Wish List Thread

[sandy61]

Here is another, what about the ability to turn on only aircraft radars and not the ship radars when you have a formation. This would allow you to position a Hawkeye with a Ageis cruiser in the same formation sector but leave the ship radar quiet while the aircraft radar could search, leaving the ship un-detectable to ESM but provide fire support when needed.

If you have already answered questions like these, I apologize, I'm new to this forum and haven't searched all the threads yet.

[TonyE]

ORIGINAL: T6Simtek

Here is another, what about the ability to turn on only aircraft radars and not the ship radars when you have a formation. This would allow you to position a Hawkeye with a Ageis cruiser in the same formation sector but leave the ship radar quiet while the aircraft radar could search, leaving the ship un-detectable to ESM but provide fire support when needed.

If you have already answered questions like these, I apologize, I'm new to this forum and haven't searched all the threads yet.

You can set sensor status manually from the Unit window. There is also a trick using Intermittent sensor settings to turn on the sensors only in specified rings of the formation editor. Otherwise what you want indeed doesn't exist yet.

This may be a good time to invite you to start a wishlist at HarpGamer. I find them easier to keep track of when there is one list per person in a fairly repeatable format. http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?showforum=35

[sandy61]

I signed up on that forum board earlier today. Thanks TonyE

[archman78]

utilisaeur version of the harpoon 1 with all extensions has the EC,
I'm very disappointed the contents of the update 8.44 is indeed the establishment of the library is not complete version of the EC + 024 +044.
windows are low bmp def Neutral ..
There is more animation and only the very poor is maintained.
Ship too are not displayed in bookstores .. .. no troops no ground operation to rescue .. .. elements justifying the integration of harpoon in its EC.
I think now pass a version
NavyFleet or the full version of the Harpoon HQE running it better.
- 1 videos are always indispensable
- 2 at the time of Google Earth or are the cards ..
congratulations on the aspect of the EC under vista
very clean in Upper def even if the game is
tros graphically poor
or navy

[VictorInThePacific]

however I discussed your issue with another member of the harpoon community and he gets around it by the following:

"- go into F3
- then I go de-select the "Enter New Legs" box
- Now, the "Prev" key turns black and I can use it
- I hit Prev until I get to Waypoint #1
- at this time, I hit the "Insert" command
- and insert a waypoint that leads in the other direction
- that new waypoint is now #1
- once the torp attack is over, I can go in and delete Waypoint #1 and the rest of the course works"

Just a work around until the wish might perhaps be granted

Hope that works for you in the interim?

I don't exactly see this as a workaround. I believe that this is the main reason why the "insert" command exists.

It's been there since the beginning (Harpoon Classic). It's a bit harder to figure out the interface procedure in HCE, but not too hard. After all, after just a few days with HCE (and a huge amount of time with HC), I was able to figure it out in HCE, without documentation or assistance.

On the other hand, I knew the procedure used to exist, so I was looking for it. In HC, the procedure is completely obvious. If someone's first Harpoon experience is HCE, they would probably not figure it out unassisted because it is a bit obscure.

So I would recommend that the procedure should simply be added to the documentation, and for all I know, it might already be there.

[VictorInThePacific]

1) My biggest wish involves formation manuevering.
Right now and since the very beginning of Harpoon, when a ship formation changes course, the units just pivot in place. So those very capable ASW units you had out in front are , depending on the angle of the turn, off to the side somewhere (In a 180, they are now trailing the formation), and the whole thing is in disarray.
I would like to see the formation follow the line of advance by rotating the entire formation around the main body the appropriate number of degrees. I had suggested this back in the days of Harpoon 2002 Gold but it didn't seem doable then.

I think that this is the responsibility of the fleet commander and the individual ship captains. Who, in the game, happen to be the same entity as the theater commander and so forth.

When I do small-angle course changes, I generally don't change the formation. When I do large-angle course changes (which I tend to avoid), I spend a fair bit of time in the formation editor maneuvering the units around so that their locations are commensurate with the new course. It may take several iterations. It really is a part of naval warfare.
And, although ships can't collide in Harpoon , I generally make sure that the ship icons don't collide !

I just read a very interesting book about the Battle of Tsushima (THE FLEET THAT HAD TO DIE by Richard Hough). It is shown there how a large part of the Russian defeat was caused by the fact that the Russian fleet was almost incapable of doing anything more complex than moving in nearly-straight lines, while the Japanese fleet could perfectly perform extremely complex formation maneuvers right in the middle of battle.

2) Ammo reloads for surface units when they pull into ports, just like aircraft do when they land.

good idea

[VictorInThePacific]

Right, bingo fuel is the point where an a/c should return to base and still have a 10% fuel reserve for any delays in landing.

Actually I would be curious to know if this is a definition, either for purposes of Harpoon or in real life.

I did some measurements with HC, and I still have the data, but really, there is so much going on in Harpoon that you don't really have time to figure it out. Not that it's really important.

