Decisive Action news

[John Osborne]

I took the liberty of reposting this from the DA Yahoo Group. I beleive that there is still some players here that has DA. l'm looking foward to do some more scenarios with it.


The latest version of Decisive Action is now available for download at
http://www.hpssims.com/Pages/updates/up_DA/Patch_DA.html This version
of the game has many new features such as network play (up to 15
computers), more detailed fire support and logistics functions, AAR
playback, and a brand new help file. Plus, numerous bugs have also been
squashed.

The new Help file is a drastic improvement over the previous one. It is
much more detailed and user-friendly. Vince “TJ” Taijeron helped me
write it and his vast experience as an experienced trainer, gamer, and
retired soldier are evident when you examine the new Help file. TJ is
the chief instructor for Decisive Action at the Command and General
Staff College and wrote the manual based on his experiences helping
officers learn to play the game.

Installing the patch is simple. Download and replace several key files
and create a new folder, titled “AAR” within the root game directory.
The DA CD is no longer needed in the drive to run the game. The download
is identical to the current Army version except for the license
instructions.

Please pass this information on to other user’s groups and your friends!

Jim Lunsford

[Scully]

Thanks John. Please let me know what you think of the update as I'd like to purchase the game sometime soon.

Brian

[Pat Proctor]

Of interest to anyone who wants a little background into the inner workings of military gaming...

Vincent Taijeron (TJ) shares an office with our own Curt Pangracs, of Raging Tiger fame ;)

Oh what a tangled web:p

[CPangracs]

Be advised,...there may be another patch out soon. Yours truly found a little missing something today while teaching it to a gaggle of LTC's!;) :cheeky:

[John Osborne]

Hi Curt,

What was missing? :)

John

[Don Maddox]

I'm curious how much interest there is in revitalizing the DA section here at Warfare HQ. We used to have one, but despite my best efforts we could never get any interest in it. I think the situation may have changed now. For starters, wargamers seem to have gradually become more accepting of modern era wargames. This wasn't always the case.

DA, TacOps, ATF, BCT, and POA2 are probably always going to remain "niche" products, but I do think the potential audience has grown substantially. Unlike some other wargames, I don't see these titles are really be competitors in that most modern era enthusiasts own them all! The point being that creating a "modern wargames" community is beneficial to everyone. That was the original intent of our now defunct Military Simulations section.

It's obvious that ATF and BCT have a growing following, and POA2 and DA may be growing as well. That's good news all the way around. I have plans to change a few things on the main Warfare HQ website anyway, and I would like your input on this issue.

These wargames (simulations?) are simply too good to allow them to wither away on the vine. We want to see them thrive and this club is uniquely suited to help bring this about.

[CPangracs]

Actually, nothing that affects the civilian player. It is the Common Operating Picture (COP) set-up. DA is supposed to be able to be setup as a "neutral" machine able to visualize a multiplayer game without allowing orders input. Definitely something not normally needed by the casual gamer! As a matter of fact, he probably won't even release a patch to the public just for that. However, if you are reading through the manual, and you read about the COP function, now you know what it is,...and that YOU can't use it!:D

[John Osborne]

Hi Curt,

I've looked at the new DA manual and I didn't see anything mention about Common Operating Picture (COP) :p

John

[Scully]

Hey Don,

I don't actually own the game yet, though I plan to buy it sometime over the next few months. I would very much like to see the DA section revitalized. I'm subscribed to the DA mailing list on Yahoo and there's really not a lot of traffic there, so I'm not sure how much interest you'll get.

I don't own TacOps, though it's on my wish list. I'm not sure about POA2...my computer just can't handle it, so it's going to have to wait. I also play Harpoon3, but they already have a very active community. Though they've decided to setup a forum like WarfareHQ just for Harpoon. You may want to see if they're interested in moving here.

I agree that these games will remain niche, which is all the more reason to have a community. This may sound a bit goofy :nuts: , but ATF and this community has really changed the way I look at modern warfare. It's been quite an educational experience and I think DA would only add to it.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

Brian

I'm curious how much interest there is in revitalizing the DA section here at Warfare HQ. We used to have one, but despite my best efforts we could never get any interest in it. I think the situation may have changed now. For starters, wargamers seem to have gradually become more accepting of modern era wargames. This wasn't always the case.

