Well, I'm finally getting started with Harpoon 3 scenario design...

 

The first scenario is a very simple one...one US cruiser, one Venezuelan frigate, and 6 Venezuelan F-16As. The cruiser patrols waters near Venezuela and the Venezuelans interpret this as an attack and go after her. They win if they sink her; the US wins if they stay alive...sinking the Venezuelan ship is not necessary for victory (although it may be necessary for survival).

 

I apologize in advance if some of these questions are rather basic.

 

First set of questions...

 

I plotted a course for the American ship but it is not moving when the game starts. What do I need to do to fix this?

 

I think a Protect victory condition is what I want--the US starts in a neutral posture and Venezuela is hostile and will attack; Victory would be achieved by the US simply by surviving, regardless of where the ship is--but it tells me every 30 minutes of game time that I've won. That's a bit annoying, especially if you're at something like 1 minute to 1 second compression. Is there any way to set a Protect Victory Condition so it waits until, say, the end of the scenario to see if you've managed to meet the victory condition?

 

I suppose a Station victory condition might work, but I'm having a little trouble getting that to work properly. I will try it again and see what happens.

 

Thanks.

 

Mark

Hi Mark, it isn't germane to the task at hand but what database are you using? I hope to take a look at your requests tonight, ships not moving at game start for player is common state but I'll review that too.

Hi Mark, it isn't germane to the task at hand but what database are you using? I hope to take a look at your requests tonight, ships not moving at game start for player is common state but I'll review that too.

 

I'm using the Players DB. I will say one thing...almost all the problems I was having with the 3.63 scenario editor (crashing, etc.) went bye-bye when I switched to ANW. I'm going to work with that for a while and see what happens.

 

3.63 is nice, but at least on my machine it is still clunky and glitchy. ANW is remarkably smooth and stable in comparison. Not sure why. Probably something to do with my machine and Windows 7.

 

If the player's ships not moving is the default, then okay. Is there a way to tell the machine that I would like the ships moving, on a particular course, etc.?

 

(Sorry if these are really basic questions...I'm a novice with H3.)

 

One "problem" that I resolved...at first, I couldn't add aircraft to an airbase I had set up. And then it occurred to me that ANW might require you to add aircraft to the individual hanger rather than just the "base." Once I figured that out, I was able to add them without any difficulty. Duh!

Well I'm about useless!

 

You should be able to use composite victory conditions for your protect.

 

1. Make a composite VC

2. Go Down a level

3. Create an On Station VC and make it a huge area with the requisite time (this becomes your clock for protect in a twisted sort of way).

4. Create a Protect VC.

5. Go Up a level

6. Modify the Composite VC and set value of 2, this changes it from OR to AND, requiring the CG to be both alive and there for the set amount of time from the on station VC.

 

I honestly know of no way to have the player units start on the move. It doesn't matter if they are plotted or in missions, either way they start without orders. Same deal with running the clock a bit in the SE before running, still in the game engine they have no initial orders. It will take someone more experienced than me for that one.

 

As for PlayersDB, that is unfortunately enough to make me withold further assistance (what little use it is). I won't support that endeavour or the people behind it even by helping you out. Sorry, if you happen to move to the HUD3 or ANWDB then sure.

[...]

 

As for PlayersDB, that is unfortunately enough to make me withold further assistance (what little use it is). I won't support that endeavour or the people behind it even by helping you out. Sorry, if you happen to move to the HUD3 or ANWDB then sure.

 

 

+1

 

No support for this stuff. The editor has been banned from all major Harpoon websites for good reasons.

Well I'm about useless!

 

You should be able to use composite victory conditions for your protect.

 

1. Make a composite VC

2. Go Down a level

3. Create an On Station VC and make it a huge area with the requisite time (this becomes your clock for protect in a twisted sort of way).

4. Create a Protect VC.

5. Go Up a level

6. Modify the Composite VC and set value of 2, this changes it from OR to AND, requiring the CG to be both alive and there for the set amount of time from the on station VC.

 

I honestly know of no way to have the player units start on the move. It doesn't matter if they are plotted or in missions, either way they start without orders. Same deal with running the clock a bit in the SE before running, still in the game engine they have no initial orders. It will take someone more experienced than me for that one.

 

As for PlayersDB, that is unfortunately enough to make me withold further assistance (what little use it is). I won't support that endeavour or the people behind it even by helping you out. Sorry, if you happen to move to the HUD3 or ANWDB then sure.

 

Don't worry about it. I mostly concerned that I was doing something wrong. If it's simply that the player's ships start that way, by default, I'll work with it.

