From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Thu Oct 10 14:06:05 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram4) id AA07486; Thu, 10 Oct 91 14:06:05 -0700 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 14:06:05 -0700 Message-Id: <9110102106.AA07486@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #1 (msgs 1-6) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 10 October 1991 Volume: 8 Issue: 1 First Message: 1 Messages: 6 Topics: (1) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (2) Amiga, etc. jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (3) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (4) PBeM Harpoon hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov (5) Tomcat Models tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (6) Re: Crazy Hornet Solutions tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 10 Oct 1991 13:19:52 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (1) Editorial It's been a long time since last issue. Where did everybody go? The USNI Christmas catalog advertises a special USNI edition of Computer Harpoon for the IBM PC. The USNI edition includes "5 all-new scenarios for USNI members only" and "Harpoon secrets from Dr. Peter Perla, author of The Art of Wargaming". Available to USNI members for $40. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 91 19:18:49 EST From: jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (John Dutka) Subject: Various Info Summary: (2) Amiga, etc. Well, I spoke with 360 yet again, both about the bugs in the Amiga 3000-fix version, and about Harpoon Gold/Extended. They were not aware of the bugs in the 3000 fix version, and will be working to correct them. About the options missing from the Amiga version (i.e. the Additional Staff/Game Options menu where you can set to view sonobuoys and towed array SONARs) will/should be added in a future (unknown release date) update. The Indian Ocean/Persian Gulf Set release date has been delayed until "the end of the year," and a the Gold/extended Harpoon version for the 80386+/Amiga 3000+ "will be considered if the resources become available." So, in other words, folks, let them know if you want the version. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 8 Oct 1991 10:36:14 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (3) Recent Naval Developments Items from the October 1991 USNI Proceedings: The VLS Aegis cruiser USS Hue City (CG-66) was commissioned on 14 September 1991. She is a Ticonderoga class Baseline 4 ship. The Type 42 DDG HMS Southampton was recommissioned on 4 September 1991 after 20 months of repairs. She collided with a merchant in the Persian Gulf during the Iran-Iraq war. During repairs, her Type 992Q air search radar was replaced with a Type 996 and her EW system was upgraded. The Polish Shipyard Stocznia Polnocna at Gdansk completed the first of new variant of the Soviet Ropucha LST design. This "Ropucha-II" variant has the following changes over earlier versions: displacement increased to 3500 tons AK-257s w/ Muff Cobb director have been replaced by forward AK-176 and 2 aft AK-630s sharing a Bass Tilt director Positive E air search radar added no positions for shore bombardment rockets The Soviet Krivak-I class FF Leningradskiy Komsomolets (unit 14) has been modified in a refit. It is expected that similar refits will be made on other Krivak-I and II ships. The modifications include: RBU-2500/6000 mounts have been replaced by racks for (4)2 SS-N-25 antiship missile mounts Head Net-C air search radar replaced by Half Plate enlarged VDS housing (new sonar?) -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 91 11:36:55 PDT From: hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov (Kolin E. Hand) Subject: (4) PBeM Harpoon To All, I was wondering if anyone was still looking for PBeM Harpoon players. I am interested in participating as well as several others I know on the net. Would welcome any others interested to e-mail to me. Thanks Kolin -- +===========================================================================+ + "If a group of N persons implements a COBOL compiler, there will be + + N - 1 passes. Someone in the group has to be the manager." + + -- T. Cheatham + +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Kolin E. Hand hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov + + Jet Propulsion Laboratory hand@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov + +===========================================================================+ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 6 Sep 1991 15:07:58 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (5) Tomcat Models In CZ v7 message 44, guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (David Guidry) writes: >Also, does anybody know if the game shows differences between the F-14A, >F-14A+, and the F-14D? As I recall, they use the same numbers on range >(14xx short range, 17xx long range) on all three types of aircraft. The A+ >and D are sxupposed to have 30% better range than the A. > ... >Just FYI: the A+ is an A whose airframe was modified to hold the F110 >engines, whereas the D is built from the ground to hold the F110. Dave was clearly refering to the computer game. I don't really know the answer to his question. In the miniatures game, there is a separate F-14A and F-14D entry. There is no entry for the F-14B (what the A+ is now called). (The few examples of the old B model are no longer in use.) I guess you could just make up a F-14B entry by using the A model sensor section with the rest of the D model data. But it seems to me that the range and performance figures for the D model are a bit off to begin with. Also wasn't the F-14D supposed to have ASPJ (jammer) built-in? -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 4 Sep 1991 10:14:15 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (6) Re: Crazy Hornet Solutions Given the thread of conversation several weeks ago, I was wondering what improvements should be made to the launch aircraft dialog. (Maybe we can suggest them to 360.) Maybe the dialog should display such strike parameters as group range with the selected planes, planned elapsed time/cruise speed and reserve. That way, players could get a handle on the effects of increasing the size of strike groups and the effects of mixing plane types. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Thu Oct 24 10:48:06 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram4) id AA06742; Thu, 24 Oct 91 10:48:06 -0700 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 91 10:48:06 -0700 Message-Id: <9110241748.AA06742@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #2 (msgs 7-13) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 24 October 1991 Volume: 8 Issue: 2 First Message: 7 Messages: 7 Topics: (7) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (8) Air Sortie Tips jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (9) SS-N-25 jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (10) Re: SS-N-25 tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (11) Amiga 3000 2.0 jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (12) Torpedo Problems wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (13) Attacking Air Bases lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 21 Oct 1991 10:58:25 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (7) Editorial New members added since last issue: qxn102@uriacc.bitnet (Armando J. Heredia) ebr@dmr.com (Evan B. Ross) sjs@bae.bellcore.com (Steve Szymanski) Anybody know the latest on BattleSet 4: IOPG? -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 17:35:14 MST From: jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (J. Taggart Gorman) Subject: Dealing with Air Sorties Summary: (8) Air Sortie Tips After playing a zillion scenarios on a Mac Harpoon, I have come up with some ideas that a few of you already know, but I'll state again for those who missed those posts. The (in)famous "Range circle at take off shows that the planes have the range, but they really don't have the range by the time they are getting near the target: problem. Nope, not a Harpoon bug. The reasons for this happening are (1) When you are launching the flight, the first planes off have to circle until the last planes make it up. This is a major problem when you have an airfield that only has one runway. With a large group of planes, you end up losing a couple of minutes of flight; (2) air groups with different plane types will fly at the lowest speed of the group. So when you launch 2 F-14s to escort that E-2, those F-14s are penalized and have to fly at the E-2s speed and don't get optimum fuel preformance. My solutions (obvious) - Launch groups of the same plane type. Launch small groups, my fav size is around 10. Since you will probably want to escort those A-6s when they go after the Soviet battle group, launch the A-6s first. Hopefully you'll have enough CAP in the immediate area of the carrier. After a bit, not more than a minute of real time, launch the escorting fighters - F/A-18s in my opinion (save the F-14s for carrier CAP). The F/A-18s are faster than A-6s, so they catch up and eventually overtake the A-6s. They'll be out in front to nail anyone who threatens the A-6s. Or have the F/A-18s loiter every now and then so they stay with the A-6s. This is close to the way that it works in real life. Send up the CAP and air-to-air patrols ahead of the strike force, not in one big bunch. But then the whole fun of Harpoon is that you can try unconventional tactics and see how it works. The best plan is to try every option, then to settle down with the one that does you best. And then practice makes perfect! |--------------------------------| "Pretend that we blew up all the schools. | J. Taggart Gorman Jr. | Now that you're dead, what are you going | jtgorman@caslon.cs.arizona.edu | to do with the rest of your life?" |--------------------------------| - Christian Slater, in _Heathers_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 17:37:39 MST From: jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (J. Taggart Gorman) Subject: SS-N-25 ??? Summary: (9) SS-N-25 Huh? A SSM on Krivak I and IIs? Looks to be pretty small. And it's in clusters of 4. Hmmmm... Might this SSM have a NATO codename of "Harpoonsky"? Seriously, any details would be appreciated. |--------------------------------| "Pretend that we blew up all the schools. | J. Taggart Gorman Jr. | Now that you're dead, what are you going | jtgorman@caslon.cs.arizona.edu | to do with the rest of your life?" |--------------------------------| - Christian Slater, in _Heathers_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 24 Oct 1991 10:33:11 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (10) Re: SS-N-25 In CZ v7 msg 10, jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (J. Taggart Gorman) writes: > Huh? A SSM on Krivak I and IIs? Looks to be pretty small. And it's > in clusters of 4. Hmmm... Might this SSM have a NATO codename of > "Harpoonsky"? Seriously, any details would be appreciated. I haven't seen much about it. It was first seen on an East German ship. However, when Germany reunified, these missiles were returned to the Soviets. They appear quite similar in concept to Harpoon. Whether they have similar performance, though, is not clear. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 91 21:03:59 EST From: jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (John Dutka) Subject: Final Info On Harpoon 3000 2.0 fix Summary: (11) Amiga 3000 2.0 Well, as expected, the Harpoon fix for Amiga 3000's running 2.0 is quite buggy, generating almost constant enforcer hits during picture display (i.e. ships sinking, victory (either side), or info requestors popping up), and is prone to sporadic random crashing and events where the program exits due to errors. The 2.0 fix also will not run under a 2 Meg CHIP RAM Amiga, so remember this. Well, it does run, but when clicking on the "Title" icon, and then, not all the time. When I got in touch with 360, they said that it was possible, under 2.04 on a 3000, to disable a fractioon of CHIP RAM to make Harpoon run. When I asked if this was possible of a Commodore-Amiga employee, the answer was no, it is NOT possible. I then proceeded to call 360 and let them know this, and ask if there was any solution to the 2M CHIP RAM problem that would work. They then stated that Harpoon wil NOT run on a 2M CHIP RAM machine, and they will get this info to their programmers, but did not know if any fix would be planned. So, the moral of this story is, if you want to run Harpoon on an Amiga, don't opt for the 2M chip RAM option for the new Agnus, or if you need the 2M, either be ready for a long wait, or get a letter writing campaign going, 'cause it looks like it's going to be a bumpy ride until a fix is available. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 15 Oct 91 19:19:39 EDT From: wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (Alex Klaus) Subject: Terrible Torps Summary: (12) Torpedo Problems Stupid Torpedos, and MEDC I have discovered another rather annoying bug in Harpoon. I was playing Senario 1, in the MEDC battleset. The Soviet force, caught me slightly off guard and two of Yavuz class ships were toasted. I light off my radars in an attempt to get a firing fix on them. Before I launch, I received a message that I lost another Penguin mount through technical problems. I manage to fire off my Harpoons, and remaining Penguins. I sank 3 ships in the Soviet task force. Now comes the bug discovery. Now that most of my missile were expended, I had fire the SST-4 Torpedoes, which in the databases and battlebook, are stated as surface ship capable. I proceed to initate the attack but the computer said that I must close to within 4.7 nm, rather than engage at 20 nm with my Torps. Attacking two Mod Kashins with guns from a PTM is not very safe idea. I was wondering if anyone has had the same problem, of weapons being theoretically capable but the computer not letting you use them. Thank Alex Klaus PS: After closing I sink one Nanucka III, and Osa III, but am toated shortly thereafter by the Mod Kashin. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 91 8:22:29 MDT From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (13) Attacking Air Bases Hello! Here's a question for all: What's the best way to kill an airbase, other than strike after strike of Hornets armed with Harpoons? And another question: Has anyone ever beat the computer playing Rapier, GIUK scenario #8, playing the NATO side? I asked this once before, but I've looked at the scenario again and still can't figure out how to win. The reason for the first question is that my multiple Harpoon strikes are fun but they also show the unrealistic logistics problem of computer Harpoon. After all, how many Harpoons can a Nimitz carry? Or how many can be stocked (realistically) at an airbase? Any help would be appreciated! Thanks! Mark R. Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (New .sig under consideration!) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Sat Nov 9 17:29:40 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram4) id AA02744; Sat, 9 Nov 91 17:29:40 -0800 Date: Sat, 9 Nov 91 17:29:40 -0800 Message-Id: <9111100129.AA02744@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #3 (msgs 14-21) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 9 November 1991 Volume: 8 Issue: 3 First Message: 14 Messages: 8 Topics: (14) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (15) Battleset #4 IOPG hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov (16) SITREP #9 tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (17) Re: Attacking Airbases csmsets@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (18) Re: Attacking Airbases guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (19) Scenario Editor bruce@bonnie-tcp.astro.ucla.edu (20) US Coast Guard tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (21) Miniatures Game Setup rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat 9 Nov 1991 16:01:45 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (14) Editorial New members added since last issue: antvelink@issun3.stc.nl (Henk Antvelink) schellen@mprgate.mpr.ca (Neil Schellenberger) postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) jan.wolitzky@att.com (Jan I. Wolitzky) Total list membership is now 225. Sorry for taking so long to get this one out. I got busy upgrading and reorganizing our network server. Oh well, sometimes we do have to do real work :-). SITREP #9 (dated July 1991) is out. Hey, I didn't even have to call GDW this time! In the Updates section, it was noted that GHQ is changing its packaging away from its boxed ship sets to single ships in blister packs. Now you fleet doesn't have to have 3 Pegasus hydrofoils for every Supruance! In addition, GHQ is now offering some UK ships and various 1:2400 scale aircraft. Also, I just got 360's Newsletter #3 (dated September 1991). (What ever happened to #1 and #2?) Three-Sixty is now offering a "limited edition" Challenger Pak version. It has the game, Battlesets #1 and #2 (plus 16 extra scenarios), Scenario Editor and BattleBook for $89.95 plus shipping. In addition to Harpoon T-Shirts, Three-Sixty is now also offering the "Exotic Fighters" calendar. What will they think of next? The 1991/92 edition of the Naval Institute's "World Naval Weapon Systems" by Norman Friedman is also out. This latest edition is upto 860 pages (roughly 60% more than the first edition) and retails for $120 plus shipping. (Naval Institute members get it for $96.) -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 91 12:01:27 PDT From: hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov (Kolin E. Hand) Subject: (15) Battleset #4 IOPG Talking to Tim Jacobs at 360, he mentioned the following tidbits about IOPG: The French will be represented with the _De Gaulle_ CVN, complete with Rafales. The French will also be RED/BLUE capable. The U.K. is present. Indonesia and Australia (the latter with O.H. Perrys) will be present. The U.S.S.R. in addition to their new CVN, will have the new Yak-141 Freestyle available to spice up any _Kievs_ in the area. Oooooh. Are all of you thinking what I'm thinking? Indian Freestyles? There will be a total of 100 different ship platforms available. The scenarios will be more difficult to triumph in due to more realistic weapon loadouts available. No more 6 Phoenix loadouts? Last time I spoke with 360, the Battleset was slipping schedules due to late computer art. They said earliest would be Late November. Probably sometime next year. Also, the western Pacific Battleset is going to be worked on. For those Enterprise fans out there, The Big E along with all of the Nuke escorts (Long Beach, Truxton, Bainbridge) will be participants. +===========================================================================+ + "If a group of N persons implements a COBOL compiler, there will be + + N - 1 passes. Someone in the group has to be the manager." + + -- T. Cheatham + +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Kolin E. Hand hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov + + Jet Propulsion Laboratory hand@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov + +===========================================================================+ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat 9 Nov 1991 14:43:25 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (16) SITREP #9 SITREP #9 contents: The Other Navy, Part Two by Robert Martinez Kitbash Corner by Patrick Hreachmack Book Review Column Alerts Column New Soviet Ship Classes Rules Corrections Product Updates "The Other Navy" is the second half of a US Coast Guard article. Some platform data from the article is presented below in a separate message. The subject of "Kitbash Corner" is the Canadian Iroquois TRUMP Conversion. The Rules Corrections material appeared earlier in CZ v6 msg 4. All the Product Update material is either in the editorial or has appeared in previously in CZ. The "New Soviet Ship Classes" article reports that two new small Soviet surface combatants have recently begun trials. Data for these new platforms will appear in a future CZ. Apparently, NATO will no longer assign "K" names to new Soviet ship classes. Instead, they will use the BAL-COM, BLK-COM designators until an actual class name is published. The following are some selected items from the "Alerts" column presented here by permission of Larry Bond. Mk92 Mod 6 Fire Control System upgrade program for O.H. Perry class cancelled. The Soviets have come out with a new air-launched version of SS-N-25 missile. NATO will probably designate it AS-17. SS-N-25 may also have a form launchable from torpedo tubes. Preliminary data for USSR AS-17: Min Range: ?, Max Range: 54nm, .80 Ph, Hang Weight: ?, 50 Damage Points, Speed: 594 knots (5.0nm/Tac Turn), VLow Cruise, I/TARH Guidance, VSmall target. Pravda has announced the launching of an Akula SSN named "Pantera" (Panther). All Akula submarines are supposed to be named after hunting cats and are drawn from the names used by an earlier