[VictorInThePacific]

Here's one thing that I think would add not only enjoyment but realism to the game. When you have dedicated certain aircraft to be on a CAP in your formation editor, it would be great if, when they have expended their primary missiles, the game gave you an option to return them to the ship/base to resupply. What ends up happening, especially in large scenarios (which I prefer ), is that your CAP exhausts it's primary weapons, ( AMRAAM, Sparrow, Phoenix ect. ) leaving only last ditch Sidewinders or just the Cannon Bursts. Then, another threat appears but you have no realistic weapon left and your in TROUBLE! And at the same time, you have many aircraft left at the base/ship that could have been placed on your CAP in replacement of the planes that have used up their missiles. Make sense?

Steve, your post seems to indicate that you are looking for an automatic procedure that requires no input from you whatsoever. I have no suggestions in that regard.

But here is a suggestion which requires only a small amount of effort, although it is definitely a workaround.

1) You detect a threat approaching <the thing that you have CAP for>.

2) At some point you decide to allocate specific airplane resources to deal with that threat eg. one fighter per attacking fighter or per 4 attacking bombers.

3) Select the threat group and use the attack/intercept command.

4) Allocate resources to deal with the threat. The list of resources will include aircraft in formations.

5) Afterwards, you will have new separate air groups sitting around doing nothing (and they may even draw your attention to this) and probably carrying nothing. These can be sent back to base.

6) I believe that what you pulled out of the formation may actually be automatically replaced from the reserve; otherwise you will have to do it manually.

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific

6) I believe that what you pulled out of the formation may actually be automatically replaced from the reserve; otherwise you will have to do it manually.

It is replaced automatically if planes are available.

[VictorInThePacific]

First, I noticed in the WestPac battle-set (I'm not sure about the other battle-sets) that when I launch aircraft to attack a particular base or ship group, after the planes have launched their weapons, they keep flying at the enemy instead of heading back to base. What would be great is if, after the aircraft have launched their weapons, there would be a pop-up that would ask you if the aircraft should continue on course or return to base. This would be nice because depending on the attacking aircraft, I may want to change their mission. Otherwise, if it is a large and complicated scenario with many things happening at the same time, you may have your planes shot down needlessly!

Steve, you specifically mention large and complicated scenarios, so what I am about to suggest will be of no use.

However, I have found that you often have to pay very close attention to what exactly aircraft do near the attack range. For example, you are attacking a 3 nm-range SAM site with 4 nm-range Hellfires. You definitely want your aircraft to park at exactly 4 nm from the target and THEN fire. In small scenarios or critical situations (small attacker-defender range advantage), I will micromanage this, by selecting the attacking air group and either using the "attack" or "course" commands. In either case, you are told the exact point at which you can first fire.

In real life, however, most aircraft cannot simply instantaneously drop all forward momentum.

[VictorInThePacific]

Harpoon has always had such a great "potential", but it's always never been seized. 3 full versions and since the first version the same problems remains (and hence why it is where it is today) - graphics, graphic, graphics. It's not something that can be casually dismissed as "yea, but that's a lot of work". That "busy" work is THE reason Harpoon is where it is today. ALL modern applications seriously address graphics - EVEN WORD PROCESSORS! Harpoon was abandoned en-mass by the community (customer / major game investment) bar-none for lack of asthetic appeal (i.e. loss of immersion / user friendly UI - especially required for complex environments).

And then there's someone like me. I am today (2009) running Harpoon Classic on a Power Mac. Due to lack of memory, I can't even use color. Yes, people, all units are simply primitive black or white icons.

The reason this works for me is because for me, the whole game/simulation is about the complex of ideas that represent the situation. The icons are simply physical representations of the abstract ideas that exist in some abstract space.

There are games I play purely for the graphics. Harpoon is something else.

Just as an aside, and I doubt that anyone here will know what I am talking about: Fifth Frontier War map.

OK, I will relent (primarily because I found this with a 5 s Google search):

http://www.jtas.net/travelleratlas/Fift ... r/War.html

and

http://www.jtas.net/travelleratlas/Fift ... r_Map.html

which is pretty much the most beautiful map I have ever seen, and it uses only the most basic color palette.

[VictorInThePacific]

while it hurts me personally to hear you speak of the work I've done as if it is nothing I'd rather hear it and at least have a chance to know about it than not ever knowing.

Tony, due to the previous post, I need to say this. You (and Brad, and Herman, and probably Freek) are the Harpoon gods (and I apologize if I slight anybody). Without you there would BE no Harpoon.

I am running Harpoon Classic (black and white) on an old PowerMac. I cannot at present upgrade either my hardware or software. (But I have accessed the HCE demo.) This is one of the reasons why some of my previous posts have left people wondering what I was talking about (there are a few incompatiblities with HCE, in particular the sonar system).

I first got into this forum a few weeks ago, when I did a Google search on some questions I had about Harpoon Classic. I have found here an enormous amount of valuable information, and that's one of the main things I care about.

Gentlemen, I am extremely impressed with your work.