DA, TacOps, ATF, BCT, and POA2 are probably always going to remain "niche" products, but I do think the potential audience has grown substantially. Unlike some other wargames, I don't see these titles are really be competitors in that most modern era enthusiasts own them all! The point being that creating a "modern wargames" community is beneficial to everyone. That was the original intent of our now defunct Military Simulations section.

It's obvious that ATF and BCT have a growing following, and POA2 and DA may be growing as well. That's good news all the way around. I have plans to change a few things on the main Warfare HQ website anyway, and I would like your input on this issue.

These wargames (simulations?) are simply too good to allow them to wither away on the vine. We want to see them thrive and this club is uniquely suited to help bring this about.

[Pat Proctor]

I do not want the following comment to be perceived as critical of HPS Sims. They are a great company with some fine products. I also don't want anyone to think I am being critical of DA or POA2 (I haven't played either of them, *yet*).

But I do think that HPS does a real disservice to these games by not offering free demos. Demos are a great way both to calm fears and to create converts. I have to say that this is part of the reason I have purchased neither game. I don't know if I have the time to devote to them and, without a demo, I don't know how much time I need to devote to them.

So, for those out there that would like to see these games grow and succeed, and if you agree with me, I would recommend dropping a line to that effect. Just please do not start your letter:

"Dear HPS Sims, Pat Proctor, from ProSIM Company told me to write this nasty letter..." ;)

[John Osborne]

Hi Scully and Don,

At one time I and some other DA players tried to support a DA Thread at WarfareHq.com. Hell I even made a scenario and post it. :cheeky:

If there is a DA thread I would support it. There should be a poll/question at the DA Yahoo Groups, which has a total of 119 members. And see if they would support it or not. Sometimes I don't think there is anybody there because it is always quite there.

As for a Harpoon 3 thread. I don't think so Scully :D I know the people who put together the Harpoon Point Fourm and I don't think that they would drop it now. They have there own web page to support it.

John

[Scully]

I do not want the following comment to be perceived as critical of HPS Sims. They are a great company with some fine products. I also don't want anyone to think I am being critical of DA or POA2 (I haven't played either of them, *yet*).

But I do think that HPS does a real disservice to these games by not offering free demos. Demos are a great way both to calm fears and to create converts. I have to say that this is part of the reason I have purchased neither game. I don't know if I have the time to devote to them and, without a demo, I don't know how much time I need to devote to them.


I couldn't agree with you more. It's why I haven't purchased DA yet.

[Scully]

As for a Harpoon 3 thread. I don't think so Scully :D I know the people who put together the Harpoon Point Fourm and I don't think that they would drop it now. They have there own web page to support it.
John

I agree with you there. I just noticed they're converting their Yahoo mailing list to a forum (I think you and I are talking about the same forum)like this. They are a great community and very well established. It wouldn't make too much sense for them to join us, but it never hurts to ask. I would love to have them here...it would cut down on the number of forums I'd have to go to every night before bed. :)

[John Osborne]

Thats true Scully :D I never thought of it like that where you can just go to one forum to read all the messages about your favorite war games :nuts:

I think that Jim Lunsford would support the DA Thread here. Here is a screenshot of my scenario titled "Axis of Evil" That I made alonnnng time ago.

John

[Scully]

Thanks for the screen shot. I just love the way the game looks. Does each counter represent a company? I'm actually pretty fired up about getting it. I'm sure you remember me asking about it around Christmas time. I ended up not getting it because I couldn't check out a demo (just to reiterate Cpt. Proctor's point).

I went with H3 (which I was probably going to get anyway) and Steel Beasts.

Once I purchase, I'd be happy to try out your scenarios. Maybe you could smack me around in a PBEM too. Though I really like the fact the patch allows up to 16 players. That could be interesting. I'm also looking forward to the H3 multiplayer, but the real time thing could make it tough. Especially in Harpoon where there's so much "down" time. You'll really have to be careful with scenario choices.