ship class. Well, at least we know the name of one Soviet submarine. France has introduced Block II versions of the Exocet AM.39 and MM.40 missiles. The new version, which will not be exported to Third World users, will have selectable popup. In Desert Storm, US F-4G and EA-6B conducted off-boresight HARM lauches. Apparently, these aircraft can launch the HARM in one direction and then turn the HARM towards the target in flight. Model this capability as follows: assume the HARM has a 60 degree field of view (30 degrees to each side), assume the HARM can be launched by the F-4G or EA-6B without seeing a target. The HARM can then be steered turning no more than 60 degrees each turn until it can see an radiating target. Assume the HARM cannot use its memory feature without seeing a target sometime during flight. The Harpoon Block ID (that's a roman numeral one followed by a "D") version has more fuel and reattack capability. The range should be about 100nm. Model the reattack capability by either adding 5% to Ph (.85 Ph total) or by making another attack roll if it misses. The target of the reattack is randomly assigned from those in its danger space (use the weighted probabilities from BOL target selection). -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 91 13:03 PDT From: csmsets@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Ed Sakabu) Subject: Killing Airbases w/o Harpoons. Summary: (17) Re: Attacking Airbases In CZ v7 msg 13, am@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) writes: > What's the best way to kill an airbase, other than strike after > strike of Hornets armed with Harpoons? I found using HARMs as being alot more affective (anti-radar). The range of a HARM is 70 nm and they go ALOT faster than Harpoons (this makes them alot harder to shoot down). They don't do as mush damage, but they takeout directors, thus making the airbase defenseless. BUT, if your looking for reallity this isn't it either. HARMs need something to home in on (i.e. working radar emmission), and after the first set go in the bases radar is usually out. Anyways, the anti-radar attacks make for real effective stand-off attacks (be it rather unrealistic). --Ed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 91 17:15:17 CDT From: guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (David Guidry) Subject: (18) Re: Attacking Airbases In CZ v7 msg 13, am@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) writes: > What's the best way to kill an airbase, other than strike after strike of > Hornets armed with Harpoons? Harpoons? Harpoons?!?!?!?! Why in any sense of realism would Harpoon (the game) allow you to target land bases... only the SLAM variant can do that. Personally, I use Walleye IIs. Guaranteed to kill a base with minimal effort. Instead of sending multiple flights of A-6s armed for "standoff" with 4 harpoons, arm them for "guided" with 4 Walleye II's. The Walleye is a 2000 pound bomb with a guidance system. Check the damage between a Walleye and a Harpoon. If I remember correctly, the damage is 2.5 : 1. I can't check it, because I'm at work. The Walleye II is also guaranteed to sink all but the very largest ships with one hit. I never waste my Intruders by having them carry 'poons. They're *much* more effective with Walleyes. > And another question: > Has anyone ever beat the computer playing Rapier, GIUK scenario #8, playing > the NATO side? I asked this once before, but I've looked at the scenario > again and still can't figure out how to win. Nope > The reason for the first question is that my multiple Harpoon strikes are > fun but they also show the unrealistic logistics problem of computer Harpoon. > After all, how many Harpoons can a Nimitz carry? Or how many can be stocked > (realistically) at an airbase? Quite a few, especially if a resupply vessel is in the group. I can't remember the class name, but these are huge freighter/tankers with rebuilt battleship engines in them. They'll keep up with the CVs when fully loaded. As for the CV itself, CVNs have lots more room for ammo stowage than conventional CVs... much of this is used to hold "strike" armament like Harpoons. You would be surprised. -- David A. Guidry | On a clear disk, you | empire Student Consultant | can seek forever | Not just a game Academic Computing and Network Services | but a way of life | -- Gott im Himmel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 25 Oct 1991 10:57:32 EST from: bruce.macintosh@bonnie.astro.ucla.edu Subject: (19) Scenario Editor I am considering purchasing the scenario editor (for an IBM PC). Before I invest the money, though, I have a few questions about its capabilities: (1) How easy is it to work with? How bad is the user interface? (2) How much randomness/computer strategy can be introduced into scenarios? (If I construct a scenario, will I automatically know too much about the computer's plans and forces to make the scenario interesting?) (3) To what extent can one mix the opposing sides? Can two countries that are normally allies in a Battleset be used as opposing forces (ie could I construct a Soviets-vs-Syria scenario in the MEDC set, or a France-vs- Britain in the NACV?) How about forces from one country - could you construct a "Soviet Civil War" scenario? (4) Do people who have bought the scenario editor consider it to be worth the money? (Question 3 is the most important.) Bruce Macintosh UCLA Dept of Astronomy/Infrared Imaging Lab MACINTOSH@BONNIE.ASTRO.UCLA.EDU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 28 Oct 1991 15:37:52 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (20) US Coast Guard The lead article of SITREP #9, "The Other Navy, Part Two" by Robert Martinez, contained some data entries on US Coast Gaurd equipment. They are reproduced here by permission of Larry Bond. USCGC Bear (full wartime configuration) WMEC ---------- Displacement: 1200 (light) In Class: 10+3 Damage Points: 49 In Service: 1983 Damage Mod: 1.00 Speed: 19.5 knots Propulsion: Diesel Crew: 116 Weapons: Total Mounts: 5 F(1)1 Mk75 76mm/62 // Mk 92 C PB&SB(4)2 Mk141 w/4 Harpoon D A(R)1 Mk15 Phalanx w/5 bursts C Aft Pad(1)1 SH-2F LAMPS I or SH-60B LAMPS III B Sensors: 2 SPS-64 J SQR-19 (van installation) M ESM Remarks: US Coast Guard Bear Medium Endurance Class Cutter is designed primarily as a fishing and EEZ patrol ship with additional equipment to be added in wartime. All assigned to Atlantic coast. Range: 9500nm at 13 knots. Also fitted with 2 12.7mm machineguns, 2 Mk19 40mm grenade launchers. Delete 16 crew if cutter does not have LAMPS assigned. Fin stabilizers. Possible RAST. Only one cutter in class can operate the LAMPS III helicopter. Towed sonar array operated from van on fantail; possible space conflict with Phalanx. Reportedly very uncomfortable to handle and top-heavy with all weapons fitted. Peacetime configuration deletes Harpoon, Phalanx, SQR-19 and possibly fin stabilizers; use HH-65A Falcon vice LAMPS. Damage and Speed Breakdown: Damage Points: 0 12 24 37 44 49 Surface Speed: 19 14 10 5 0 Sinks USCGC Reliance WMEC -------------- Displacement: 761 (light) In Class: 16 Damage Points: 34 In Service: 1964 Damage Mod: 1.00 Speed: 18 knots Propulsion: Diesel Crew: 71 Weapons: Total Mounts: 2 F(1)1 Mk22 76mm/50 C Aft Pad(1)1 SH-2F LAMPS I or SH-60B LAMPS III or HH-65A Falcon B Sensors: 2 SPS-64 J Remarks: US Coast Guard Reliance Medium Endurance Cutter class was designed primarily for SAR and law enforcement activity. Three assigned to Pacific coast, remainder on Atlantic coast. Range: 6100nm at 14 knots. Also fitted with a couple of machineguns. No hangar for helicopters. Aviation workshop. Possible RAST. Possible van mounted SQR-19 fitted during wartime. Damage and Speed Breakdown: Damage Points: 0 9 17 26 31 34 Surface Speed: 18 14 9 5 0 Sinks HH-65A Falcon SAR ------------- Cannon ATA: 0 Def ATA: 1.5(1.5) Sensors: FLIR Performance: Speed: Knots (nm/phase) ---------- Throttle Setting -------------- Altitude Cruise Military Afterburner ----------------------------------------------------------- VLow/Low 140(0.6) 165(0.7) - Medium 140(0.6) 165(0.7) - Ceiling: 3600 meters Endurance: Cruise Range: 460nm Internal Fuel: 910kg Inflight Refuel?: N Ordnance Loadouts: None Remarks: Helicopter. US Coast Gaurd short-range search and rescue version of French SA.365F Dauphin 2. Ship or land based. May land in water using inflatable bags. Engine problems have marred what is reportedly a very fine aircraft. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 91 15:16:12 EST From: rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil (Robert S. Dean) Subject: Setting Up a Miniatures Game Summary: (21) Miniatures Game Setup Most of the traffic here recently has concerned the computer versions of Harpoon. Since I'm terribly uncomfortable will all that new-fangled technology (-:, I have been considering setting up a miniatures game at my local gaming store, to see if I can spark some local interest. Now, I don't have nearly as many ships in my 1/3000 scale miniatures collection as I would like, and I want to keep things within reason for new players. A U.S. carrier battle group is thus out of the question. What I do have, however, are a few Swedish corvettes and a minelayer, and some Russian Tarantuls, Krivak-IIIs, and a pair of Alligator class LSTs. It looks to me like I ought to do something along the lines of the scenario about a landing in Norway from _Battles of the Third World War_, but set in Sweden. (Obviously some sort of byproduct anarchy in the U.S.S.R--which is why those KGB Krivak-IIIs have been recalled to the Baltic and placed under naval control... I have the worst luck when it comes to trying to pick "common" ships when I'm shopping without a copy of _Combat Fleets_.) Statistics for the Swedish Navy are already given in the 1990-91 Data Annex (whew!), but there should be a few airplanes involved. Can anybody suggest reasonable sets of data for existing planes to substitute for Swedes? Also, since the deadliness of SSMs in modern combat means that the battle will probably be over after one exchange of missiles, I though I would cast the players in the roles of the various Soviet ship captains, let them plan their operation, and then limit communication to be consistent with the 30-sec turns once the missiles start flying. Does that sound reaosnable to anyone? Good Gaming, Rob Dean rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Fri Nov 15 13:16:31 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram4) id AA06270; Fri, 15 Nov 91 13:16:31 -0800 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 13:16:31 -0800 Message-Id: <9111152116.AA06270@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #4 (msgs 22-28) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 15 Novemeber 1991 Volume: 8 Issue: 4 First Message: 22 Messages: 7 Topics: (22) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (23) FTP Archive Address Change kxb@math.ksu.edu (24) New Soviet Ship Classes tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (25) Scenario Editor postmaster@manadon (26) Miniatures Version Hints lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (27) Planes chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (28) Baltic Action tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.c2s.