 

I apologize if I hit a raw nerve with my mention of the PlayersDB. I confess I'm still too much of a novice with H3 to tell the difference--to be honest, at this point, one of the biggest reasons I like the PlayersDB is simply that it lists the years of service and country in the name of each platform, which is very convenient.

 

Mark

Actually, all this leads to a related set of questions. Aside from the PlayersDB, which appears to be a taboo subject here, the choices I'm offered in the database manager (that is so convenient...thank you, whoever thought of that...) are...

 

ANW DB 2.4.3

Harpoon 3 Standard Database

HUD3 1.5.0

 

A few quick questions...

 

1) What are the pros and cons of each one? Or, if they're all equally good, what the main differences between them? Or, are they all pretty much the same and it's just a matter of personal taste?

 

2) More or less, how many scenarios are available for each one?

 

3) In the general opinion of the Harpoon community, which is emerging as the current "standard" for people writing scenarios? I'd like my scenarios, when I get around to writing them, to be as accessible to people as I can make them. (Of course, with the database manager, it probably doesn't matter much, but I'm curious if one database has emerged as "the one most people use" or not.)

 

Thanks.

 

Mark

Okay, I'm an idiot. Sorry. I didn't realize that the H3 Standard and HUD 3 databases sort entries by country when you add a unit. I was just looking at the database view which lumped them all together.

 

Hmmm...the HUD 3 appears to have many goodies in that don't show up in the standard database...

 

If anyone has any other remarks about the various databases, pros and cons, etc., I would certainly appreciate it. Thanks.

 

More questions and comments later...

 

Thanks again to everyone for all the help.

 

Mark

I'd offer my vote of support for the HUD3 database.

 

IMHO, Darren really cares about the game, has a longstanding connection with it, and a strong knowledge of both the game mechanics and the platforms that make a database what it is.

I'd offer my vote of support for the HUD3 database.

 

IMHO, Darren really cares about the game, has a longstanding connection with it, and a strong knowledge of both the game mechanics and the platforms that make a database what it is.

 

I continue to build scens and play using the PlayersDB.

 

main reasons are the great support I get in creating new platforms for new scenarios (just got HMS Tiger added), the great support in testing, the fact there are so many great scens out and last but not least the availability, now since a few years, of a nearly continuously operational Multiplayer server.

Of course after a while you get used to a database and tend to stick with it, as that minimizes the maintenance work needed too.

 

Freek

First set of questions...

 

I plotted a course for the American ship but it is not moving when the game starts. What do I need to do to fix this?

 

When you create a scenario, each side needs to be 'told' what to do. To accomplish this, you need to set up missions for each side. In your particular case you need to set up a transit type mission [if you are simply going from Point A to Point B] or a patrol mission [to loop around the waypoints]. This will give the AO [automatic operator, aka 'the computer'] something to do. It will automatically defend itself [providing that it can see the incoming weapons....sensors are also set during mission building].

 

I think a Protect victory condition is what I want--the US starts in a neutral posture and Venezuela is hostile and will attack; Victory would be achieved by the US simply by surviving, regardless of where the ship is--but it tells me every 30 minutes of game time that I've won. That's a bit annoying, especially if you're at something like 1 minute to 1 second compression. Is there any way to set a Protect Victory Condition so it waits until, say, the end of the scenario to see if you've managed to meet the victory condition?

 

The 'Protect' VC isn't very flexible for a human played side since you technically 'win' the VC from the outside since your unit is 100% intact. A 'Station' VC is more ideal if you are conducting a transit mission or a 'Protect Station' if you are conducting a patrol.

 

I suppose a Station victory condition might work, but I'm having a little trouble getting that to work properly. I will try it again and see what happens.

 

What kind of problems are you having with it?

 

Also keep in mind that all missions created by the scenario editor are deleted when the player selects that side. This allows the player to do things his own way and not have any help from the scenario editor.

 

Are you using a Tico with the Mk26 launcher or a VLS? This can greatly determine the balance of your scenario.

 

Later

D

Forgot to add:

 

http://wiki.computerharpoon.com/index.php?...tory_conditions

 

Has a description of the VCs in ANW.

 

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.

 

Later

D

ANW DB 2.4.3

Harpoon 3 Standard Database

HUD3 1.5.0

 

A few quick questions...

 

1) What are the pros and cons of each one? Or, if they're all equally good, what the main differences between them? Or, are they all pretty much the same and it's just a matter of personal taste?

 

2) More or less, how many scenarios are available for each one?

