I know we have the option in the Scenario editor now. I also know there were some bugs with neutrals giving position reports to the enemy before. Are those and similar known bugs fixed?

 

If/when I start rewriting older DB stuff, I want to know if I can include neutrals with it and not mess up anything. Also, what would be the minimum GE/HCDB version they could be run under?

Clearly you should use the last DB, it's fixed and almost definitive because space limitations, and it has almost all the major platforms in the 1980-2015 time period. The World Wars and Cold War database lack yet some important platforms (as landing ships in the HCWW or many plane types in the HCCW).

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?/files/file/235-hcdb-120621-1980-2015-era/

For a long time ago when I design and test (usually intensive testing) my scenarios I've not noticied neutrals reporting the other side, and I use a lot of neutral "merchants" and "biological" submarines.

 

Edited correct name of DBs and time period.

Clearly you should use the last DB, it's fixed and almost definitive because space limitations, and it has almost all the major platforms in the 1980-1975 time period. The World Wars and Cold War database lack yet some important platforms (as landing ships in the WWDB or many plane types in the CWDB).

 

Guys, please use the databases' proper names. The HCE World Wars Database is abbreviated HCWW, not WWDB, and the HCE Cold War Database is abbreviated HCCW, not CWDB.

 

It may seem like a small thing, but the last thing I want to be doing is trying to explain to new players over and over again that these aren't multiple different databases. Consistency is everything.

 

There are dedicated threads for requesting additions to these various databases, if you are needing something for a scenario you have in the works especially.

 

Btw, the HCDB covers the 1980-2015 time period (roughly). I expect that was a typo, but again, just to clarify.

Clearly you should use the last DB, it's fixed and almost definitive because space limitations, and it has almost all the major platforms in the 1980-1975 time period. The World Wars and Cold War database lack yet some important platforms (as landing ships in the WWDB or many plane types in the CWDB).

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?/files/file/235-hcdb-120621-1980-2015-era/

For a long time ago when I design and test (usually intensive testing) my scenarios I've not noticied neutrals reporting the other side, and I use a lot of neutral "merchants" and "biological" submarines.

Sorry, I should have said 'minimum version of HCDB' to use neutrals. I'm currently using the latest myself. Thanks for the info that they work great for you! Still wondering what minimum version of the GE recognizes neutrals. Thinking of what notes to put on any rebuilt scenarios I post.

 

And Brad, any 'rebuilt' scenarios from original or HDS battlesets would be built using the HCDB. I might use the HCCW for something older at some point, but I doubt it. Same for HCWW. I'm happy to use it to play a scenario, but I probably won't write one for it.

 

Now, while I'm mentioning DBs, I'll toss in a derail. Does the HCDA have anything particularly that the HCDB doesn't cover? Or has it been mostly overtaken now, too? (I don't think that's your creation, Brad?)

 

I looked at the HCCW, noticed it says 50-75, and HCDB says 80-2015. Should we fill the 75-80 gap, or would we not miss anything in that gap anyway?

 

Clearly you should use the last DB, it's fixed and almost definitive because space limitations, and it has almost all the major platforms in the 1980-1975 time period. The World Wars and Cold War database lack yet some important platforms (as landing ships in the WWDB or many plane types in the CWDB).

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?/files/file/235-hcdb-120621-1980-2015-era/

For a long time ago when I design and test (usually intensive testing) my scenarios I've not noticied neutrals reporting the other side, and I use a lot of neutral "merchants" and "biological" submarines.

Sorry, I should have said 'minimum version of HCDB' to use neutrals. I'm currently using the latest myself. Thanks for the info that they work great for you! Still wondering what minimum version of the GE recognizes neutrals. Thinking of what notes to put on any rebuilt scenarios I post.

 

Neutrals were introduced long ago with the boxed version. You can find updates and corrections to the neutrals' behaviour in the Release Notes file in your HCE directory.

Neutrals were introduced long ago with the boxed version. You can find updates and corrections to the neutrals' behaviour in the Release Notes file in your HCE directory.

Good to know, then. There are various merchants running around *some* scenarios that would seem to be neutral, while others are 'definitely belligerent'. Nice tool to use.

Now, while I'm mentioning DBs, I'll toss in a derail. Does the HCDA have anything particularly that the HCDB doesn't cover? Or has it been mostly overtaken now, too? (I don't think that's your creation, Brad?)

 

I looked at the HCCW, noticed it says 50-75, and HCDB says 80-2015. Should we fill the 75-80 gap, or would we not miss anything in that gap anyway?

 

The HCE Americas Database (HCDA) is also mine. It covers North and South America, and has many units that do not appear in the HCDB, particularly those from the Caribbean, Latin America and South America in addition to major units from major nations.

 

The gap between 1975 and 1980 in my database work is largely intentional, because I wanted to cover roughly 25 year periods and we don't miss much in those 5 years in any event.

Neutrals are still far from perfect. The 2010+ series of game engines set out to remedy that (among other things) but that required lots of unstable builds as opposed to the stable but more limited 2009.### series. We weren't able to maintain any kind of testing momentum with those unstable builds so I abandoned them last year but naturally would like to revive them at some point if there is enough interest.

Neutrals are still far from perfect. The 2010+ series of game engines set out to remedy that (among other things) but that required lots of unstable builds as opposed to the stable but more limited 2009.### series. We weren't able to maintain any kind of testing momentum with those unstable builds so I abandoned them last year but naturally would like to revive them at some point if there is enough interest.

 

I guess my criteria for 'good enough to use' would be:

 

1) no position reports from neutrals to either side

2) no changing to enemy out of the blue and firing on me, unless I fire on them first.

 

Anything else shouldn't be an issue, unless I missed something obvious.

I do remember feeling hard done by in a particular scenario when I was being given away to the enemy by a neutral whale. Of course neutrals in history haven't always been all that neutral so far as intelligence gathering goes.

So far as including them in scenarios, at best they are little more than a teaser for so long as you have a partial contact (yellow and 'uncertainty' region showing). There appears to be no 'points against you' for blowing them out of the water which is kind of a shame as that is in my mind the point of having them - make you hesitant until positive ID.

From memory you can launch an attack on a neutral if you don't have an exact fix on it (ie it is still showing up yellow). I think Greenpeace had me on their hit list for a while I was spreading blubber all over the oceans:)