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 15 Nov 1991 12:27:07 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (22) Editorial New members added since last issue: pjf@hubcap.clemson.edu (Phillip J. Flower) steves@heurikon.heurikon.com (Steve Schultheis) wilson@b11.b11.ingr.com (Jon Wilson) -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 91 11:51:16 CST From: kxb@math.ksu.edu (Karl R. Buck) Subject: Harpoon FTP Archive's New IP Address Summary: (23) FTP Archive Address Change Hello everyone. I've got a few notes to pass along concerning the Harpoon related ftp archive on ftp.math.ksu.edu (129.130.30.2): First: Beginning 18 November, 7pm CST, ftp.math.ksu.edu's IP address will be changing to 129.130.6.1. ftp.math.ksu.edu should still work if you have a working nameserver. If you have trouble with ftp.math.ksu.edu after November 18 try our new IP address. If none of these options work, I can send uuencoded files via email. Second: We are using a new ftp server program. If your ftp client has trouble after giving the password, try prepending a "-" sign to your password. If you still have trouble send me email. Third: We need new uploads! Amiga, Mac and PC scenarios are all welcome. Log in as anonymous and upload them in the pub/incoming directory. Send me a short email message telling me about your contribution and I'll move it into the appropriate directory. Thanks to all that have contributed. Happy hunting. -- Karl Buck email: kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu Department of Mathematics Phone: 913.532.6750 Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 11 Nov 1991 10:34:00 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (24) New Soviet Ship Classes A SITREP #9 article reports that two new Soviet ship classes are now undergoing trials. The following data from that article is reproduced here by permission of Larry Bond. Neustrashimyy (BAL-COM-8) FF ------------- Displacement: 4000 (standard) In Class: 1+? Damage Points: 128 In Service: 1991 Damage Mod: 1.00 Speed: 32 knots Propulsion: Gas Turbine Crew: 220 Weapons: Total Mounts: 12 F(1)1 Auto 100mm/70 // 1 Kite Screech C P/S(2R+4)2 CADS-N-1 w/15 bursts & 32 SA-N-11 missiles // 2 Hot Rod C,D F&A(4)1 SA-N-9 w/32 missiles // 1 Cross Sword D F(12)1 RBU 6000 w/5 salvoes E PB/SB(1)6 533mm Torpedo Tubes w/1 SET-65 F Aft Pad(1)1 Ka-27 Helix A B Sensors: Navigation Radar, 2 Palm Frond, Top Plate J Horse Jaw, Horse Tail M Remarks: Neustrashimyy means redoubtable. Krivak follow-on. On trials December 1990. Uses Soviet Design Modifier (.90) in damage point calculation. CADS-N-1 is a combined gun/missile mount. Its guns fire together. Possible reloads for 533mm torpedo tubes. Use Don 2 data for navigation radar. Damage and Speed Breakdown: Damage Points: 0 32 64 96 115 128 Surface Speed: 32 24 16 8 0 Sinks Dergach FFL ------- Displacement: 700 In Class: 1+? Damage Points: 15 In Service: 1991 Damage Mod: 1.00 Speed: 50 knots Propulsion: Gas Turbine Crew: ? Weapons: Total Mounts: 6 F(1)1 AK-176 76mm/60 // 1 Bass Tilt C A(R)2 AK-630 30mm/65 // 1 Bass Tilt C PB&SB(4)2 SS-N-22 w/4 Sunburn // 1 Band Stand D A(2)1 SA-N-4 w/20 Gecko // 1 Pop Group D Sensors: Band Stand, Navigation Radar J Remarks: World's largest SES. Possible replacement for Nanuchka. Uses SES (.50) and Soviet Design (.90) Modifiers for damage point calculation. Speed estimated. One Bass Tilt director controls both AK-176 and AK-630. One Band Stand acts both as Sunburn director and as search sensor. Use data for Don 2 for Navigation Radar. Damage and Speed Breakdown: Damage Points: 0 4 7 11 13 15 Surface Speed: 50 38 25 12 0 Sinks -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 91 11:11 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk Subject: Harpoon Scenarios Summary: (25) Scenario Editor Bruce Macintosh asked some questions on the Scenario Editor which I would like to give my views on. Firstly, scenario editor is BRILLIANT. It is easy to use and allows many very interesting set-peices to be set up. The ability to re-locate land bases, eg putting a Soviet base (albiet with the wrong name) in Newfoundland, or Ireland, or in the middle of the Atlantic. To my knowledge, opposing sides cannot be mixed and units from one battleset cannot be translocated to a different battleset. Setting up your own scenario can give very good game-play. You can think of it as having very good espionage! By choosing the right balance of forces the game can still be made as difficult (or nigh on impossible) as you want. However, having to deal with some-one else's scenario is a better test of your "Commander" skills. If any-one wants one, or more, of my scenarios they are quite welcome. I believe that I can send them out without incurring the wrath of 360, but, if not, please will some-one let me know. I have designed a number of them to model Naval exercises and operations with which I am famililiar, including Bierra, the Cod War, North Sea operations and so on. Unfortunately, HARPOON, although the best modern sea-warfare package available outside of the MOD,Dod isn't very good on submarine ops... If CZ does have any sway with 360, I would ask for sonar propogation maps to allow submarines to be used effectively. At the moment submarines are just too vulnerable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 91 15:41:44 MST From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: Best way to start . . . Summary: (26) Miniatures Version Hints Hi all! I am thinking of actually trying to play Harpoon, the board version, over break this Dec. (about time, since I've pretty much bought everything that's been published in GDW's Harpoon line.) What I would like to know is if there are any ways that you people think are a good way to start; ie what kinds of ships should I pit together, what rules can I afford to ignore for now, what rules are the most important, etc.. I am hoping to do something by email, but I'm not sure how it's going to work out yet. Any help would be appreciated! ============================================================================== |Mark R. Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu| |Colorado State University | |Fort Collins, Colorado | |Quote: "Stop the world, and let me get off!" - Petra | ============================================================================== ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 11:39:47 MEZ From: chbrin5%dknkurz1.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Kai Hortmann) Subject: (27) Planes Does somebody know how many planes one could expect in a realistic GIUK scenario? I downloaded several scenarios from hilbert.math.ksu.edu and several of them had more than 1000 planes between the two sides! Isn't that a bit too much? The scenario editor doesn't limit you in any way, but I doubt that the USSR has 20 Mainstays on one base and groups of up to 60 MIGs of the same type. I personally prefer 100 planes or less in the whole scenario. I'm toying with the idea of writing a scenario with not a single plane (including helos), but that would be not very realistic as well. :) <* Kai Hortmann - University of Konstanz - Germany *> <* chbrin5@dknkurz1.bitnet or chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de *> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 15 Nov 1991 12:52:20 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (28) Baltic Action In CZ v8 msg 21, rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil (Robert S. Dean) writes: >Also, since the deadliness of SSMs in modern combat means that the battle >will probably be over after one exchange of missiles, It might be interesting to see if both sides could be armed with relatively short range stuff. (I hate it when fleets are pitching SSMs at each other at 200nm. You never have enough table space to put both fleets out at once.) Depending on the availability of air search assets it could be a very tense game of hide and seek. >... I thought I would cast the players in the roles of the various >Soviet ship captains, let them plan their operation, and then limit >communication to be consistent with the 30-sec turns once the >missiles start flying. Does that sound reaosnable to anyone? It's probably okay. Since you are playing the Swedes as well as referee, you should have a plan for the Swedes. They should follow that plan, despite what you know as referee. After the game, show them the master plot, discuss tactics and missed opportunities, etc. That gets them interested in doing better, thinking about tactics and increasing their interest in Harpoon. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Mon Dec 2 16:49:36 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram4) id AA02238; Mon, 2 Dec 91 16:49:36 -0800 Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 16:49:36 -0800 Message-Id: <9112030049.AA02238@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #5 (msgs 29-32) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 2 December 1991 Volume: 8 Issue: 5 First Message: 29 Messages: 4 Topics: (29) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (30) Amiga v1.1 Challenge Pak chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (31) Reality? postmaster@manadon (32) Harpoon BattleSet #4 jjszucs@cbmvax.commodore.com "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 2 Dec 1991 16:26:38 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (29) Editorial New members added since last issue: nmr1!ptw001!kallela@uunet.uu.net (E. Adam Kallel) BattleSet #4 is out for IBM PCs! See the last article for a review. Who went to the last Origins? Did anyone see the beta-test version of WWII miniatures Harpoon? -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 16 Nov 91 12:52:49 MEZ From: chbrin5%dknkurz1.