Victor In The Pacific

[VictorInThePacific]

2) <dead horse> SAM control </dead horse>. I like the ability to control global SAM fire rates/engagement ranges. I'd like this to be granular to the individual platform and be able tell a platform not to fire SAMs (besides turning their radar off). Better yet I'd like to be able to issue engagement priorities to each platform - not issue orders for SAM fire itself, just limit a platform as what to target its' SAMs at.

Example - Select the Bunker Hill in the unit window, click the SAM control button in it's Details window and scroll down/map click to tell it to concentrate on Missile Group XYZ. It would do this until Missile Group XYZ ceased to exist and then go back to automatic mode.

Some sort of graphic next to the icon in the unit window, like the lightning bolt used for jamming, would indicate that a platform is under individual SAM control and would help management. ("Why doesn't the Bunker Hill fire! Oh yeah, I told it not too!")

I think that the computer SAM control routines are inadequate. I haven't tested it out in depth in HCE, but the way it is in HC is sufficiently bad that if it is that way in real life, the system designers should be shot for treason.

How many 2-letter words starting with i did I just use?

[VictorInThePacific]

1) There may be a case for better graphics, but the Harpoon series of games is surely aimed at a relatively small niche market: naval personnel and serious stragegists/tacticians. The average commercial computer game is designed for high initial sales, with a much shorter commercial life. Games come and games go, but products like Harpoon, Steel Panthers, Combat Mission and the Campaign series will always be around due to their basic excellence. Even with the advent of super whizzo 3D graphics, there is still nothing to touch them.

agree

2) The cartoon ship graphics showing missiles being fired, and incoming may be crude but in my humble opinion, they are very effective indeed! This may be the wrong forum for this, but would sombody in authority please consider including them in H3ANW in a future patch? I much prefer them to the launch and strike videos and when one of your ships takes incoming fire, the cartoon graphic really brings it home to you that the symbol being attacked is really an actual vessel.

agree

[CV32]

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific

Harpoon was abandoned en-mass by the community (customer / major game investment) bar-none for lack of asthetic appeal (i.e. loss of immersion / user friendly UI - especially required for complex environments).

Must be happening in an alternate bizarro universe somewhere. [:D]

[Vincenzo_Beretta]

ORIGINAL: VictorInThePacific
Just as an aside, and I doubt that anyone here will know what I am talking about: Fifth Frontier War map.

I did. My first space wargame, actually, back in the late '70s [:)]

[Firebird]

Gents,
I must confess that my background is the Air Force, so my wish is from something that we used to practice all the time and would be useful for saving valuable resources in the game.
I would like there to be a Survival Scramble option for all air bases. When this was actioned all the aircraft on the ground would immediately, and singularly get airborne at the earliest opportunity and fly to a preset area to avoid loss on the ground. You could also designate zones from the base where the holding area would be.
In an ideal world you could also break this down so for example you could place fighters in the threat axis and strike aircraft, or AWACS away from it. I realize though that this breakdown may be just too much for coding to be done.
Could this done?

[TonyE]

ORIGINAL: Firebird
Could this done?

Such a thing could be done. Such a thing is highly unlikely to be done given the time required for the reward. Plus it is awfully easy to flush all of your birds manually, split em once they are airborne and proceed.

[YankeeAirRat]

I have found it easy to simulate the scramble option via launching groups of two into various patrol points near the base. That way if needed I can then send them to land at another base if their "home" was destroyed. I have found flights of two aircraft take really quick when compared to trying a mass launch of everything and then trying to split the group.

[VictorInThePacific]

I would like there to be a Survival Scramble option for all air bases. When this was actioned all the aircraft on the ground would immediately, and singularly get airborne at the earliest opportunity and fly to a preset area to avoid loss on the ground.

A comment about this, and notwithstanding Tony's previous reply:

I think that this is pretty important in particular for the AI.

If a human player is about to lose an airbase, you have options. I need to ask you, if your base is about to be wiped out, or even if it is about to damaged, why do you still have ANY aircraft on the ground? They should have been in the air long ago, doing something useful.

But how many times are you attacking a computer base, and the AI just leaves its planes on the ground to die? I suppose if you're just doing small amounts of damage, the planes are not really at serious risk, but if the base is about to get blown up, the AI should certainly be doing a survival scramble.

I show an example of this problem in fairly gory detail in my "No Man's Land" AAR. Playing as the Soviet player, I was significantly outnumbered in aircraft quality-wise, if not quantity-wise (but my surface force was vastly superior to the NATO one). What I did was spend the first part of the scenario grinding down one of the NATO bases with MANY airstrikes with second-rate aircraft. During the course of this, the AI never figured out what I was doing. I was not able to kill very many airplanes on the ground. However, when the final airstrike went in, I destroyed a bunch of them, and this is when they definitely should have scrambled. Well, perhaps they were all re-arming. Since the planes on the other NATO airbase took essentially no part in the battle, I was able to freely dismantle the NATO fleet in the second part of the scenario.

Now I am not offering to do any programming, and I think that Harpoon does an excellent job of simulating this type of combat, but I have to say that this is a flaw in the AI that a human can always take advantage of.