[John Osborne]

Sure I will smack you around on a DA PBEM :p

Here is a Scenario Background of Axis of Evil (June 2002): Twelve years after the last Gulf War, and after the death of Saddam Hussein. The government of Iran acted fast and made profit of the chaos. They annexed Iraq and formed the world largest Islamic Republic called United Islamic Republic (UIR). As before, they made a move against the kingdom of Kuwait. The I Corps (The Immortals) with a rebuilt Iraqi Army have decided to add the Kingdom to their new UIR. Over a period of 45 days, the U.S. has dispatched elements of II (US) Corps with a heavy Infantry Division along with 4th (UK) Armoured Brigade from the UK. Also the 15th MEU (SOC) stationed off the shore of Kuwait to help deter aggression. The 24 ID (M) and the 4th AB (UK) is already in position along side the 1st Kuwaiti Mechanized Division. The CENTCOM J-2 predicts that the UIR is poised to attack now. Saudi Arabia is committed to supporting the operation but will be unable to provide ground forces to assist with the defense of Kuwait. However the Saudi government has at Hafral Batin, a Saudi Mechanized Division station there.

Just so you know I made this scenario way before there was another Bush in the White House. :nuts:

I have plans for part two of Axis of Evil :cheeky:

John

[Don Maddox]

Okay, what would you guys think of this: I could create a new forum called "Modern Military Simulations" or something like that. The ATF, POA2, DA, etc forums would be placed under this forum as sub-forums (very similar to what you see above for AARs). This way, we would have a "generic" place to talk about modern warfare, tactics, and issues of interest to players of all the games, but we also have a place to disucss issues specific to each game. We won't be losing anything, but we will gain an additional forum devoted to the whole modern wargame concept, plus the existing forums will be easily accesible and better organized.

Sound like a plan?

Of course, the same approach will probably not work on the main Warfare HQ webpage. It's best to keep the sections separate there as people might get confused.

[John Osborne]

Okay, what would you guys think of this: I could create a new forum called "Modern Military Simulations" or something like that. The ATF, POA2, DA, etc forums would be placed under this forum as sub-forums (very similar to what you see above for AARs). This way, we would have a "generic" place to talk about modern warfare, tactics, and issues of interest to players of all the games, but we also have a place to disucss issues specific to each game. We won't be losing anything, but we will gain an additional forum devoted to the whole modern wargame concept, plus the existing forums will be easily accesible and better organized.

Sound like a plan?

Of course, the same approach will probably not work on the main Warfare HQ webpage. It's best to keep the sections separate there as people might get confused.

Sounds Like a Plan too me. When this happens I will post a message in the DA Yahoo Groups along with letting Jim Lunsford know. Maybe Curt can mention to Jim what we're doing to get more people involved with DA :D


John

[Don Maddox]

I also still have all the DA maps that we used to host "back in the day." I can re-post these if there is interest.

I would very much like to get some articles about strategy and tactics. We need more of this type of stuff as it is of interest to all the players. A lot of wargamers don't understand the basic concepts of how modern warfare works and these articles are of great benefit. CPT Proctor is the obvious choice for this, but he is usually busy with running ProSim. I'm afraid it will fall to the rest of us. We can certainly consider reprinting articles that may have appeared in professional military journals or other websites, but we MUST have the permission of the author to do so. I will not reprint an article unless we have permission first.

[John Osborne]

I also still have all the DA maps that we used to host "back in the day." I can re-post these if there is interest.

Don, I too have some more DA maps that I can post also. As for maintaining the DA thread. If you can't get anybody to do it. I would be happy to give it a try :D Now that I have a stable job with weekends off. I can do it.

I beleive NORAD and Scully can help me get my foot on the ground running to do it. :nuts:

John

[Deltapooh]

Thanks for the screen shot. I just love the way the game looks.

This is the dilemma of Decisive Action. The game looks great. I've had it for going on two years. Played it once, but never could bring myself to uninstall. When I got my new PC, take a wild guess what was one the first games I installed on it (After BCT and ATF)? DA. I would love to make some scenarios for it. When I first purchased it, I even thought about combining BCT and DA to build a scenario pack that people with both games could enjoy.

I'm going to try to have a go at it again. Maybe, if I apply myself........

John, your Axis of Evil Scenario looks great.

As for expanding the forum, I'll go with whatever changes occur. The more the merrier. I know the last DA forum here died out. However, I think alot of people still had it on their HD. Maybe this is DA's new beginning.

[Ivan Rapkinov]

/me has it on HD...

better start breaking out the glossary all over again...

[John Osborne]

Hi Ivan,

Good points.

The reason I bought DA was that some of my military friends had it and was playing the game. They shown it too me and that was the reason that I got it. Plus being a retired military person who knows the ends and outs of military tactics had know problem playing it. :cheeky:

How ever if I didn't know about the game and there wasn't a demo for it. I for a fact wouldn't of gotten it. Even when POA2 didn't have a demo and I was reading the post about it and the problems players were having with it. My decision was not to get it and wait until the players using it were reporting that the game is working better.

