Mgellis Posted October 14, 2012 Report Share Posted October 14, 2012 Whenever I try to use ASROCs (e.g., RUR-5s) I cannot seem to get them to fire. Other torpedos work fine, but not the ASROCs. I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong (or if they were just a lemon as far as the technology goes and malfunctioned all the time in real life) or if there is a database error, but I figured I should report it. Thanks. Mark ANW HUD 4 v1.1 b10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunny Posted October 14, 2012 Report Share Posted October 14, 2012 I've found what's going on. ASROC has flag "limited to mount arc" enabled. It means that if your mount has a firing arc left on the ship, it won't fire at a contact right of the ship. Most efficient trick is to fire from the expected mount arc. FG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mgellis Posted October 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2012 I've found what's going on. ASROC has flag "limited to mount arc" enabled. It means that if your mount has a firing arc left on the ship, it won't fire at a contact right of the ship. Most efficient trick is to fire from the expected mount arc. FG Have you been able to get it to fire? I tried with a sample scenario...got a Reasoner within 3 miles a Ming, lined up the sub on my port bow (which is what the database says is the right arc), clicked the attack button (and the MK16 was the weapon that the AI auto-selected as the right one to use), and fired...and nothing happened. Later, when I attacked again, it was clear the first ASROC had not fired because I still had six in the mount (one selected to fire and five more available). Is there anything else that might be causing this to happen? Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunny Posted October 14, 2012 Report Share Posted October 14, 2012 I think I have the issue... Need to BOL the weapon. IE, launch the weapon in the estimated bearing of the sub, and then it will activate its own sensors to pick the target. FG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunny Posted October 14, 2012 Report Share Posted October 14, 2012 Finally, I may have found what the issue is: early ASROC variants have no "far surface Probability of Kill" opposite to later. Corrected for HUD4 v1.11. Since it's a real issue, 1.11 will be released IMMEDIATELY after 3.11. FG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mgellis Posted October 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2012 Thanks, Gunny! Any news on when 3.11 will finally be out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunny Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 I have no idea of when it will be. My guess is that it won't be before Tuesday, since Matrix will upgrade its servers. Anyway, HUD4 1.1 files (ex beta 10) are into Matrix hands as we speak. FG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncepulido Posted October 15, 2012 Report Share Posted October 15, 2012 Some 15 years ago or so I tried to model 1898 Hispano-American ships in Harpoon 2, but a lot of bugs forced me to quit that game variant, and now I think I've less spare time to do any attempt to return to ANW, perhaps in 15 years more or so .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSF Posted January 1, 2013 Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 Built a small test scenario, ASROC armed US DD Spruance vs. a Soviet Tango SSK. ASROCs don´t fire. Using the latest db version, which should be of Dec. 23rd, but looks like Nov. 24th. Definitely an db issue I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mgellis Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 Gunny sent me a couple of rough updates to test and I was finally able to get the ASROCs to fire (at least, on the four or five ships I tested) and this fix should be part of the next update (HUD-4 v1.12?) but I don't know when Gunny is going to release that. He may be trying to incorporate as many fixes, updates, new platforms, etc. as he can before he does that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunny Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 This will be part of the last 1.11 update. I don't know when I'll send it. FG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mgellis Posted January 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 This will be part of the last 1.11 update. I don't know when I'll send it. FG One minor quibble...I would recommend that whenever a change is made to the database that a new version number is created rather than simply updating the file. My concern is that simply updating the file could cause confusion as there will now be a couple of different versions of the database with the same number--scenarios might not get updated because people think they already have the right database and then will not be able to play the scenario. It isn't that hard to figure out what's wrong, of course, but it might create frustration for some players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunny Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 My preference goes to changing number when big changes occur: 1.1 when the mine flag was added, 1.11 when official release came with a lot of corrections were brought, then next big thing, 1.12 will be when I'll have the new HUD4 signatures' calculation enforced for every platform. FG . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSF Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 This will be part of the last 1.11 update. I don't know when I'll send it. FG Gunny, is it really a good idea to wait with an update so long when such a major flaw was detected? I´m no db guy thus I can´t say how much time this costs. But no-functioning weapons, be them Mavericks or ASROCs are a real show stopper. IMO those should be corrected with an own small release. The logical number for that would be 1.12; the next large update 1.20. These are the usual conventions when it comes to versions IIRC. Just my 2c but why should anybody write an ASW scenario with ASROC armed US destroyers knowing they don´t work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mgellis Posted January 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 This will be part of the last 1.11 update. I don't know when I'll send it. FG Gunny, is it really a good idea to wait with an update so long when such a major flaw was detected? I´m no db guy thus I can´t say how much time this costs. But no-functioning weapons, be them Mavericks or ASROCs are a real show stopper. IMO those should be corrected with an own small release. The logical number for that would be 1.12; the next large update 1.20. These are the usual conventions when it comes to versions IIRC. Just my 2c but why should anybody write an ASW scenario with ASROC armed US destroyers knowing they don´t work? The biggest problem is when it is a surprise. Most ships with ASROC actually have other ASW weapons, so the failure of the ASROC usually does not render the destroyer helpless, although those extra 6 torpedoes are often a welcome addition to your firepower, especially if you are otherwise limited to four or six boxed torpedoes with no reloads. If you know the ASROC isn't available, though, you just plan around it, the way I imagine a real captain would plan around it if he knew he had a mechanical failure on his ship but had to go into action anyway. I had actually been planning on just side-stepping the ASROCs by unloading them with the logistics control and adding a note in the scenario orders explaining that they were not available. That way people would have known they had to plan around that limitation. Now that the error looks like it has been resolved, I won't have to do that. Personally, I think we should have a "call for database testers." It is a simple matter to set up a "test platforms" scenario and just run through the various weapons, etc. to see which ones work and which ones have issues. But there are a huge number of platforms and most of them are fine so it is easy to miss the ones that need corrections. Gunny will still have to make the corrections, as I think he is the only one who can actually edit the database, but if we had a group of people working through the platforms in a coordinated way, we'd be able to get more information to Gunny more quickly and more efficiently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.