 

3) In the general opinion of the Harpoon community, which is emerging as the current "standard" for people writing scenarios? I'd like my scenarios, when I get around to writing them, to be as accessible to people as I can make them. (Of course, with the database manager, it probably doesn't matter much, but I'm curious if one database has emerged as "the one most people use" or not.)

Thanks to Dale for verifying at least partial validity for the below. The errors of course remain mine!

 

1) Standard Database (ODB) pretty safe to say is not to be used for new scenarios. The only updates it tends to see are the bare minimum to keep the related scenarios functioning. ANWDB (Dale's baby) is actively maintained. He tries to translate the H4 paper data faithfully to the game. Dale is responsive to requests when he isn't out sailing the seven seas (conversely when he is sailing the seven seas response may be sparse). HUD3 is Darren's beast. He takes an approach more focused on fitting the numbers to the results seen in the game. In general this means more thorough testing before he commits to an algorithm to convert his source data into game values. Darren has the grander ambitions and that is both good and bad. In general I would be writing scenarios with HUD3.

 

2) HUD3 close to 300 (many rebuilds of the stock scenarios), ODB around 150, ANWDB about 40.

 

3) There aren't a ton of new scenarios being written for public consumption outside of PDB-land. The idealist in me wants to see HUD3 be the DB of choice but over the longer-haul Dale with ANWDB has been more consistently with the game in the last few years. I personally would go with HUD3 but ANWDB may well do the trick for you, either way I don't think you'll go wrong. As for accessibility as you've surmised both ANWDB and HUD3 are plenty accessible.

As for VCs, ditch the Protect VC entirely, the CG's side can just have an On Station VC like Dale suggests with the duration set to the time required for the CG to survive and make the box either the whole map or the area in which you think the CG should stay during the course of the scen.

Thanks to Dale for verifying at least partial validity for the below. The errors of course remain mine!

 

1) Standard Database (ODB) pretty safe to say is not to be used for new scenarios. The only updates it tends to see are the bare minimum to keep the related scenarios functioning. ANWDB (Dale's baby) is actively maintained. He tries to translate the H4 paper data faithfully to the game. Dale is responsive to requests when he isn't out sailing the seven seas (conversely when he is sailing the seven seas response may be sparse). HUD3 is Darren's beast. He takes an approach more focused on fitting the numbers to the results seen in the game. In general this means more thorough testing before he commits to an algorithm to convert his source data into game values. Darren has the grander ambitions and that is both good and bad. In general I would be writing scenarios with HUD3.

 

2) HUD3 close to 300 (many rebuilds of the stock scenarios), ODB around 150, ANWDB about 40.

 

3) There aren't a ton of new scenarios being written for public consumption outside of PDB-land. The idealist in me wants to see HUD3 be the DB of choice but over the longer-haul Dale with ANWDB has been more consistently with the game in the last few years. I personally would go with HUD3 but ANWDB may well do the trick for you, either way I don't think you'll go wrong. As for accessibility as you've surmised both ANWDB and HUD3 are plenty accessible.

 

I think I will probably work with the HUD3 for a while. This is NOT meant as a judgment of ANY of the DBs beyond "what seems to work best on my machine." ANW is more stable than 3.63 for some reason. I have no idea why. Probably something to do with my machine and the 64-bit version of Windows 7. This was always a big obstacle for me when it came to earlier versions of H3. To be blunt, I'm lazy. I don't want to have to fiddle with my machine or reinstall stuff every time I want to play a game. ANW has solved these problems for me. As for the database, HUD3 and ANWDB are equally easy to use, but HUD3 seems to have a few more "toys" to play with. : )

 

Completely different question (more along the line of "lessons I am learning as I go")...

 

Rolands are pretty much useless against cruise missiles, aren't they?

 

I noticed that when I ran my second trial scenario (Phibron heads to Venezuela to blow up airfield) and I pop off four Tomahawks from the SSN Scranton. (No, I don't know why a Phibron has an SSN with it...Actually, it makes sense, but I just do what the GlobalSecurity website says and what the voices in my head tell me to do, okay?) Anyway, the missiles level the airfield in short order. End of scenario. I figured out how to attach the Rolands to the airfield, making it a Group. This did not help. And, of course, since the Venezuelan planes are on the airstrip, blowing it up eliminates most of them before they get airborne, and they really are the main thing that could hurt the Phibron.

 

Now, when I added SA-15s (I assume the Russians sold the Venezuelans some)...okay, THAT took down the Tomahawks.

 

In other words, what I'm learning is that the gods of war did not create all SAMs equal. : )

 

More comments and questions later...

 

Thanks again for all the help so far.

 

Mark