With the DA patch 2.0.3 is a better help manual on how to use DA. I'm working on converting it to a pdf file so that it can be printed out. Old timers like me has to have a hard copy to read. :nuts:

John

[Pat Proctor]

Don,

I have forwarded to Mike (aka Norad) a couple of articles on fires in the offense and defense (they are built in AAR format with a lot of screenshots). You might consider posting them to the more general, modern wargames, article archive as well.

You also have my permission to reprint the articles "Breaching 101" and "Building an Engagement Area" from Chapter 6 of the BCT and/or ATF manual (I can provide electronic copies if you want them).

You have a large repository of military experience here on the forum already (KB, Curt, John O and many more). I am certain if you sweet-talked a few of them, you could build quite a library of articles ;).

[Ivan Rapkinov]

we really need Doug MacGregor and Daniel Bolger on this forum (chuck in John Antal and Robert Leonhard, and we've got a golf game :D )

DA is the sim I used to demonstrate the diff between tofflerian RMA firepower theory, and Fehrenbachian manuveur theory (to idiot 3rd year IR students, supposedly who "knew" strategy...) -> I'll see how big the .ppt file is and see if I can host it somewhere.

KANSAS! Here we COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEE! (said while bouncing along in a M-577 :) )

[Scully]

I beleive NORAD and Scully can help me get my foot on the ground running to do it. :nuts:

John

Be careful what you wish for John... :)

[John Osborne]

Hi Don,

I just talked to Jim Lunsford and he said that he will support the DA thread. I'm working on getting TJ to drop by when he can and other DA Team members from Ft Leavenworth. Before I post about a DA Thread to the DA Yahoo Group. I need to know if it is a Go or No Go for the DA Thread?

John

[Don Maddox]

There will be a DA forum. I'm working on some things for the main webapge at the moment, but I will set it up as soon as I'm able.

[CPangracs]

I'm working on a North Korean Scenario just for the heck of it. The terrain is insane!

[Deltapooh]

I want to build a campaign based on the DESERT PROMISE Playbook. I even converted the html file to .pdf and started up research. I really want to learn this game.

[Ivan Rapkinov]

Curt: if you're going to do a NK scn, add an aussie Bde, given our recent purchases, and expeditionary history in the region...

(not that I'm trying to get the austrlaisn in at any cost, nooooooo.......... :D )

DP: I've got a Chechen War Pt 2 scn floating about that I "tried" to get to work - maybe we can bounce ideas off each other (and the rest of the forum) as to how to get them to work properly :)

[John Osborne]

Thats Great! With Curt, Deltapooh, and Ivan working on new scenarios for DA. It will help bring in more players into the DA Thread when it opens. I too am working on part two of Axis of Evil scneraio that I made. I'm retouching up Axis of Evil, part one :D And getting off my butt to finish both Yom Kippur War scenarios :nuts:

Deltapooh, What is the DESERT PROMISE Playbook? I never heard of that :surprise:

John

[Deltapooh]

Thats Great! With Curt, Deltapooh, and Ivan working on new scenarios for DA. It will help bring in more players into the DA Thread when it opens. I too am working on part two of Axis of Evil scneraio that I made. I'm retouching up Axis of Evil, part one :D And getting off my butt to finish both Yom Kippur War scenarios :nuts:

Deltapooh, What is the DESERT PROMISE Playbook? I never heard of that :surprise:

John

DESERT PROMISE Storybook (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2001/DP_storybook.htm) I'd been looking at this scenario for months. I had thought about this for ATF, but it is best suited for DA because of the scale.

I'm some distance from building a working scenario for DA. I have alot to learn about the game. However, given the improved help file, I am more committed to the game than I have been in the past.

[John Osborne]

DESERT PROMISE Storybook (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2001/DP_storybook.htm) I'd been looking at this scenario for months. I had thought about this for ATF, but it is best suited for DA because of the scale.

I'm some distance from building a working scenario for DA. I have alot to learn about the game. However, given the improved help file, I am more committed to the game than I have been in the past.

I just looked at Desert Promise Storybook. It looks like one hell of a scenario when you put it together :D I can't wait to try it.

