The Love that didn´t last....

[Kallekula]

At the start I loved this simulator and I still see a great potential, but!:

It crashes ALL_THE_TIME! I have yet to exit the application normally ONCE! what the F***! I paid Money for this, make it work! I am running this on a MSI GT70 with all the bells and whistles.

I can´t get the SOSUS to work, the same goes for many of the SAM´s. Is there a manual that slipped me by?

If in Beyound Visual range A-A engagement and run out of BV-missiles then it should be considered winchester and RTB but instead it goes in for the suicide run, bad logic.

I suggest that one can check a box for main weapon for a mission or something because I often find (for example) F15K expend the SLAM-ER properly and go in for a presumed strafe run against an armored bat. Even if i order the planes manually to RTB, after an Air to air refuel the orders are forgotten and the planes are coming back in

Since you started to charge a well rounded price for this, we expect more [:@]

...I would hate to see you trip on the finishing line since you have done a lot to make it the best real time sim out there [&o]

[mikmykWS]

Hi Kallekula


Sorry you're having a hard time with this and certainly don't want you to be frustrated with it.

In terms of the crashes:

Can you confirm that you've got the prerequisites installed? You can do this manually by going into your prerequisites folder

Have you been installing the updates. Please click the update button on your matrix launcher if not.

If you're still getting crashes please post a screenshot if possible. We really do want your game to run well and this will help us.


For the SOSUS and SAM's just post your files and I'll take a look. A little more detail into what is not happening will help us solve the issue or provide better instructions.

On the F-15k issue do you have your Winchester ROE set to on or off?

Thanks!

Mike

[Kallekula]

It seems indeed that I have the latest DirectX installed on my computer aswell as the .Net 4.5

I have the 1.02 version installed

The screenshot would be rather pointless since the process hangs and then just doesn´t respond.

Regarding the SAM´s I just put them on the map (The french SAMP/T works fine but others that I try doesn´t respond to enemies flying overhead.

The SOSUS I just Place on the seabed but nothing happens. I tried to add the SOSUS bunker but it doesn´t seem to work. I run hostile submarines around and over the arrays but to no avail [&:]

[mikmykWS]

Thanks for replying Kallekula.

ORIGINAL: Kallekula

It seems indeed that I have the latest DirectX installed on my computer aswell as the .Net 4.5

I have the 1.02 version installed

The screenshot would be rather pointless since the process hangs and then just doesn´t respond.

Any particular scenario? I'd like to see if I can get it on my computer.

Regarding the SAM´s I just put them on the map (The french SAMP/T works fine but others that I try doesn´t respond to enemies flying overhead.

Okay depends on what the SAM type is but you may need to add a radar to that side so that SAM sees the target and you may have to adjust your ROE's (Engage non hostile means the SAM doesn't have to get an ID before firing) to allow the SAM to fire at the target. The ROE Is particular important if the SAM or radars detection capabilities are limited. Please also make sure their your radar is active and that the plane is actually in the engagement range of the SAM missile.

The SOSUS I just Place on the seabed but nothing happens. I tried to add the SOSUS bunker but it doesn´t seem to work. I run hostile submarines around and over the arrays but to no avail [&:]

Okay just tested the the Bottom fixed array (SOSUS) works but its not 100% and we may need to increase the sensitivity. Will take a look.

Hope this helps and please let me know if there is anything else I can help you with.

Mike

[Stevechase]

ORIGINAL: Kallekula

It seems indeed that I have the latest DirectX installed on my computer aswell as the .Net 4.5

I have the 1.02 version installed

The screenshot would be rather pointless since the process hangs and then just doesn´t respond.

Regarding the SAM´s I just put them on the map (The french SAMP/T works fine but others that I try doesn´t respond to enemies flying overhead.

The SOSUS I just Place on the seabed but nothing happens. I tried to add the SOSUS bunker but it doesn´t seem to work. I run hostile submarines around and over the arrays but to no avail [&:]
Kallekula,
If you will give the Devs the info I am confident they will resolve the issues. Hang in there. There can be some things not working as should be, but not due to shoddy design. Sims of this complexity can have some things fall through the cracks. But your posting will help resolve some of those issues. So good catch.

[Kallekula]

I Think the crash is due to lack of memory which I doubt is an issue stemming from the computer since I have 12gb of RAM. Perhaps there is a problem with memory allocation?

I have Another issue that at least the MH-60R won't take on Sonobuoys even if they are there in the ship Magazines. I placed two MH-60R on the Carlo Bergamini an added loadouts (but they show up on the heli once on patrol)

Also a MAD search with the P3 or P8 would to my knowledge take Place at 200ft, for ASW patrols the altitude should probably be set thereabout.

Here something where I Think you made a change, perhaps you too can elaborate:Land units are normally quite dispersed, perhaps this should not be about damage Points if that's currently the case. It shouldn't make a difference whether you bomb a tank platoon with an mk 82 or mk 83 for example. You would want there to be a matter of hitting all the tanks given the probabilities, with a bonus for submunition dispensers.

Best regards

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Kallekula

I Think the crash is due to lack of memory which I doubt is an issue stemming from the computer since I have 12gb of RAM. Perhaps there is a problem with memory allocation?

We expect to have an update out in a day or so that resolves the crash. Please do try it when it appears and let us know if you are still experiencing the issue.

I have Another issue that at least the MH-60R won't take on Sonobuoys even if they are there in the ship Magazines. I placed two MH-60R on the Carlo Bergamini an added loadouts (but they show up on the heli once on patrol)

I'll take a look.

Also a MAD search with the P3 or P8 would to my knowledge take Place at 200ft, for ASW patrols the altitude should probably be set thereabout.

