returns.zip Memory Allocation Failure Screen Shot.zip
  24. Issue Information Issue ID #000039 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.087 Fixed in 2009.089 TCS half detectionPosted by Grumble on 10 August 2013 - 06:27 AM TCS detection is reported but the detected contact is not displayed, neither as exact fix nor as uncertainty region. In the attached savegame (HDS5 3.0) F-14 BKA detects group ZDA via TCS at 1:22:52:28 (to go, within 2 seconds of the save, PD roll allowing), pressing the Show button on the contact report popup points out the location of the contact (via the flashing radial spikes linking nearby groups to the point) but ZDA is not displayed. It is also not listed in the Attack list of any of the blue groups within AAM range. ZDA is only displayed after it is detected also via other means, visual or radar. Two savefiles attached, one from 2 secs before detections, the other is 30 seconds earlier to allow for sensor change tests. Issue-039-TCS-half-detection.pdf nowyouseeme.zip
  25. Issue Information Issue ID #000035 Issue Type Issue Severity 0 – None Assigned Status 23 – Fix Accepted By Reporter Version 2009.087 Fixed in 2009.089 Drop sonubuoy key activates hull sonarsPosted by Grumble on 01 August 2013 - 03:29 AM The drop sonubuoy key activates hull sonars of ships and submarines also. Expected: drop sonubuoy should drop buoys and activate dipping sonars only. Player might accidentally use the key for the wrong group or might want to activate dipping sonars of a/c formation patrols of a mixed group / CVBG. This will erroneously also activate hull sonars of ships and submarines, revealing their locations to enemy sonars. Load savegame passive.hp9, press the key for CVBG AAC, hull sonars of the Tico and Spruances are also activated. See drop.hp9. Note, the Leahy and Belknap stays passive, it seems that only units also with Towed Array sonar are affected. See towed.hp1, the Type 22/2 and 22/3 of AFC have gone active, the Invincible and the Type 42s stayed passive. Issue-035-Drop-sonubuoy-key-activates-hull-sonars.pdf drop.zip
×
×
  • Create New...