John

[Old&Slow]

I can`t get Ver 2.03 to run due to the usual "OCX " problems, so I don`t know if they have an improved Scenario Design "Help" file in 2.03.

I have sent a EMail off to HPS Tech support and we will see what Greg comes up with.

I bring this up ( as one who has done 3 scenarios ) since the biggest problem with Scenario design is not the OB`s or the construct of the battles, which are pretty easy IMO, but the Map Creation, which is a real PITA to get scaled & scaned and working right, which is why you saw so few Scenarios for a Game that has been out for over 3 + years.

A new DA Thread here is a great idea , but unless Vince or more better Lunsford do a **_Detailed _ ** Map creation tutorial, and are available here to help, this game will just fizzle again IMO.

[Mompariglia]

Greetings. I've seen a lot of activity for DA, I hope anyone can help me with PBEM. I and Gary have tried to play PBEM but I can't open his save files (while he can open mine). Plus we tried with a TCP/IP game, but we failed here too, there was a sort of impossibility to establish a connection. Have you ever had these problems with DA? Note: I downloaded 203 patch. Thanks,
M

[John Osborne]

I can`t get Ver 2.03 to run due to the usual "OCX " problems, so I don`t know if they have an improved Scenario Design "Help" file in 2.03.

I have sent a EMail off to HPS Tech support and we will see what Greg comes up with.

I bring this up ( as one who has done 3 scenarios ) since the biggest problem with Scenario design is not the OB`s or the construct of the battles, which are pretty easy IMO, but the Map Creation, which is a real PITA to get scaled & scaned and working right, which is why you saw so few Scenarios for a Game that has been out for over 3 + years.

A new DA Thread here is a great idea , but unless Vince or more better Lunsford do a **_Detailed _ ** Map creation tutorial, and are available here to help, this game will just fizzle again IMO.

Hi Old&Slow,

There are a couple of other players who are having problems with the patch due to the OCX problem. Jim has been sending it to the players who are having problems. I'm trying to get the file so that I can post it here. I didn't have the problem like your having. The patch worked fine on my computer :D

As for the help file, I asked Jim about the help file being in a pdf format and he said that they are working on the User's Manual which will be converted into a flat file. He also stated that they are updating the Help File. And Jim said that he will support the DA thread once that it is up and running. I'm talking to TJ and the rest of the DA Team at Ft Leavenworth too help support the thread.

John

[Pat Proctor]

Does anyone know more about this "Desert Promise" scenario. Specifically, where did it come from? Is this a DOD product, or is this generated by someone else?

[Stardog]

Well that figures hehe
I just bought ATF and now everyone is talking about playing DA :)

[John Osborne]

Does anyone know more about this "Desert Promise" scenario. Specifically, where did it come from? Is this a DOD product, or is this generated by someone else?

Hi Sir,

This is what I got about Desert Promise Storybook CINC USCENTCOM commences planning for operations in the Gulf of Oman, Persian Gulf, and on Iranian territory in order to restore freedom of navigation within these waterways and to remove the Iranian shipping threat.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/2001/DP_storybook.htm

John

[Deltapooh]

Well that figures hehe
I just bought ATF and now everyone is talking about playing DA :)

Well, ATF has so much support, we're allocating resources to save a dear old friend. :D

I was working on the FV-107 until Photoshop got nifty and crashed before I could save :mad: :mad:

[CPangracs]

Well that figures hehe
I just bought ATF and now everyone is talking about playing DA :)
Don't worry, Stardog,...no one is abandoning ATF or any other games here,...just a tribute to an old game getting a new lease on life!!

[CPangracs]

I can`t get Ver 2.03 to run due to the usual "OCX " problems, so I don`t know if they have an improved Scenario Design "Help" file in 2.03.

I have sent a EMail off to HPS Tech support and we will see what Greg comes up with.

I bring this up ( as one who has done 3 scenarios ) since the biggest problem with Scenario design is not the OB`s or the construct of the battles, which are pretty easy IMO, but the Map Creation, which is a real PITA to get scaled & scaned and working right, which is why you saw so few Scenarios for a Game that has been out for over 3 + years.

A new DA Thread here is a great idea , but unless Vince or more better Lunsford do a **_Detailed _ ** Map creation tutorial, and are available here to help, this game will just fizzle again IMO.
Actually, map creation is one of the simplest things you can do in DA! As long as you know the Lat/Long of a point on the map you are trying to create, and can reliably replicate the distance of a kilometer on the map, and it doesn't go over a certain number of Km-squared, you are good to go!