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Kai Hortmann) Subject: Challenge Pak, Amiga version 1.1 Summary: (30) Amiga v1.1 Challenge Pak As I was unable to get any battlesets or the scenario editor in Germany, I bought the "Challenge Pak", while I was in the US. The main reason was that it was cheaper to buy the Pak, including battleset #2, the scenario editor and the battlebook, than to buy them singularly. So I ended with another copy of the master game for my Amiga. Back home in Germany I noticed two things: 1) The Challenge Pak included version 1.1, while I had v1.0 2) The NTSC version 1.1 doesn't run on my PAL Amiga. :( So I still use v1.0 Now my questions: 1) What is the difference between Amiga versions 1.1 and 1.0? 2) Can anybody think of a way to make the NTSC version run on a PAL machine? <* Kai Hortmann - University of Konstanz - Germany *> <* chbrin5@dknkurz1.bitnet or chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de *> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 91 10:44 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk Subject: (31) Reality? Ed Sakabu and others discussed the best way to take out air-bases. In doing so they pointed out one of Harpoon's little foibles - it lets you attack with unrealistic weapons & get results. (It will also refuse to attack with some quite realistic weapons!). There are two views here. Either its "play to win" - in which case any tactics that work can be used, or its "simulate reality" - in which case some self-imposed that work can be used, or its "simulate reality" - in which case some self-imposed constrains are needed. One tactic, widely used in Nato strategies, is the one-way air attack. For example, attacking from the UK deep into the USSR, with pilots flying either on to China or as far back into Scandinavia as they can get, before their fuel runs out. Their survival time, over the target, is only going to average some 4 minutes, anyway. (Fish-heads, sorry surface fleet officers, say that the aviators don't get paid more - they just get paid faster). Many of the scenarios lend themselves to this form of attack. Provided the commander gets his aircraft back over inhabited, preferably friendly, land before their fuel runs out, I reckon its reality. Keith Wain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 14:35:30 EST From: aruba!jjszucs@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com (John J. Szucs) Subject: (32) Harpoon BattleSet #4 Yesterday evening (26 Nov 91), I picked up the long-awaited Harpoon BattleSet #4 -- Indian Ocean/Persian Gulf. I purchased the PC version of the BattleSet (which appears to be the only version currently available). The price at Electronics Boutique was $27.99. The package consisted of a album-like slip-case, a small manual describing the installation procedure and features of the BattleSet, and three 5.25" 360KB diskettes. 3.5" 720KB diskettes are available from Three-Sixty. The manual indicates that due to the large size of some scenarios (particularly Desert Storm and variants), you may run out of memory, depending on your configuration. The README recommends using MS-DOS 5.0 and/or cleaning out unnecessary TSRs from your AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS. In my configuration, I use DOS 5.0 and a few TSRs (mouse driver, Stacker, etc.). I didn't experience any problems. My initial impression (based on about 6 hours of play) is that this is *very* impressive. This BattleSet includes an installation program, so you don't have to manually COPY and JOIN the files. New platforms for the major powers include: o F-117A Nighthawk "stealth" fighter/bombers o B-52H Stratofortress bombers (including a Standoff configuation carrying 12 Harpoons each!) o F-15E Strike Eagle fighter/bombers o TLAM-C (Tomahawk Land Attack Missile-Conventional) conventionally-armed cruise missiles o The Soviet Kusnetsov class aircraft carriers o The naval variants of the Su-27 Flanker and MiG-29 Fulcrum (for deployment on the Kusnetsov class carriers) o The Yak-141 Freestyle (an upgraded version of the Yak-38 Forger); this can give a Soviet Kiev class carrier a bit more of a fighting chance; in reality, this is an on-again/off-again project that might become a victim of the Soviet economic crisis o The French Charles de Gaulle class carrier o The French Rafele fighter (for use on the de Gaulle) In addition, the large (and growing) Indian Navy is well represented by three carriers (including the Cochin -- a full-size carrier currently under construction) and a number of submarines (both imported and locally produced). It also plays a central role in an number of scenarios. Other less-visible, but still important, improvements include: o Long range sub-caliber rounds for battleships (this is a hypothetical system) o SALH laser-guided shipborne artillery rounds (currently under development) o Accurate sonobouy characteristics o Updated passive sonar (hydrophone) characteristics The scenarios in this BattleSet fall into three broad categories: 1) Western forces vs. regional forces (the US escorting of tankers during the Iran-Iraq War; US retaliation against Iran for terrorism; and Operation Desert Shield/Storm). 2) Regional conflicts (the Iran-Iraq War and several India vs. Pakistan scenarios). in some cases, Western powers become involved. For example, one scenario involves an escorted French cargo shipment to Pakistan, opposed by Indian forces. 3) Superpower conflicts (US and allies vs. USSR and allies) in the Indian Ocean/Persian Gulf region. Of course, 360 included a historical Desert Storm scenario, including a US CVBG in the Arabian Sea, a Coalition SAG (focused on the battleships Iowa and Wisconsin) in the Persian Gulf, and Coalition bases in Saudi Arabia and Bahrain and at Diego Garcia vs. most of the Iraqi Air Force and all of the Iraqi Navy (10 ships!). This is the scenario that I played last night. One interesting item in this scenario is that Teheran, Iran shows up as a "Red Side" (Iraqi) base. However, it didn't launch any attacks against me, so I decided (in the interest of political realism) not to attack it. Perhaps this allows the scenario to re-create the Iraqi Air Force fleeing to Iran. One of the more interesting Western power vs. regional power scenarios (in my opinion) is a variant of Desert Storm in which Iraq does not end its advance in Kuwait, but instead continues onto to over-run Saudi Arabia and the other friendly Gulf states before the US can intervene. This scenario looks to be a bit more challenging for the US side. I'll play for a little while and let the list know about any other observations (positive or negative), but I thought some of you might be interested in these initial impressions. John J. Szucs, Product Assurance, Commodore International Services Company ...{uunet|rutgers|pyramid}!cbmvax!jjszucs jjszucs@cbmvax.commodore.com All opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer. "Freedom * Security = Constant" -- Larry Niven ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Tue Dec 17 19:06:26 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram7) id AA07904; Tue, 17 Dec 91 19:06:26 -0800 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 19:06:26 -0800 Message-Id: <9112180306.AA07904@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #6 (msgs 33-38) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 17 December 1991 Volume: 8 Issue: 6 First Message: 33 Messages: 6 Topics: (33) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (34) Mac Purchase Information d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (35) Re: Mac Purchase Info tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (36) Blue on Blue rohde@adcalc.fnal.gov (37) IBM IOPG postmaster@manadon (38) Single Ship Duel Tactics postmaster@manadon "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 17 Dec 1991 18:43:34 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (33) Editorial New members added since last issue: abbey1@husc.harvard.edu (Joshua Abbey) elendil@mintir.fidonet.org (Edward J. Branley) egw@p3.lanl.gov (Egw) mitch@stb.info.com (Mitch Gunzler) bhendrix@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Brian Hendrix) jle@world.std.com (Joe M. Leonard) s907396@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Eugene Miramar) rohde@fnalad.bitnet (Don Rohde) sscotten@email.bony.com (Steve Scotten) dadstoy!czlist@xcluud.sccsi.com (Terry Stockdale) It has been a long time since the last issue. Submission traffic has been pretty low. I will be out of town for two weeks on vacation, so I won't be able to respond to administrative requests during that period. However, I would like to continue to encourage you to submit articles. Is BattleSet #4: IOPG out for the MAC yet? I have not seen it anywhere, but my local store claims that they had already sold their only copy. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 13:26:41 MET From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se Subject: Harpoon for Mac Summary: (34) Mac Purchase Information Some questions about the Mac version: Which is the latest version of it? How many battlesets is there for it? How much does it, and the battlesets and editor cost in the US? Email replies and keep Ted happy! :) -bertil- -- "It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an exercise for your kill-file." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 11 Dec 1991 10:18:10 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (35) Re: Mac Purchase Info >Some questions about the Mac version: > > Which is the latest version of it? I think it is v1.01 (which is mislabelled v1.1 on the distribution disk). > How many battlesets is there for it? #1: Greenland, Iceland, UK Gap (GIUK - included with the game) #2: North Atlantic Convoy (NACV) #3: Mediterranean Conflict (MEDC) #4: Indian Ocean, Persian Gulf (IOPG) - local store says its out! > How much does it, and the battlesets and editor cost in the US? Here is one sample point from a local discount store (COMP-USA). list local discount store all prices US dollars (360) (COMP-USA) ---------------------------- Harpoon (includes GIUK) Black & White 59.95 36.99 Color 74.95 Scenario Editor 39.95 25.99 NACV Black & White 29.95 18.99 Color 39.95 MEDC Black & White 29.95 18.99 Color 39.95 IOPG Black & White ? 