Ok

Here something where I Think you made a change, perhaps you too can elaborate:Land units are normally quite dispersed, perhaps this should not be about damage Points if that's currently the case. It shouldn't make a difference whether you bomb a tank platoon with an mk 82 or mk 83 for example. You would want there to be a matter of hitting all the tanks given the probabilities, with a bonus for submunition dispensers.

Best regards

Armored, Mech and artillery units have dispersal values set internally while infantry is a whole damage point type unit. You'll really notice it when using unguided cluster munitions.

[mrfeizhu]

The game crashes some times, just start it up from the auto save, the game is like wives, girl friends and kids, its a work in progress. Enjoy your time with it.

[Dimitris]

The term "work in progress" has been abused to death here, let's stop this. This is like saying that any car brand that gets an updated model is a work in progress.

[Kallekula]

I try to add satellites but nothing happens

I also tried the OV-1D Mohawk with the SLAR but it seems unable to pick up armored formations

Something I do like is how simple it was to add the extra 16 VLS cells for the Carlo bergamini that it has provisions for.

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Kallekula

I try to add satellites but nothing happens

Which satellites? Did you zoom out and make sure they're not at the poles? They don't work like normal units that you can manipulate but are anchored to orbits.

I also tried the OV-1D Mohawk with the SLAR but it seems unable to pick up armored formations

What alt, speed, etc? Was the armored group behind a mountain, in a valley etc?

I'll follow up and check this out but this stuff does help us if there is a problem.

Something I do like is how simple it was to add the extra 16 VLS cells for the Carlo bergamini that it has provisions for.

Great[:)]

[Kallekula]

I have a mission set in 1984 and checked the box for all the US satellites but they don't show up anywhere

[mikmykWS]

Works fine here although very few in the database for that year. You may want to try drilling down past the first level of folders.

M

[bgeery]

@Kallekula - Most of your comments and problems seem to come from a complete lack on knowledge of the game. Have you spent time here reading the threads, or reading the manual cover to cover? I'd sure hate for you to be wasting Mike's and the rest time chasing "problems" caused by user error and ignorance. This is not a program you just fire up and dive into.

[erichswafford]

I've tried to recreate some of these problems and so far everything works as it should except for the SOSUS thing (maybe not sensitive enough?).

Anyone just getting started with making scenarios should start by modifying the ones already in the game. That helped me figure out a *lot* of complexities that I would have otherwise (mis)attributed to various bugs.

Honestly, if they stopped development now, I'd still be incredibly happy with what I've got. In less than 30 minutes, I whipped up an awesome sub-hunting scenario with conditional missions and random placement of assets. I've been dreaming of something like this since I set up my first Harpoon miniatures game in 1982.

[mrfeizhu]

"The term "work in progress" has been abused to death here, let's stop this. This is like saying that any car brand that gets an updated model is a work in progress."
Sorry i don't see the term a work in progress as a negative thing. Beta is negative and I think that if people complain about the price of the game to me that negative given the quality of the game and the work that goes into fixing problems and adding content.

[jdkbph]

mrfeizhu, I agree. I don't think the term "work in progress" implies anything negative, and I think it very much applies to this game at this point in time. The car analogy doesn't work: you buy a car and basically what you left the showroom with is about all you can expect, features and functionality-wise, from that point forward. Not so software... and this game in particular.


Clearly, given the work going on here by both the devs and the community (scenarios, database updates, new code builds several time per month, etc), this game is by no means finished. Again, that's not to say there's something wrong or that it's bad or to imply anything negative. It is very much to the dev's credit that they are so actively engaged in evolving, improving, expanding and refining this thing post-release.

That (to me) is what "work in progress" means... and that (to me) is a positive. I hope this game stays a "work in progress" for a very long time to come. But let me reiterate: even if it was finished and we're looking at the final state, it would still be leaps and bounds beyond anything else in the genre, and pretty much par for most games in general where it comes to quality (eg, bugs and general weirdness). I have no complaints, and nothing but praise for what I see happening here.

JD

[Blas de Lezo]

ORIGINAL: jdkbph

mrfeizhu, I agree. I don't think the term "work in progress" implies anything negative, and I think it very much applies to this game at this point in time. The car analogy doesn't work: you buy a car and basically what you left the showroom with is about all you can expect, features and functionality-wise, from that point forward. Not so software... and this game in particular.


Clearly, given the work going on here by both the devs and the community (scenarios, database updates, new code builds several time per month, etc), this game is by no means finished. Again, that's not to say there's something wrong or that it's bad or to imply anything negative. It is very much to the dev's credit that they are so actively engaged in evolving, improving, expanding and refining this thing post-release.

That (to me) is what "work in progress" means... and that (to me) is a positive. I hope this game stays a "work in progress" for a very long time to come. But let me reiterate: even if it was finished and we're looking at the final state, it would still be leaps and bounds beyond anything else in the genre, and pretty much par for most games in general where it comes to quality (eg, bugs and general weirdness). I have no complaints, and nothing but praise for what I see happening here.

JD

I agree totally.

[mikmykWS]

Thanks. I think[:)]

I think D's point is some positive communication would help us continue to be all those things. That's not a huge request.

Thanks!

Mike

[Kallekula]

Ok the satellites are solved in a symptomatic fashion: It wasn´t enough to click in the box for all US satellites, I had to go into the tree to click each satellite. How am I supposed to know that? I do love the immersive qualities of this simulator but there are thing that needs improvments and the crash frequency is at the top of that list for me. The crashes are much more frequent for Heavy scenarios though but maybe there should be a limit or at least a performance warning, I don´t see that as user error.