If you want UTM grid reference, then you are SOL unless we get Jim Lunsford to take that feature from the hardcode and put it into the editor.

If ANYONE has a specific map they want turned into a map using Lat/Long for DA, give me a holler. I could have it done in a few minutes!

[Old&Slow]

Actually, map creation is one of the simplest things you can do in DA! As long as you know the Lat/Long of a point on the map you are trying to create, and can reliably replicate the distance of a kilometer on the map, and it doesn't go over a certain number of Km-squared, you are good to go!



I would respectfully disagree with that.

Trying for actual historical locations and using a scanner to reduce parts of actual 1:250:000 military topo maps, or JPG`S of same available on the net, or USGS Maps,is very frustrating ( for me anyway ) due to the " doesn`t go over a certain number of Km-squared " part :(

I don`t want to start a pissing contest, but if it`s so easy where are all the new DA maps, other then the 2 old ones on the HPS home page ?

Tell you what Curt ;) , you do some DA maps of I Corps area in Viet Nam using the 1:250:00 military maps , ( or anywhere else for that matter) and I`ll do some Scenarios of an ACR in that period :devious:

[CPangracs]

I would respectfully disagree with that.

Trying for actual historical locations and using a scanner to reduce parts of actual 1:250:000 military topo maps, or JPG`S of same available on the net, or USGS Maps,is very frustrating ( for me anyway ) due to the " doesn`t go over a certain number of Km-squared " part :(

I don`t want to start a pissing contest, but if it`s so easy where are all the new DA maps, other then the 2 old ones on the HPS home page ?

Tell you what Curt ;) , you do some DA maps of I Corps area in Viet Nam using the 1:250:00 military maps , ( or anywhere else for that matter) and I`ll do some Scenarios of an ACR in that period :devious:
I'm sorry you have so much trouble creating mapes for DA. You are limited to 150,000 square kilometers, which limits the map size a bit. I recently had to create 2 separate maps for one fight because the maps were too big. Not only that, but we had to fudge the scale a bit. We recreated realistic movement rates by creative use of the terrain-types.

The reason you haven't seen a great deal of maps is because DA is not really a game for the casual gamer, and it plays at a level higher than battalion-level. I have been creating historical maps for DA for over a year. Unfortunately, much of the info I use is directly from the Defense Mapping Agency, and the maps aren't allowed outside of the institution for security reasons.

In fact, we just did a recreation using an original Vietnam map in an area that one of our other sim guys actually built a bridge during the war. We have resources here that are numerous, but we have also used the net extensively to find historical maps to use. I used one for Russo-Polish war scenario.

So, pissing contest not withstanding, it IS easy to create a map in DA. The hard part is deciding how much detail you want in the terrain, whether or not to directly draw graphics on that .bmp or .jpg map to save resources during gameplay, and how exact you want to make the order of battle.

Also, how much time are you willing to dedicate to actually building a scenario? I could put a buttload of maps out there, but the map isn't squat without terrain and a scenario,...and that all takes time rather than a particular skill. I never played DA until less than 11 months ago. I now consider myself somewhat an expert on the program, can teach others to use it and create detailed scenarios to include historical scenarios, and I have created successful scenarios used by the Masters in Applied Military Science program here.

Like I said,...if you need a particular map done with terrain, and it is not classified by the Defense Mapping Agency or other entity (i.e., public domain on the internet or other source), get it into digits and send it to me, and I can have it back to you in about 24 hours, depending on the size. All I ask is that I get to keep a copy for possible future use here at the college.

Curt

[Don Maddox]

Is Jim looking at the possibility of tweaking the map size issue a bit? What size is the largest map that came with the game? It's been a while since I played and I don't remember.

[Ivan Rapkinov]

Curt: what scale is best to send you - I have several Zimbabwe, Chechen and East Timor maps I wouldn't mind having converted.

[John Osborne]

Don and Rest of the Guys :D

I'm still alive. I had to go to Denver this Sunday my job sent me to Denver and will be here until Thursday night. I'm typing this email at a hotel and Don, I still want to help in the setup and maintaining of the DA Thread. I haven't left yet :nuts:

John

[Deltapooh]

Is there somekind of tutorial available? This would speed up the learning process.

