Thread for DB3000 database problems, updates or issues

[Rongor]

Hi there! Me again[:)]
Today I suggest to add the Bangladeshi Durjoy-class corvettes. These are quite new and in some way a downscaled derivate the chinese Type 056 corvettes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durjoy-class_corvette
Only two are completed so far. The newest one, BNS Nirmul, accompanied by F17 Ali Haider, just arrived in the mediterranean sea last weekend to join the UNIFIL-MTF.

[Lnestig]

First thanks for the steady stream of patches that you guys deliver, awesome.

Second, I've put in a request for this earlier but maybe it was lost in the massive number of posts here, the Swedish field artillery system ARCHER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_Artillery_System
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/archerhowitzer/

Third I wonder if the MHDS (mounted Helmet Display System) capacity is modeled in the game and if it is does JAS39 Gripen 2016- benefit from this yet? What I understand from different articles Swedish combat pilots are now testing MHD's giving IRIS-T missiles better capability to target enemy aircrafts.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/cob ... ens-03914/
https://sv-se.facebook.com/mhskarlberg/ ... comments=9
http://blogg.forsvarsmakten.se/flygvape ... erspektiv/

[Lnestig]

I forgot one and I understand that's it a bit tricky since most of it is secret but I would need HMS Orion for a scenario so please try your best.
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Orion_(A201)

[Lnestig]

A few more
The"new" Swedish HKP 16, I know it's the UH-60M Black Hawk, but if you have the time in the future add it will give some extra flavour to Swedish scenarios. It is fitted with a vinsch witch might not be on the US version.
If you decide to add it please add some swedish special forces troops (SOG) as passengers.
http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/informa ... kopter-16/

HMS Koster-class minehunter, upgraded Landsort-class
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/landsort/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koster-cla ... res_vessel

[mikmykWS]

Thanks!. Requests added to ze list.

Mike

[nsKb]

I was playing the awesome Battle of the First Salvo scenario from the community scenario pack. What struck me is how fast the SA-N-6, in fact most of the SA-10 derivatives/copies (HQ-9, SA-20 etc.) are super fast. These high speeds (Mach 6+) are only achieved momentarily and using only specific flight paths. Right now the SA-10 (5V55) and its next of kin fly at Mach 6 in Band 4, the 9M82 goes Mach 7 yet it is specifically designed for such high speeds while the 5V55 is not. This might be a bit controversial but I think most of the SA-10 line should be in the Mach 4 range, the bigger ones like the 40N6 should be a bit faster.

Speaking of the 40N6, this missile is currently listed in the database at 1800 kg, due to its high performance its is likely much heavier (2500 kg+). The TELs probably can't carry 4 of them either.

Another thing I noticed is that the SA-2 is listed at its launch mass (approx 2200 kg) while the SM-2ER and SM-6 ERAM have only their upper stage mass listed (705 kg). Is this on purpose? Does it affect the missile model?

[Rongor]

Hi there!
My today's requests are two corvette sized classes:
1. the danish P520 Diana class patrol vessel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMS_Diana_%28P520%29
2. the dutch A900 Mercuur class submarine support vessel http://www.damennaval.com/nl/company_product-range_torpedo-recovery-vessel.htm

[Pergite!]

I wonder if it would be outrageously possible to add more units, or specifically the entire Db to the generic side? I have been looking at creating scenarios from NATOs fictive Zoran Sea or Skolkan settings. It does however cosmetically not look that good with the mix of all nation specific entries (a French aircraft drops Russian paratroopers while protected by Chinese fighters etc). Some unit looks generic until you press their Db entry in the viewer, others present their parent name in their unit name on the map. Even if I rename the unit, that name is never shown if it belongs to another side than the player.

Btw generic trucks gets ID "none" if they aren't identified as a specific side. Maybe should be changed to their signature equipment "Trucks".

[DeltaIV]

I'm not exactly sure, but from what I understand, the soviet SS-N-3b missile (aka P35) should be able to attack surface ships. Currently both CWDB&DB3000 model this weapon as land/mobile target only, which in turn makes Kynda-class cruisers (designed as ASuW platform) to be useless.

Can you guys look into this? [:)]

[Vici Supreme]

Came accross this while building a scenario.
Some air search radar detection rings are broken. I don't know if their ability to detect aircrafts is affected too. Also not able to change direction. Only occurs with non-360 degree search radars like Russian High Screen B or Voronezh-VP.



Another thing I noticed a while ago is that I'm not able to add additional munitions to a Sa-21 a/b Growler Magazine or a FIM-92 Stinger when placed aboard a ship.

Greetings [8D]

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: Pergite!

I wonder if it would be outrageously possible to add more units, or specifically the entire Db to the generic side? I have been looking at creating scenarios from NATOs fictive Zoran Sea or Skolkan settings. It does however cosmetically not look that good with the mix of all nation specific entries (a French aircraft drops Russian paratroopers while protected by Chinese fighters etc). Some unit looks generic until you press their Db entry in the viewer, others present their parent name in their unit name on the map. Even if I rename the unit, that name is never shown if it belongs to another side than the player.

Btw generic trucks gets ID "none" if they aren't identified as a specific side. Maybe should be changed to their signature equipment "Trucks".

Would need to make a change to our database architecture or would cost of us probably 40+ hours in copying and pasting for what is more or less a cosmetic change of text line. Sorry this is probably not in the cards at this point. Time->value thing.

Trucks and None bit logged.