23.99 Color ? Harpoon BattleBook 18.95 Challenger Pak 89.95 65.99 (Game, GIUK, NACV, Editor, Book - battlesets probably Black & White) Note 360 also charges excessive "shipping and handling" also. I think the Black & White versions generally include an option to upgrade to color for additional mail order payment (at least mine did). -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 1991 14:22:40 -0600 (CST) From: rohde@adcalc.fnal.gov Subject: Very Unusual Occurance (bug) Summary: (36) Blue on Blue I'm wondering if anyone else has had anything this interesting occur. First, I'll set the scene: System: 3Meg A2000HD (at the time: v1.3) Game: Harpoon V1.0 Battleset: NACV Scenario: 14.0 Playing: RED Options: Nuke release, No Snork, Real Wx, No Maint. Failures, Full Ord. No Auto Formation Situation: I was bringing a red antiradar plane around one of two groups of blue ships. Suddenly I get presented with an attack screen: Surface Group AAS attacking Surface Group ABS ATTACKING UNITS UNIT WEAPONS REMAINING 01:VLS Ticonde Leyte Gulf Harpoon 1C x4 04:Knox Elmer Montgo Harpoon 1C x4 05:Type 22/3 Cumberland Tomahawk x8 06:Trafalgar Torbay 07:Los Angeles Birminghom ENEMY UNITS WEAPONS ALLOCATED 01:CG VLS Ticonderoga 02:CGN Virginia 03:CG Belknap 05:FF Knox 06:FF Type 23 07:AOE Sacramento Yes... look carefully... they're both BLUE units! What did I do? I fired a Harpoon, of course. :-) Unfortunately a RED plane within range automatically shot it down... I never got the requester again. I did get a color hardcopy though. I think I'll send it to 3-60 just to drive 'em nuts. What caused this to happen? I suspect shooting down more than 255 enemy planes, overwrites some stack and strange things like this start to occur. -+ Don Rohde ROHDE@FNALAD.BITNET ROHDE@ADCALC.FNAL.GOV ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 91 12:29 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) Subject: Harpoon (IBM PC) - Middle East Scenario Summary: (37) IBM IOPG First, the bad news.. If you have been having crash problems with NACV and the baseline battlesets, expect more than ever with the Middle East. Following 360's advice and setting up a special boot disk with no drivers improved things a lot but the system still locks. Two different "crash" modes seem to exist, themaxi crash leaves everything frozen and needs power on/off to get the machine back; the mini crash leaves the mouse pointer still working, but the clock frozen. The latter crash gives all the symptoms of a "garbage collection", so may notbe a crash at all. However, I have never waited for more than a few hours to see if the machine would come back. The control-alt-del works with mini crash mode. Also on the bad news, something is clearly wrong near the Equator! The tactical display will not scroll as far South as needed. In some scenarios, eg Red, White and Blue, you end up with all the action below the scrollable region. The good news is that the platforms are far more flexible and allow more even balancing of forces. One great limiting factor remains that of infinite fuel supplies for warships. The tactics of taking out the tanker and then waiting for all the escorts to run out of fuel just does not work. The Middle East and Med. battlesets are well worth getting - particularly if you have the Scenario Editor. The HARPOON games are very much blue-water type engagements and coastal scenarios, without minefields and all the rest, are not very realistic. Similarly, sonar conditions in shallow waters - particularlythe waters off Norway, are far too good - in practice they would be bottom bounce and reverberation limited. However, for off-shore operations most of these limitiations are not signiicant. I still can not believe the value for money of HARPOON! KW ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 16 Dec 91 15:14 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) Subject: Harpoon Tactics - Single Ship Duel Summary: (38) Single Ship Duel Tactics Using the scenario editor, I set up a fairly simple problem: The scenario was a convoy action whereby a single ammunition ship had been disabled and had to be left behind, some 200 miles North of the Azores. The convoy commodore had left a Spruance class behind, to defend the ship until an ocean-going tug could arrive from the Azores. (20 hours at 10 knots). The red force attacking the ammunition ship comprises 1, 2 or 3 Udaloys. The remainder of the red force is continuing its attacks on the convoy main body. The red commander has used Udaloys because the convoy has no submarine protection and the Udaloys are not much use for anything else. Whatever tactics I use, the Udaloys lose. Even robbing the Spruance of its missiles, it still wins. The Udaloy has a gun but, unless I play red commander, she never uses it against surface ships - at least, she doesn't appear to. The blue tactic that I have been using is to circle the ammunition ship at 2 miles and at creep speed, all sensors passive. Any thoughts? Or is it simply that the Udaloy really IS totally ineffectual in a surface engagement? KW ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Mon Jan 13 09:44:17 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram7) id AA06668; Mon, 13 Jan 92 09:44:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 13 Jan 92 09:44:17 -0800 Message-Id: <9201131744.AA06668@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #7 (msgs 39-45) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 13 January 1992 Volume: 8 Issue: 7 First Message: 39 Messages: 7 Topics: (39) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (40) Re: IBM IOPG lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (41) Mac Scen Swaps reynolds@cns.bu.edu (42) Sonobouy Link Range junio@twinsun.com (43) Editor Bug norm@ctr.columbia.edu (44) Challenger Pak Problems dreydav@karl.iit.edu (45) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 13 Jan 1992 09:36:58 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (39) Editorial New members added since last issue: gjb@fig.citib.com (Greg Brail) fred@sics.se (Larske Fredlund) bob.gahl@ebay.sun.com (Bob Gahl) mgilbert@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Mike Gilbert) junio%twinsun.com@cs.ucla.edu (Junio Hamano) haneyg@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu (Gary W. Haney) paul@xcluud.sccsi.com (Paul Hutmacher) kohm@acsu.buffalo.edu (Robert F. Kohm) laik@cory.berkeley.edu (Kevin Lai) norm@ctr.columbia.edu (Norm Lunde) truman@mpd.tandem.com (Truman Ng) robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Paul Robichaux) dennis@metw3.met.fu-berlin.de (Dennis Schulze) shafer@rigel.dfrf.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) yuqian@bvc.edu (Unknown) A subscriber mentioned that the digest does not follow the official RFC 1153 format. I am considering changing to this format. If you feel strongly one way or the other, please send mail to the administrator address. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 17 Dec 91 22:22:07 MST From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (40) Re: IBM IOPG In CZ v8 msg 38, Keith Wain writes: >First, the bad news.. If you have been having crash problems with NACV >and the baseline battlesets, expect more than ever with the Middle >East. Following 360's advice and setting up a special boot disk with >no drivers improved things a lot but the system still locks. Two >different "crash" modes seem to exist, themaxi crash leaves everything >frozen and needs power on/off to get the machine back; the mini crash >leaves the mouse pointer still working, but the clock frozen. The >latter crash gives all the symptoms of a "garbage collection", so may >notbe a crash at all. However, I have never waited for more than a few >hours to see if the machine would come back. The control-alt-del works >with mini crash mode. Hmmm . . . I haven't had any problems with it so far. I use the clean boot disk as mentioned in the BattleBook (similar to the one 360 discusses in the readme files.) I use a Tandy with 728k (the 128k above 640 is used for video memory only), and I ran the desert storm scenario that supposedly needs 600KB's free. I thought that the computer would crash, because the most I can free up is ~580KB. However, with a little a/c management (didn't use most of the aircraft since they weren't needed), I got through it with no problem. About the only error I ever get now is the runtime a05, division by zero error. According to 360, this is part of the executable, and has something to deal with the keyboard interface. >Also on the bad news, something is clearly wrong near the Equator! The >tactical display will not scroll as far South as needed. In some >scenarios, eg Red, White and Blue, you end up with all the action >below the scrollable region. The good news is that the platforms are >far more flexible and allow more even balancing of forces. I suggest you read all of the readme files. They specifically mention that a new system was used for IOPG, and that if you access a previous BattleSet first, then IOPG, you could have this problem. The solution is to delete all your BattleSets from your directory, install IOPG.RES and IOPGXXX.RES, then put all your other BattleSets back on. Then, the BattleSet selection screen will display the IOPG first, then the others in the order you copied them. BTW, those of you with PC's, you might want to get in touch with 360 soon and see if they'll send you version 1.21 of Harpoon. Apparently, there are a lot of nuances to IOPG that will go untouched unless you use v1.21. Hope this helps! =============================================================================== |Mark R. Lam | Insert your | lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu | |Colorado State University | favorite quote | ### | |Fort Collins, Colorado | in this space. | lam@handel.cs.colostate.edu | =============================================================================== ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 91 19:16:21 -0500 From: reynolds@cns.bu.edu (John Reynolds) Subject: Do any Mac Harpooners want to swap edited Harpoon scenarios? Summary: (41) Mac Scen Swaps Although it is fun to design new scenarios it is not fun to play them if you designed them yourself. Would any Mac users like to swap scenarios? Perhaps we could find a way to set up a scenario repository accessible by anonymous ftp? [You should take a look at the scenario FTP site on kxb@math.ksu.edu. -ted] -John ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 92 14:49:11 -0800 From: junio@twinsun.com (Junio Hamano) Subject: How far can I leave sonobuoys behind? Summary: (42) Sonobouy Link Range After my P-3 Orion has already left the place where it killed a submarine, the sonobuoys it dropped to hunt the sub down picked up another sub (I'm playing computer version). The manual says sonobuoys are active for a few hours, so I can understand they can detect that sub. But their signal reached me even though none of my units were near them anymore. I just wonder what is the realistic range that they can transmit the signal to airbourne platforms. I don't play board (miniature) version, but what does the rule say about this? -junio ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 03:05:17 EST From: norm@ctr.columbia.edu (Norm Lunde) Subject: Scenedit Bug Summary: (43) Editor Bug Has anybody out there experienced frustrating crashes while trying to write scenarios with v1.0 of Scenario Editor for the IBM PC? It happens to me every time I try to give a surface or submarine group orders to attack a land base. When I try to load "factory" scenarios which include this type of action (e.g. Rapier in GIUK) I get the same result -- a weird dialog box telling me that a resource file is missing and immediate system lockup. Is there a fix for this bug? I should note that this is a legitimate, purchased copy of SCENEDIT. There's no need to flame me just because I didn't bother to register it :) Norm Lunde norm@ctr.columbia.