[CPangracs]

Is there somekind of tutorial available? This would speed up the learning process.
I will post a scenario-editing tutorial I created tomorrow:D

[CPangracs]

Is Jim looking at the possibility of tweaking the map size issue a bit? What size is the largest map that came with the game? It's been a while since I played and I don't remember.
Not sure what the max size of a map is that came with the game, but the most "squares" you can have is 150,000. Now, this means you can have a 1:50K map of an insane size (as in the .bmp or .jpg), but it will most likely overload the memory resources of even a system with 1 GB of RAM. And why would you want to do that anyway, right? ;)

We have approached Jim about map size and possibly even a zoom! Unfortunately, other things took precedence. The changes/additions/fixes you are all seeing now are the result of our shop working directly with Jim to create a product we could use to support the students here.

Larger maps are on the "list",...maybe over the summer?!:surprise:

[cbelva]

I have been noticing some weird behavior as I have been working with the new patch, and I am wondering if anyone else has seen the same problems. 1) The HQ units firing arty from their location when there are out of range of arty and they do not contain any arty. 2) Bombers being too strong and destroying every unit they attack. 3)The AI using bombers in scenarios where they are not suppose to have bombers. 4) Attack Helicopter, when on a recon mission, firing on an enemy unit after returning to its LZ at the end of the turn and then the enemy unit returning fire (even when they are several kms from each other).

I have been playing with the new patch and have observed this behavior in just about every scenario I have played. Those which came with the game and some which I have created. I have sent saved game files to Col Lunsford to review.

[CPangracs]

I have been noticing some weird behavior as I have been working with the new patch, and I am wondering if anyone else has seen the same problems. 1) The HQ units firing arty from their location when there are out of range of arty and they do not contain any arty. 2) Bombers being too strong and destroying every unit they attack. 3)The AI using bombers in scenarios where they are not suppose to have bombers. 4) Attack Helicopter, when on a recon mission, firing on an enemy unit after returning to its LZ at the end of the turn and then the enemy unit returning fire (even when they are several kms from each other).

I have been playing with the new patch and have observed this behavior in just about every scenario I have played. Those which came with the game and some which I have created. I have sent saved game files to Col Lunsford to review.
1. If an HQ is assigned to another HQ that has arty units attached, it will fire in direct support of that HQ,...no matter if it is in range! This can be seen as a feature (for the person who it is firing for), or a bug. We think it is a bug, and we are waiting to see how long/if a student catches it. He is working on that fix as we speak.

2. Bombers are indeed strong. Bombers can be devastating in real life! If the attack occurs while the attacked unit is in a TAI, it is even worse! This is why the daily bomber totals should be minimal, and that players ensure they have good ADA coverage of HQ, SPT, and other high-value targets!

3. New one on us. We will test tomorrow.

4. This is due to lag in the program. The actual engagement occured earlier, but, for whatever reason (video settings, other programs running, etc. If you are running the game with all the sound on (i.e., Options-Game Speed-Regular Game Speed), then lag is even more prominent! As long as the units did, indeed, come into contact with each other, and it's not some weird unit engaging from across the map or something, I wouldn't worry about it.

I would be interested to know if anyone has tried to connect over the internet for a game. We connect on our closed battle command (BCNET) all the time, but have yet to try it over the open net.

[cbelva]

1. If an HQ is assigned to another HQ that has arty units attached, it will fire in direct support of that HQ,...no matter if it is in range! This can be seen as a feature (for the person who it is firing for), or a bug. We think it is a bug, and we are waiting to see how long/if a student catches it. He is working on that fix as we speak.

2. Bombers are indeed strong. Bombers can be devastating in real life! If the attack occurs while the attacked unit is in a TAI, it is even worse! This is why the daily bomber totals should be minimal, and that players ensure they have good ADA coverage of HQ, SPT, and other high-value targets!

3. New one on us. We will test tomorrow.

4. This is due to lag in the program. The actual engagement occured earlier, but, for whatever reason (video settings, other programs running, etc. If you are running the game with all the sound on (i.e., Options-Game Speed-Regular Game Speed), then lag is even more prominent! As long as the units did, indeed, come into contact with each other, and it's not some weird unit engaging from across the map or something, I wouldn't worry about it.

I would be interested to know if anyone has tried to connect over the internet for a game. We connect on our closed battle command (BCNET) all the time, but have yet to try it over the open net.