Thanks!

Mike

[mikmykWS]

Issues logged. Thanks guys!

Mike

[Vici Supreme]

Dear Dev's. I'd like to have:

EC 120 Colibri for Indonesian Navy maybe

Ilyushin Il-96-300PU low priority but would be really cool to have it! [;)]

Mil Mi-8 AMTSh (additional informations)

Yakovlev Yak-130 Russian version would be best suiting but maybe a Syrian database entry too? (please[&o])

Xian Y-20 Kupeng 3D-printed cargolifter for China.

Il-476 / Il-76MD-90A again, I know (informations about quantity)

Commercial Il-76T as there are no civilian Il-76's in DB

Agusta Westland AW.139 a lot of user countries (hard to find any informations about the nation specific loadouts/roles, so very low priority)

Agusta Westland AW.109-Power Multipurpose Naval Helicopters for Philippine Navy. 2 EW/OTH versions aboard Gregorio del Pilar-class. (additional informations)

I know there are simular units in the DB for some of these, nevertheless I'd like to have those nation specific units. I hope you consider my requests! Thanks

[Mgellis]

ORIGINAL: mikmyk

ORIGINAL: Pergite!

I wonder if it would be outrageously possible to add more units, or specifically the entire Db to the generic side? I have been looking at creating scenarios from NATOs fictive Zoran Sea or Skolkan settings. It does however cosmetically not look that good with the mix of all nation specific entries (a French aircraft drops Russian paratroopers while protected by Chinese fighters etc). Some unit looks generic until you press their Db entry in the viewer, others present their parent name in their unit name on the map. Even if I rename the unit, that name is never shown if it belongs to another side than the player.

Would need to make a change to our database architecture or would cost of us probably 40+ hours in copying and pasting for what is more or less a cosmetic change of text line. Sorry this is probably not in the cards at this point. Time->value thing.

Mike

Would a workable compromise be to clone some 20-30 platforms as Generic, using some of the world's most commonly exported platforms? This has already been done for some Soviet tank platoon facilities. Add things like the M113 APC and the various BMPs, a couple of the more common 105-mm and 155-mm howitzers, Oerlikon 20 mm cannon and other common AA guns like the 40 mm Bofors, SA-10 and other common SAMs, a couple of common manpads, radars, etc.

I can definitely see it not being worth the time to clone the entire database (!) but if you're just trying to create some fictional countries, you really only need a few dozen platforms to have a pretty rich and customizable "menu" to pick from.

Anyway, it's just a thought. I hope this helps.

[Coiler12]

I honestly don't see what the problem is with just borrowing from other countries. My very first scenario: Albania doesn't have J-6s. Ok, take them from another user (in this case North Korea). I don't think it ruins the immersion.

[Mgellis]

Another solution for Pergite! and other seeking generic platforms. There is now a generic infantry company, which can be used as the foundation for pretty much any kind of land unit you would like, since you can swap sensors and weapons in and out. Just as a test, I added six 155 mm howitzers, renamed it, and poof! it's a "Klingon artillery battery." This won't cover everything (e.g., armored platoons) but it certainly opens up a lot of fictional/alternate history/etc. possibilities.

Again, just a thought. I hope this helps.

[Mgellis]

ORIGINAL: Coiler12

I honestly don't see what the problem is with just borrowing from other countries. My very first scenario: Albania doesn't have J-6s. Ok, take them from another user (in this case North Korea). I don't think it ruins the immersion.

I do this, too, for some scenarios. I think the country names can be a distraction to some people, though, so I try to find the "supplier" country for these platforms because I figure people will say something like "Oh, yes, the J-6 is Chinese, so it makes sense that Madagascar would have Chinese J-6s instead of Ethiopian ones. (This does not actually make that much sense, I confess, but I think it looks a little nicer this way.) It's a style thing.

[Pergite!]

ORIGINAL:

Would need to make a change to our database architecture or would cost of us probably 40+ hours in copying and pasting for what is more or less a cosmetic change of text line. Sorry this is probably not in the cards at this point. Time->value thing.

Trucks and None bit logged.

Thanks!

Mike

I totally agree!
I will however then make a list of suggestions for generic ground units that would be suitable to add to beef up the custom options. It's also in that department that I have encountered the nation specific unit class names.
Any inputs on my previous request to give small arms the possibility to target and destroy aircraft?

[Pergite!]

ORIGINAL: Mgellis

Another solution for Pergite! and other seeking generic platforms. There is now a generic infantry company, which can be used as the foundation for pretty much any kind of land unit you would like, since you can swap sensors and weapons in and out. Just as a test, I added six 155 mm howitzers, renamed it, and poof! it's a "Klingon artillery battery." This won't cover everything (e.g., armored platoons) but it certainly opens up a lot of fictional/alternate history/etc. possibilities.

Again, just a thought. I hope this helps.

The problem is that regardless of how many passes you do with your ISR bird over that company, it will still only get the ID "Infantry Company" and a contact number. Surface vessels have their actual individual name presented to you, but ground units just get their class visible, or at least that is the result from all tests I have done.
Otherwise I agree with all the suggested work-arounds.

[e2204588]

Since 2004, Chin Yang class [Knox] (ID #529) had equipped with AAW systems from decommissioned "Wu Chin III" DD (ID #108).

Remove:
AN/SPS-40
SPG-53F

Add:
DA-08
STIR 180
LIOD
SM-1 x 10

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knox-class ... Yang_class