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 8 Jan 92 19:39 CDT From: dreydav%iitvax1.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu Summary: (44) Challenger Pak Problems I've purchased the challenger pak for pc's, and have not been able to run any of the NACV scenarios. I can run them, but I have absolutely no loadout for any of my aircraft, and my ships have no weapons. The version I'm running is 1.21. What can I do to run these scenarios??? I've talked with someone else who has had similar problems... Second question: (Actually a comment) The intelligence of the computer player appears to be quite minimal. For most of the scenarios of the GIUK I've been able to win whether I play either side, usually the first time and occasionally the second time I try. The only notable exception being when I play blue for the submarine-missile-attack-on-soviet-air-bases scenario. I still haven't been able to win that... The other scenarios are no longer fun; I annihilate the computer every time. Third question: Ever try moving your ships across land??? It works... Why go around Iceland when you can just as easily go right through it??? Thanx for any answers, Dave Dreyer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 10 Jan 1992 09:36:50 PST From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (45) Recent Naval Developments Soviet Union is officially gone now. Admiral of the Fleet V.N. Chernavin remains in command, though some Fleet commanders were sacked because of their pro-coup leanings. Russia and Ukraine are reportedly going to split the Black Sea fleet. The Commonwealth Navy continues to scrap obsolete units as the Navy is downsized. New construction has been drastically cut back. Some reports suggest outfitting of the Varyag (Kuznetsov class CV) and construction of the Ulyanovsk CVN have been suspended. Apparently, no new cruiser construction is planned. The Yuri Andropov will be the last Kirov class CGN and Admiral Lobov the last of the Slava class CG. In destroyers, the Sovremenny DDG continues production. The Udaloy DDG class will terminate with 12 units. Development work, however, has not stopped. Apparently, a successor class for the Udaloy is being developed. As reported earlier in CZ, the Neustrashimyy FF class and the Dergach SES FFL class are in trials. Also, Krivak frigates are receiving upgrades. It's not yet clear whether submarine production has been cut back. Recent reports suggest an improved Akula SSN design on trials. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Fri Jan 17 13:52:49 1992 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram7) id AA02124; Fri, 17 Jan 92 13:52:49 -0800 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 92 13:52:49 -0800 Message-Id: <9201172152.AA02124@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v8 #8 (msgs 46-54) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 17 January 1992 Volume: 8 Issue: 8 First Message: 46 Messages: 9 Topics: (46) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (47) Computer Virus Weapons junio@bo.twinsun.com (48) Attacking Bases lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (49) Ex-Soviet Navy lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (50) Amiga Harpoon tlvx!system (51) Surprising Results postmaster@manadon (52) Equatorial Problems postmaster@manadon (53) Volume 8 Index cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (54) CZ Guidelines cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 13:41:02 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (46) Editorial New members added since last issue: dreydav@karl.iit.edu (Dave Dreyer) reynolds@cns.bu.edu (John Reynolds) rws@cs.brown.edu (Richard W. Sabourin) jsjea2%alaska.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Unknown) This brings Volume 8 to a close. It should appear on the archive site shortly. What's left? Does anyone know what 360 is going to do next as far as Harpoon is concerned? -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 11:09:36 PST From: junio@bo.twinsun.com (Junio Hamano) Subject: Computer Virus as a Weapon? Summary: (47) Computer Virus Weapons ABC Nightline last week had a special programming called the gulf war -- untold story. In the programming, it was reported that some computer components for radar equipment were deliberately contaminated with computer virus before they were shipped to Iraq, and the virus worked very effectively by stopping Iraqi radar to help US forces sneak into Iraqi airspace. I find this very clever but tad unbelievable --- does anybody have more info to share? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 15:09:22 MST From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (48) Attacking Bases This may be old news to you experts at Computer Harpoon, but I've played the simulation quite a bit and just found this out (don't ask me why I didn't see this before!) I decided to attack the Bangalore base in India (using IOPG) with the Nimitz. The carrier was approximately 650 miles away. I launched 12 Hornets armed with LR Anti-Radar (2 HARMs each.) When they were about to launch their HARMs, I launched ten Intruders armed with Standoff (4 Harpoons each.) After the the HARMs impacted (for 9% damage), I launched another 12 Hornets armed with LR Standoff (2 Harpoons each.) The Intruder raid increased the damage percentage to 51%. The second Hornet raid left the base damaged at 73%. Each of these raids were spaced approximately 20 minutes apart. This was the fastest way I had ever damaged a base to that extent (short of using nuclear munitions). After the first Hornet flight landed, I rearmed them with LR Standoff and launched them off (this raid put the base at 95% damage.) Finally, the Intruders were rearmed to Guided loadout (four Walleye II each). This raid finished the base off. Again, short of nuking the base, this is the quickest I've ever destroyed a base. So, my question is this: Have other players used this tactic more, and does it work like I described above? Is this a realistic approach to targeting an airbase (ignoring, for the moment, logistical considerations)? Thanks! -- Mark R. Lam InterNet Address: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu Colorado State University lam@handel.cs.colostate.edu Fort Collins, Colorado ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 12 Jan 92 15:17:53 MST From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (49) Ex-Soviet Navy With the breakup of the Soviet Union, is there any idea on how the Navy is going to be divided? I think that this particular situation opens up a lot of new horizons for Harpoon players. This is easily simulated in the paper version, but for computer players, this is currently not possible. I would like to see the ability to put any type of platform in Blue or Red groups, even if it means seeing the Kiev taking on the Baku. What do you other players think? If enough of us send messages to Three-Sixty, maybe they'll change the scenario editor to accomodate these "Civil War" scenarios. On a related note, has anyone played this kind of game? (ie Soviet on Soviet) What were the results? What made the difference in the battle? Later! -- Mark R. Lam InterNet Address: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu Colorado State University lam@handel.cs.colostate.edu Fort Collins, Colorado ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 92 21:56:31 EST From: sinkhole!tlvx!system@bikini.cis.ufl.edu (SysOp) Subject: (50) Amiga Harpoon I haven't been following the CZ much lately, so I apologize if this has been discussed, but does anyone have any info on using Harpoon with an Amiga 3000? I have version 1.0, which doesn't work. In calling 360, they said that version 1.1 would only work with ADOS 2.0, not 2.04 (which, of course, I have), saying it "crashes." Does anyone know what that means? Am I out of luck? I know the first Harpoon didn't like the "click-to-front" utilities. If Harpoon 1.1 was used on a machine without these sorts of utilities, would it tend to not "crash"? (If that IS the problem, someone should tell 360. :-) ) (Maybe I should just order 1.1 anyway, but if it doesn't work it doesn't work....) Thanks! Gary -- system@tlvx.UUCP (SysOp) Temporal Vortex BBS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 9:08 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) Subject: Harpoon Tactics Summary: (51) Surprising Results I am enclosing some Harpoon correspondence - do others agree with my comments? From: taltos@edu.nevada (David Lerman) To: postmaster@uk.ac.manadon-engineering-college Subject: Harpoon Questions Dear Keith, As you seem to be an experienced Harpoon player (judging from CZ), perhaps you can advise me. I have been playing Harpoon (Mac) MEDC, and I am more than a little peeved. I have been trying to play the "Come-as-you-are" scenario but each time (~4), playing blue, when my F-15s and F-4s from Tel Aviv rise up to do battle with the Syrian MiGs, the same thing happens. MY MISSILES BARELY WORK. I had 10 F-4s in Air-to-Air configuration, take on 4 MiG-29s. Each time. for each volley, I downed at MOST 1 MiG, and they were heading right at me. It is absurd that I had to use up over 20 Sparrows to down 4 MiGs. The people at 360 say "It can happen", but every time? Do you have any ideas? I like the game, but these types of incidents occur much too often and I am seriously considering giving up the game to avoid aggravation. I also find that no matter which side I play, the other side's weapons seem extraordinarily reliable and accurate compared to mine. Probabaly the most upsetting of these incidents was