Thanks for the update. I was wondering what was going on. In the scenarios where the enemy had bombers (even tho they were not in the scenario) it was a real show stopper. They were literally taking out my entire command.

[Deltapooh]

I will post a scenario-editing tutorial I created tomorrow:D

That should be helpful as well. You can learn about the game from scenario-editing too. :D

[Jim Lunsford]

I am sorry it has taken so long for me to return to the forum. I have been busy trying to fix some of the bugs some of you have already identified. At this time (23 Mar), I believe I am caught up. Once I am satisfied, we've corrected most of them, we'll post another patch.

Version 2.0.3 has many enhancements from the previous version. Most were added to satisfy Army requirements. Some of these enhancemnts, IMO, do not add anything to standard wargame play. However, you can be the judge of that.

If you've had problems with missing OCX files, then return to the HPS site. Yesterday, I updated the OCX patch. If the patch does not solve your problems, then contact me directly and I'll insure we' get you up and running.

If you find a bug, then immediately, rename the autosave.btl file in the Saved Games folder and email it to me with a description of the problem. That will enable me to replicate the problem.

I will try to check the forum daily. Thanks your support!

Jim Lunsford

jlunsford@kc.rr.com

[Gary]

Curt,

I have tried to play an internet TCP game. I could not get a connection with my opponent as either the Host or Caller.

Gary

[CPangracs]

Curt,

I have tried to play an internet TCP game. I could not get a connection with my opponent as either the Host or Caller.

Gary
First, do you have a firewall? If you are behind a firewall, you must open a port and tell the other person what the port number is. This will change the IP you connect to from 198.45.11.148 to 198.45.11.148:XXXX,..."XXXX" being the port number you have opened. I won't attempt to tell you HOW to open the port, but you can normally do it by going to the WAN address of your firewall/router and selecting the port you want to open. Maybe Jim Lunsford has a better insight into exactly which port the game uses.

Anyone else have any ideas?!

[Gary]

Hi Curt,

Thanks for the quick reply. I actually turned off my firewall but we could still not get a connection. I guess it might be that he had a firewall running.

I managed to get the programme to search the net so I know it works well up to that point.

Gary

[Don Maddox]

I am sorry it has taken so long for me to return to the forum. I have been busy trying to fix some of the bugs some of you have already identified. At this time (23 Mar), I believe I am caught up. Once I am satisfied, we've corrected most of them, we'll post another patch.


Hello Jim. It's good to see you on this forum! We're certainly glad to have you.

Gentlemen, I will be adding a forum dedicated specifically to Decisive Action either tonight or tomorrow.

[cbelva]

Hello Jim. It's good to see you on this forum! We're certainly glad to have you.

Gentlemen, I will be adding a forum dedicated specifically to Decisive Action either tonight or tomorrow.

That great news Don. Charles

[Scully]

Hello Jim. It's good to see you on this forum! We're certainly glad to have you.

Gentlemen, I will be adding a forum dedicated specifically to Decisive Action either tonight or tomorrow.

I'm with Don. Glad to have you here, Jim. Looking forward to picking up DA and having some fun with it.

Brian

[Jim Lunsford]

Most of the DA multiplayer testing took place over a LAN. However, I did test it successfully several times over the Internet with a player in AZ. We both had firewalls. He disconnected his and hosted the game. I kept mine going and we had no problems. However, it has been a while since we performed the test. I've talked to a couple of other people, including John Tiller, about this problem; and it is a problem as Microsoft doesn't document DirectX well.

Refer to the link:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;240429

for MS documentation on the issue. Note: DA uses DirectX 7.

I use a LinkSys router/firewall and it is not clear to me (using the documentation for both) what you have to do with my firewall to make this happen.

I will keep researching the issue!

Jim

[Jim Lunsford]

Most of the DA multiplayer testing took place over a LAN. However, I did test it successfully several times over the Internet with a player in AZ. We both had firewalls. He disconnected his and hosted the game. I kept mine going and we had no problems. However, it has been a while since we performed the test. I've talked to a couple of other people, including John Tiller, about this problem; and it is a problem as Microsoft doesn't document DirectX well.

Refer to the link:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;240429

for MS documentation on the issue. Note: DA uses DirectX 7.

I use a LinkSys router/firewall and it is not clear to me (using the documentation for both) what you have to do with my firewall to make this happen.

I will keep researching the issue!

Jim