in GIUK "The Duel", playing Blue, when my sub (the Improved LA class) located the enemy task force early, trailed them, got exact position of most of the ships, and let them close to within 180 nm of my task force. I then launched a total of 40 Tomohawks (including sub) with complete surprise, as they had no active radar up. SAMs stopped ~5, but of the rest, only 2 hit, a Sovremenny, no big deal. I found that more than a little absurd. Any thoughts? Happy New Year, dml taltos@uns-helios.nevada.edu The Nevada Test Site: Better bombs for a better tomorrow. From: judy::postmaster "Keith Wain" 6-JAN-1992 12:01:17.58 To: cbs%uk.ac.nsfnet-relay::edu.nevada::taltos Subject: Re: Harpoon questions I only have the PC version, so I cannot re-create your examples directly however, I too have carefully set up what should be a "perfect" solution only to find that everything misses.. At first I got very miffed. Later I got used to the idea and now treat it as the vagaries of warfare, having to allow for "illogical" results now and again adds an extra dimension and gets the panic-mode adrenalin going. Watching the whole of a strike force, which had been carefully kept out of missile range, disappearing in puffs of smoke discourages you from ever bringing them in that close again - which is probably very realistic.. The tomahawk situation interests me greatly. You didn't say whether you had fired TASMs TLAMs TLAM/D TLAM/C or TLAM/N. I've found most of these successful provided that the target doesn't move much. TASMs should re-attack with better ECCM if they miss the first time, but my HARPOON doesn't allow re-attack. TASMs should get OTH with GPS or AN/USQ-81, but, again, I don't believe that my HARPOON gives mid-course correction. One method of attack that works is to get the opposing forces to stop or to back-track or to at least slow down, before launching tomahawks. They are very successful against ships in harbour. I have also found that it is more successful to launch them singly, with a couple of seconds gap between each one. Submarine launches at close range have got excellent results- the old wolf-pack idea of delaying an attack until you can vector in several units from all round the compass works well, particularly with combined TASMs and torps. On the aircraft side, I haven't had the same sorts of problems. Again, splitting your force into several sections, flying a couple around the target group at afterburn and then steering all the sections into the group from odd angles give s a very good return. It's a little unrealistic in that (as far as I know) you cant friendly fire yourself. All of the usual sucker tactics, like using an AWACS plane as a decoy to lure groups into a killing ground, work very well. Try putting an ECM helicopter up the lee side of a group of ships and then setting it to continuous transmit - it makes a good decoy. (Helicopter pilots get paid too much anyway - or at least, get paid too fast...) Hope this helps Happy new year Keith Wain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 92 9:30 BST From: postmaster@manadon-engineering-college.ac.uk (Keith Wain) Subject: Mark Lam note - cz 40 Equatorial Problems Summary: (52) Equatorial Problems In CZ v8 msg 40, Mark Lam cured my Equatorial problem! I am not quite sure how 360 keeps their battleset database, but simply renaming the .res files (other than the IOPG), running Harpoon, and then renaming them back - doesn't work. Moving all the files into a subdirectory and then moving them back, IOPG first, does work. Presumably Harpoon is simply looking through the MFD and grabbing the names as they come - in which case there could be problems if files are allocated the entries associated with an earlier (deleted) set of files. I await with interest what happens when I compact the drive! On the subject of crashes, there seems to be some relationship between the cpu power, the scenario complexity, the time compression in use and the amount of new activity that has just been actioned. One way of minimising crashes (which works for me, at least), is to switch to normal time while launches are underway. I'm using a 25Mhz 386/387 with 8 meg at the moment and that seems much better than the 16Mhz 386/387 with 2 meg that I used to use. Finally, what's the "Battlebook"? Cheers Keith Wain ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 13:25:46 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (53) Volume 8 Index Volume Issue Date Messages Author - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 1 10 October 1991 (1) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (2) Amiga, etc. jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (3) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (4) PBeM Harpoon hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov (5) Tomcat Models tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (6) Re: Crazy Hornet Solutions tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 2 24 October 1991 (7) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (8) Air Sortie Tips jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (9) SS-N-25 jtgorman@cs.arizona.edu (10) Re: SS-N-25 tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (11) Amiga 3000 2.0 jdutka@wpi.wpi.edu (12) Torpedo Problems wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (13) Attacking Air Bases lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu 3 9 November 1991 (14) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (15) Battleset #4 IOPG hand@spc7.jpl.nasa.gov (16) SITREP #9 tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (17) Re: Attacking Airbases csmsets@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (18) Re: Attacking Airbases guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (19) Scenario Editor bruce@bonnie-tcp.astro.ucla.edu (20) US Coast Guard tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (21) Miniatures Game Setup rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil 4 15 Novemeber 1991 (22) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (23) FTP Archive Address Change kxb@math.ksu.edu (24) New Soviet Ship Classes tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (25) Scenario Editor postmaster@manadon (26) Miniatures Version Hints lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (27) Planes chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (28) Baltic Action tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 5 2 Decemeber 1991 (29) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (30) Amiga v1.1 Challenge Pak chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (31) Reality? postmaster@manadon (32) Harpoon BattleSet #4 jjszucs@cbmvax.commodore.com 6 17 December 1991 (33) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (34) Mac Purchase Information d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (35) Re: Mac Purchase Info tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (36) Blue on Blue rohde@adcalc.fnal.gov (37) IBM IOPG postmaster@manadon (38) Single Ship Duel Tactics postmaster@manadon 7 13 January 1992 (39) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (40) Re: IBM IOPG lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (41) Mac Scen Swaps reynolds@cns.bu.edu (42) Sonobouy Link Range junio@twinsun.com (43) Editor Bug norm@ctr.columbia.edu (44) Challenger Pak Problems dreydav@karl.iit.edu (45) Recent Naval Developments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 8 17 January 1992 (46) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (47) Computer Virus Weapons junio@bo.twinsun.com (48) Attacking Bases lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (49) Ex-Soviet Navy lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (50) Amiga Harpoon tlvx!system (51) Surprising Results postmaster@manadon (52) Equatorial Problems postmaster@manadon (53) Volume 8 Index cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (54) CZ Guidelines cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 17 Jan 1992 13:24:46 PST From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (54) CZ Guidelines Guidelines for The Convergence Zone Last Update: 6 January 1992 Author: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim - CZ Moderator) Welcome to The Convergence Zone! Goal "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. The Harpoon products include Harpoon, Captain's Edition Harpoon, Computer Harpoon, Harpoon SITREP, and various supplements for the print and computer versions. Naval topics are discussed in so far as they are related to the game or provide useful background. The goal of CZ is interesting discussions and material and just plain fun. Submissions Messages for submission to the mailing list should be sent to "cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu". CZ is published in digest form. All messages are subject to possible rejection or editing by the moderator. Rejection should be pretty rare and only occurs if the subject of a message is wholly inappropriate or if the message is offensive. (Please keep flames to a minimum!) Editing should be pretty rare also. Reasons for editing include (but are not necessarily limited to) extreme length, obvious errors and really bad formatting. Any editing will be noted. Please double check your submissions for errors and try to stay within 80 characters per line. Administration Administrative requests should be sent to "cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu". Once in a while, the moderator has to do real work, so please be patient. If several people on the same machine receive the CZ, please try to organize a local redistribution. When you signup, I will send you back issues from the current volume. Previous volumes are available from the archives. Archives After each volume is complete, it along with an index is placed on "sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca" (129.100.100.12) for access by anonymous FTP. Please be polite and don't FTP from 08:00 to 18:00 US Eastern time during a workday. The CZ archive volumes appear under the "pub/cz" directory in compressed format. The volumes are named v1.Z, v2.Z, etc. The index files are named i1.Z, i2.Z, etc. A few other items appear under separate names. The complete list is in the file "INDEX". There is also an independent scenario archive run by kxb@math.ksu.edu (Karl R. Buck) on ftp.math.ksu.edu (129.130.6.1) which allows anonymous FTP. The details are on that site in the file "pub/harpoon/00readme". Please be polite and FTP during off peak hours. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * **********