denden@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dennis H Chang) (11/14/90)
Thanks to the person who posted the latest news on Harpoon. I will call
MacZone right away (and if they don't have it, MacConnection). I wish
more people would post the latest breaking news on these games. There's gotta
be beta testers out there who could let net users know about a game a little
earlier...
Hey, Three-sixty, how come no comment? I remember quering you about Harpoon
and got no comment? Are you guys no longer reading net news? If you still
are, how about a Populus port? joint Three-sixty/Bullfrog venture...
ins_apw@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU <--borrowing a friends account
mail this account
Philip Wongkeith@uhccux.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Vampires R Us) (11/26/90)
It's out! I picked it up at a local software dealer and have tried a few games. This version (1.0) has the features of v1.2 on the PC. Well not exactly, I don't know how to get the towed-array to show up. Apparently they forgot to include this, or it isn't in the documentation. The good news: It's faster on the mac. I've played it on a SE/30 and a 4M Plus, and both beats a 386sx w/VGA. Incrementing the time beyond 1 Min, and I find it updates much faster and smoother. The menus are designed for the additional features (no alt-f8 combo for the extra staff options). It's MultiFinder compatible (but sheesh, what a processor hog)! The bad news: You gotta pay $15 for the color version. The sounds could be better. The map gets cluttered with all those funny patterns of gray (I assume this isn't a problem with the color version) for range circles. The maps, both group and individual unit are more magnified on the Mac. I kept wishing I could zoom out just a tad more. There's no save (command-s) feature, only a "save as..." so you have to retype your filename if you want to use the same filename. I also don't enjoy the modal dialogs, I wish they altered the interface to keep windows on windows instead of staying with the PC interface. All in all, it behaves pretty much like the PC version. I didn't see any new tricks being pulled, nor did I have to alter my standard tactics in the big shootouts. I assume they're using the same core codes for the strategies. They also took some liberties with what is considered the "standards" for a Mac interface [the zoom buttons (1x 2x 4x 8x) are ON the window title areas]. One other thing, I don't know what this game looks like on a bigger screen. Beats me if they hardcoded the window sizes...enjoy! -- Keith Kinoshita; UH-KapCC, OCS, Cmptr, Lecturer INTERNET: keith@uhccux.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU ARPA: uhccux!keith@nosc.MIL "All the world's a simulation And all the Sims and SimEarthlings merely players..." -William Simspeare
LSB103@psuvm.psu.edu (11/28/90)
Humm...I see that someone else has a posting of Harpoon already...Huh well, I said I was going to post a review of it, and I will...For the people who still don't have the game, I recommand this game for anyone who is interested in modern day naval warefare. The options are limitless and the game is so detailed that I found it hard to master. Huh, by the way, I call up some of the mail order stores on the mac magazines and was told that they don't have the game in stock. So when I went back to New York City for Thanks- giving, I went to J&R Music Outlet and picked it up. Sorry I don't have their phone number but I think you can check it up thru phone directory. They usually have the latest games for all game machines...I saw a NFL game that looks pretty interesting...back to the subject of Harpoon, the interface is strictly mac-like, and that's a major plus. It also does not have any copy-protection on it. Now if Three-Sixty can do it, why can't else follow suite? The game comes in 2 disks, one is the main program disk and the other one is the GIUK (Greenland Iceland United Kingdom) disk. There are no system on the two disks so you'll need to swap disks quite often, even if you have two drives. So a hard drive is recommended. By the way, does anyone out there have a version of system (later than 6.0.2) that is less than 250K? Huh, one more thing about Harpoon that I dislike: Most of the current ships, subs, aircraft, and their arsonals are included in the game, why didn't Three-Sixty include a booklet that describe each each weapon's range, effective targets, etc? You can look all of this up in the game, but I find it very annoying to quit whatever you are doing so you can go to the window. Additional info will be posted later as I have the game longer...send any info or question via E-mail, please.
JMP124@psuvm.psu.edu (jim pyke) (11/29/90)
It was mentioned that there was no information on the weapon systems. This is
true as far as the game is concerned. However, and I realize this is not a
real defense of the game, if you want that info in a booklet form, I suggest
purchase the game that Harpoon by Three Sixty was based on. Namely, Harpoon.
GDW makes it, and although I have only played it once or twice due to its
complexity, I find the information that comes with it more than makes up for
its $20 cost. And, from what I understand (though I don't own it) the 1990/91
update has all the new ship classes as well as new weapons and sensors. All in
all it is very in depth and just the thing for doing intelligence gathering
on the Soviet Oscar that is coming your way (ie. what IS the range on those
SS-N-19's?)
BTW - according to the book, they have a range of 250 nautical miles, so watch
out!
-Jim
jmp124@psuvm.psu.eduplague@milton.u.washington.edu (Jack Brown) (12/02/90)
I just got Harpoon yesterday and have been playing for a while. The game is quite good. It does have an annoying tendency to crash, though. I cannot ressurect my saved "Duel" scenario since the game crashes every time the Slava fires a misile at one of my helos. Anyone else notice bugs? Questions: 1) How do you activate ECM pods on your fighters? Is it automatic when sensors are turned on? 2) When a ship/plane group runs out of move orders, how does one tell it to patrol from the course set window, or can you? 3) Is it possible to use underway replenishment ships and if so, how? 4) How goddamn many missiles do you have to shoot at the Sovs in the duel scenario to get more than five missiles in? Please email replies and thanks. Jack Brown aka plague@milton.u.washington.edu
carlton@apollo.HP.COM (Carlton B. Hommel) (12/04/90)
plague@milton.u.washington.edu (Jack Brown) asks: >When a ship/plane group runs out of move orders, how does one tell it >to patrol from the course set window, or can you? This one bothered me, too, but I think I've figured it out. Groups that have been given a movement speed of 0 (for subs/ships) or "Loiter" (for planes) go nowhere. Thus, if you want a group of Fulcrums that have sucessfully shot down a Buccaneer to go back to sleep, hit meta-2, and tell them to loiter. >Is it possible to use underway replenishment ships and if so, how? This probably will be implemented the same time in-air refueling is done, ie "The next release". >How goddamn many missiles do you have to shoot at the Sovs in the >duel scenario to get more than five missiles in? I haven't played this one yet, but its *supposed* to be hard. Try waiting until you are close enough to fire both short and long range missles, and perhaps that will overwhelm his defences. Sneak a sub in, and torpedo the Kiev class ship. In other comments, the senarios do change each time. Not only do you get different starting locations, but also different ships. For example, you might get a Kiev ship one time, and a Kirov another. My major complaint is that the computer player is not bright. I sent out my Nimrod ASW planes without adequate fighter cover. Once. The computer does it all the time. While the computer is quick to intercept your undefended aircraft, it does not protect its own. Has anyone got through to their phone line? Its always busy when I call. Carl Hommel carlton@apollo.hp.com
ets@ollie.SEAS.UCLA.EDU (12/04/90)
In article <90331.173154LSB103@psuvm.psu.edu> LSB103@psuvm.psu.edu writes: >There are no system on the two disks so you'll need to swap disks quite >often, even if you have two drives. So a hard drive is recommended. By >the way, does anyone out there have a version of system (later than 6.0.2) >that is less than 250K? I found that if I strip down (i.e. removed all fonts and DA's except the control panel) from the system and user the mini-finder from Ancient Art of War on the Harpoon program disk you don't have to swap at all. > Huh, one more thing about Harpoon that I dislike: >Most of the current ships, subs, aircraft, and their arsonals are included >in the game, why didn't Three-Sixty include a booklet that describe each >each weapon's range, effective targets, etc? You can look all of this up >in the game, but I find it very annoying to quit whatever you are doing >so you can go to the window. I found this kind of a pain also. But all in all it a great game (or more appropriately a great simulation) that will take a LONG time to master. --Ed
cac@druco.ATT.COM (Curtis A. Conkey) (12/05/90)
in article <4e610dbf.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM<, carlton@apollo.HP.COM (Carlton B. Hommel) says:
< In other comments, the senarios do change each time. Not only do you
< get different starting locations, but also different ships. For
< example, you might get a Kiev ship one time, and a Kirov another.
<
< My major complaint is that the computer player is not bright. I sent
< out my Nimrod ASW planes without adequate fighter cover. Once. The
< computer does it all the time. While the computer is quick to
< intercept your undefended aircraft, it does not protect its own.
<
What would be really nice is to replace the "computer player" (i.e. the algorithm)
with a Modem and a real human who can be brillant or stupid just like the
real world.
This is done in 688 Attack Sub and really enhances a game when you have to play
against a real person.
Curtis
Denversteve@uswmrg2.UUCP (Steve Martin) (12/11/90)
So far I have played the first six scenarios and find that I can easily win as NATO. The real challenge is winning as the Russians. Has anyone else noticed this? Do you think it is because of the inherent weapon systems differences, or just improper play balance? -- Steve Martin | Nothing I say can be held against U S West Marketing Resources Group | Me or my employer! (...uswat.uswest.com!uswmrg2!steve)
ets@ollie.SEAS.UCLA.EDU (12/11/90)
In article <4e610dbf.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> carlton@notelrac.UUCP (Carlton B. Hommel) writes: >My major complaint is that the computer player is not bright. I sent >out my Nimrod ASW planes without adequate fighter cover. Once. The >computer does it all the time. While the computer is quick to >intercept your undefended aircraft, it does not protect its own. I've found this true also. But what really bugs me is that when you aren't in direct control of an air group (and I think if you have auto formation on) air to ground/air weapons are fired automatically, usually at low priority targets (i.e. not at the amphib craft in the amphib landing scenerios) or at incoming AtA missiles that there is no chance in getting!
ets@ollie.SEAS.UCLA.EDU (12/11/90)
In article <6868@drutx.ATT.COM> cac@druco.ATT.COM (Curtis A. Conkey) writes: >in article <4e610dbf.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM<, carlton@apollo.HP.COM (Carlton B. Hommel) says: >What would be really nice is to replace the "computer player" (i.e. the algorithm) >with a Modem and a real human who can be brillant or stupid just like the >real world. > >This is done in 688 Attack Sub and really enhances a game when you have to play I've read that Compu-Serve has such a deal with 360 (they are testing a multi- player version on the net). They run multi-player games on the weekends. Has anyone out there in netland played in one of these games? --Ed
ddeutsch@bbn.com (Debra Deutsch) (12/11/90)
I haven't heard anything about CompuServe testing a multi-player Harpoon, but I have heard rumors (no details though) that a multi-player Harpoon was in the works *somewhere*. CompuServe does have multiplayer games, though. They are available all the time, not just on weekends. There are space conquest/battle games, a couple of fantasy swords/sorcery games, an infantry-type combat game, and another game that is sort of like a quiz show. There used to be a sea-battle game but it was discontinued. Cheers, Debbie Deutsch
ted@cs.utexas.edu (Ted Woodward) (12/12/90)
In article <1990Dec10.175412.10694@uswmrg2.UUCP> steve@uswmrg2.UUCP (Steve Martin) writes: >So far I have played the first six scenarios and find that I can easily >win as NATO. The real challenge is winning as the Russians. Has anyone >else noticed this? Do you think it is because of the inherent weapon >systems differences, or just improper play balance? SOme of the scenarios are inherently easier for one or the other. I find the 1st one is easier for the Russians because they have 80 nm range missiles, vs 8nm of the Norwegians. The one I can't handle is Rapier, the sub attack on Murmansk. AUGH! Slight Spoiler: The Duel is a lot easier if you put your subs in his path, speed zero. He runs over you. I killed Frunze with my missiles, and my torps killed all but one Sovremeny (two missed it). Iowa's Tomahawks finished it off. Notice I said IT. In western navies, ships are known as SHE. In the Soviet navy, ships are known as HE. So western navies call Russian ships IT. -- Ted Woodward (ted@cs.utexas.edu) "Mad scientists HATE shopping for shoes!" -- Peaches
Dan.Chiu@f421.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Dan Chiu) (12/15/90)
>>This is done in 688 Attack Sub and really enhances a game when you >>have > to play What is "688 Attack Sub"? I haven't heard of it. Who publishes it and where can I get it? Thanks. Wondering in the Nation's Capital... Dan. -- Dan Chiu, Dan.Chiu@f421.n109.z1.fidonet.org via The Black Cat's Shack's FidoNet<->Usenet Gateway blkcat.fidonet.org and Fidonet 1:109/401
ptm@jake.tmc.edu (Peter T. Murphy) (12/18/90)
In article <2773.276A0357@blkcat.fidonet.org> Dan.Chiu@f421.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Dan Chiu) writes: >>>This is done in 688 Attack Sub and really enhances a game when you >>>have >> to play > > What is "688 Attack Sub"? I haven't heard of it. Who publishes it >and where can I get it? > > Dan. 688 Attack Sub is from Electronic Arts of SanMateo CA. Good graphics & sound on a IBM or -compatible. Pretty good simulation of a Los Angeles class and it's weapons. User can play as a 688 or an Alpha-class captain, and can choose to play against the machine or against a people (via modem).
james@wrs.com (James Moore) (12/19/90)
I thought Harpoon had the potential to be a very good game, but I
returned it to my local software store the day after I bought it. Out
of six or so games I started, I could only finish one, and that was
with scenario #1. All of the others crashed at some point, usually
about ten to twenty minutes into the game. This was running on a
Plus, with 2.5 megs, running regular finder, system 6.0.5, no inits
(took all of them out of the system folder), and Disinfectant 2.3
didn't report any viruses.
I was disappointed that I had to bring it back, because while it
stayed up it was entertaining. It's gawdawful slow on a Plus in the
later scenarios, which is unfortunately understandable (although an
option to turn off some level of detail in exchange for speed would be
nice).
I'll probably buy 1.1 when (and if) it comes out.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Moore | Wind River Systems
james@wrs.com | Alameda, California
| 1-800-USA-4WRS / Fax 415-814-2010plague@milton.u.washington.edu (Jack Brown) (01/19/91)
Does anybody know if 360 has come out with an update for Mac Harpoon? Specifically, anything to correct the bugs? The reason I ask here is that I would like to avoid the long distance charges :) Jack Brown aka plague@milton.u.washington.edu
gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (System Administrator) (01/20/91)
In-Reply-To: message from plague@milton.u.washington.edu |Does anybody know if 360 has come out with an update for Mac Harpoon? |Specifically, anything to correct the bugs? | |The reason I ask here is that I would like to avoid the long distance |charges :) I doubt it, as the game has only been out for a little over a month on the Mac. I sure do hope that they fix the bugs though. Gary --- UUCP: ogicse!clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/253-9389 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, Wa ARPANet: crash!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com | Vancouver Apple Users Group
denden@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dennis H Chang) (01/22/91)
Although I haven't heard of any newer versions for Harpoon, I have heard/seen news about the second battleset, North Atlantic Convoys. So for those of you who are waiting, this should satisfy you. ins_apw@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU Philip Wong
ASB110@psuvm.psu.edu (Andre Sean Brown) (02/12/91)
Exactly what kind of bugs are these? I had the game for 1 month now and the only annoying bugs I have with it is that the program sometimes bomb when you send out too many aircraft in one tactical group. Another one is that when I save the game using floppies, it wouldn't retrieve the game later. Has any one else also had these expereriences?
pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Paul S Shannon) (04/04/91)
I got Harpoon a couple of days ago, and I was wondering: is there any way to defeat a torpedo once one is fired at you? I can't seem to do anything about them. Just sit there and wait to be killed. Also, does anyone have problems with the program freezing up for no reason? I have an SE/30, 5 megs and a HD.
han@Apple.COM (Byron Han) (04/04/91)
In article <1991Apr4.054118.24889@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Paul S Shannon) writes: >is there any way to defeat a torpedo once one is fired at you? run like hell away from it. seriously. >Also, does anyone have problems with the program freezing up for no >reason? I have an SE/30, 5 megs and a HD. Save often. this program is really cool, but really buggy. This is not an official Apple statement. -- Byron Han, CommToolbox Emir The dream continues... Apple Computer, Inc. -------------------------------------------- 20525 Mariani Ave, MS: 35CP Internet: han@apple.COM Cupertino, CA 95014 AppleLink: HAN1 HAN1@applelink.apple.COM Phone: 1.408.974.6450 CompuServe: 72167,1664
ins_apw@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Philip Wong) (04/05/91)
Once fired, immediately change your ships direction. Once about half way from you ship, check to see if it's pointing toward your ship...if so, change direction and speed again. If you every really want to avoid a torpedo (at ship ) or missile (at plane), you can do it by changing it's movements from second to second. ins_apw@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU Philip Wong (301) 235-3998 P.S. For those other Harpoon fanatics out there, MEDC scenario is availiable now
vaughan@puma.cad.mcc.com (Paul Vaughan) (04/05/91)
In Harpoon, Torps have a limited range and their speed is only about double the top speed of most ships. So, if the torp was fired from near it's maximum range, you just have to run away a little bit and it will fizzle. If it was fired from close to you, you've either got a race on your hands or no chance. It's a good idea to know apriori what the range is and then check the speed of the thing just as it's fired to calculate whether it's worth running or not. I'm not sure if longer ranges (but still within max range) or angle of attack affects the probability of hitting. BTW: I tried to mail this but it was rejected <<< 550 Host name "cunixb.cc.columbia.edu" unknown, recipient rejected 550 <pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu>... User unknown -- Paul Vaughan, MCC CAD Program | ARPA: vaughan@mcc.com | Phone: [512] 338-3639 Box 200195, Austin, TX 78720 | UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!milano!cadillac!vaughan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I spent from $3 to $10 today to pay interest on the national debt. How about you? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ted@cs.utexas.edu (Ted Woodward) (04/06/91)
In article <1991Apr4.054118.24889@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Paul S Shannon) writes: >I got Harpoon a couple of days ago, and I was wondering: >is there any way to defeat a torpedo once one is fired at you? Run away from it at max speed. If the target is a sub; change depth. You may run it out of fuel, and going at max speed/changing depth lowers its hit chances. >I can't seem to do anything about them. Just sit there and wait to >be killed. Torps happen...but you can run them out of fuel usually by going max speed in an SSN. Then, of course, the computer may decide to drop another right in front of you... >Also, does anyone have problems with the program freezing up for no >reason? I have an SE/30, 5 megs and a HD. Increase the system heap space. I had problems with it crashing, and then increased the space. I forgot about the problems, and was puzzled at the stories of many crashes. Then I tested out a friend's copy of Med (review to come...) and had more crashes. So I increased the size again, and no prob. So, if you are experiencing crashes in Harpoon, increase the system heap size. BTW, I just got a copy of beta 1.01c, and I can't figure out what the changes were...but there don't seem to be any NEW bugs. I've also used the color beta, and it had some serious bugs. But it should be ready soon for all of you with color machines. If you have a bug report, please send it to me. I can get it in quickly; the benefits of being a beta tester... -- Ted Woodward (ted@cs.utexas.edu) "Mad scientists HATE shopping for shoes!" -- Peaches
jch@public.BTR.COM (Jack Hwang) (04/11/91)
If you are running the subs, the best way is to change the course and the depth. Although sometimes you can outrun the torpedos, it usually attract more fishes due to the noises under high speed. Of course, this change only effective when you can hear the incoming torpedos. If ASW planes drop them right above your head, you can only cross your fingers. Jack
hui@landau.uchicago.edu (Hui Dong) (04/27/91)
Harpoon is a great game, but would it be better to allow two person play against each other over appletalk? I feel it maybe easier to program than to write a good computer strategy.
hui@landau.uchicago.edu (Hui Dong) (04/29/91)
In harpoon, when run away from incoming missles or topedos, should one turn the active sensor off so they may lost track of you, why computer always ask you to turn sensors on?
omh@cs.brown.edu (Owen M. Hartnett) (04/29/91)
In article <1991Apr28.225341.13085@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@rainbow.uchicago.edu writes: > > In harpoon, when run away from incoming missles or topedos, should one >turn the active sensor off so they may lost track of you, why computer >always ask you to turn sensors on? This may be because the anti-missile system needs the sensors to track the missiles. However, I have one problem, when you've found an enemy position, and the unit that detects it is shot down, you lose that enemy altogether. I would think that 1) you'd be better able to track it from different sensor stations, since it's position is currently known, some adjustment should be made for this and 2) you should continue to be able to "attack" it (i.e. it should remain on the board of detected enemy positions). what happens is my scout aircraft blunders upon a strong enemy ship position and, after radioing back its position, gets itself shot down. Now, it's like I've never found the ships. Now, I know that it's there - shouldn't the program keep it on it's discovered list? Also, I should be able to send out aircraft to attack it. When I do send out other planes, they usually don't detect it until they're right on top of it and get shot down. How far can surface ships go in a couple of minutes? -Owen . Owen Hartnett omh@cs.brown.edu.CSNET Brown University Computer Science omh@cs.brown.edu uunet!brunix!omh "Don't wait up for me tonight because I won't be home for a month."
pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Paul S Shannon) (04/29/91)
In article <73794@brunix.UUCP> omh@cs.brown.edu (Owen M. Hartnett) writes: >In article <1991Apr28.225341.13085@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@rainbow.uchicago.edu writes: >> >> In harpoon, when run away from incoming missles or topedos, should one >>turn the active sensor off so they may lost track of you, why computer >>always ask you to turn sensors on? > >This may be because the anti-missile system needs the sensors to track the >missiles. However, I have one problem, when you've found an enemy position, >and the unit that detects it is shot down, you lose that enemy altogether. > >I would think that 1) you'd be better able to track it from different >sensor stations, since it's position is currently known, some adjustment >should be made for this and 2) you should continue to be able to "attack" >it (i.e. it should remain on the board of detected enemy positions). > >what happens is my scout aircraft blunders upon a strong enemy ship position >and, after radioing back its position, gets itself shot down. Now, it's like >I've never found the ships. Now, I know that it's there - shouldn't the >program keep it on it's discovered list? Also, I should be able to send out >aircraft to attack it. When I do send out other planes, they usually don't >detect it until they're right on top of it and get shot down. How far can >surface ships go in a couple of minutes? > >-Owen >. > >Owen Hartnett omh@cs.brown.edu.CSNET >Brown University Computer Science omh@cs.brown.edu > uunet!brunix!omh >"Don't wait up for me tonight because I won't be home for a month." This doesn't eliminate the problem of losing where the enemy units are, but you can attack them by sending up a patrol. You'll probably have to turn on your radars to find them again. Does everyone's subs get massacred very quickly, or am I an incompetent sub commander? I find the attack on the Kola peninsula, and the Boomer hunting scenarios extremely difficult. Also, the USSR defense against the Carrier Battle Group seems just about impossible, since the F-14s shoot down your attack planes before they can find the Nato force, and the Mainstays have no surface search radar (this totally sucks, and I sort pity the Soviet commander that has to find a ship). How are the other battle sets? Does the computer become a better tactician? ---------------------------------------------------------------- If you happen to fall off the Sears Tower, go limp, so people will think you're a dummy and they'll try to catch you, because, hey, free dummy.
crphoton@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Charles Rolater) (04/30/91)
In article <1991Apr28.225341.13085@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@rainbow.uchicago.edu writes: > > In harpoon, when run away from incoming missles or topedos, should one >turn the active sensor off so they may lost track of you, why computer >always ask you to turn sensors on? The computer wnats you to turn sensors on so you can find out what shot the missles at you in the first place. Most of the missles are not sensor tracking or anti-rad(there are a few...but these are mainly used for attacking bases). No torpedoes can home on sensors. Charles .
gdm@cs.columbia.edu (George Michaels) (04/30/91)
Somebody mentioned that it is very difficult to play the Russians against a US carrier group due to the F-14's. This is not true. A human playing the Russians can use the following tactic. When the poenix missiles are about to wipe out a wing of your aircraft, duck down to VLOW altitude. The missiles will miss, and you can proceed on to either cream the F-14's at medium range or go for the Carrier group. Try this. It works. gdm
sharp@fsd.cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Maurice Sharp) (04/30/91)
A previous posting made reference to the difficulty of hitting the
US carriers in NACV. I use a sacrifice method to hit a carrier group.
I send a bunch of Backfire bombers with StandOff loadout around the
left flank. Way around. Then I send in a Mainstay with a Backfire
fighter escort up the middle. I fly them low with no detection
equipment on. That is important, if you are detected you are dead.
BTW, by this time I have an idea where at least two carrier groups
are.
When the bombers have circled behind the line of advance (US has
not detection planes back there), I move up the Mainstay group, send
them Very High, and turn on the detection. The Backfire fighters will
take care of the first few fighters that show up. If all goes well,
the Mainstay pinpoints a group, the Backfire Bombers military or
afterburner in, hit the Carrier group, and return home the way they
came.
This has succeded in destroying one carrier group, and severly
damaging another (carrier down, a few ships hurt). Give it a try...
maurice
--
Maurice Sharp MSc. Student (403) 220 7690
University of Calgary Computer Science Department
2500 University Drive N.W. sharp@cpsc.UCalgary.CA
Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4 GEnie M.SHARP5awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) (04/30/91)
In article <1991Apr30.002437.22993@cs.columbia.edu> gdm@liberty.columbia.edu (George Michaels) writes: >tactic. When the poenix missiles are about to wipe out a wing of >your aircraft, duck down to VLOW altitude. The missiles will miss, How long can you leave them at this altitude? I may be a bit careless, but I've lost a bunch of Sov planes in the drink at VLOW altitude.
ted@cs.utexas.edu (Ted Woodward) (05/01/91)
In article <48155@ut-emx.uucp> awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) writes: >In article <1991Apr30.002437.22993@cs.columbia.edu> gdm@liberty.columbia.edu (George Michaels) writes: >>tactic. When the poenix missiles are about to wipe out a wing of >>your aircraft, duck down to VLOW altitude. The missiles will miss, >How long can you leave them at this altitude? I may be a bit careless, but >I've lost a bunch of Sov planes in the drink at VLOW altitude. Leave them there for as short a time as possible. Only go down to VLOW when the phoenixes are about to toast you. When they miss, pop back up to whatever (with backfires, I prefer high or very high on mil or afterburner). -- Ted Woodward (ted@cs.utexas.edu) "Mad scientists HATE shopping for shoes!" -- Peaches
sr26+@andrew.cmu.edu (Stephen Alexander Racunas) (05/01/91)
Ducking under Phoenixes works, but pop back up after the missiles pass, or <glub>, no more MiG's... Subs are toast. No one I know can play them well against the computer. The Computer seems to use it's air assets somewhat foolishly.... unescorted bombers, helicopters outside the SAM range of the fleet, allocating defensive SAM fire in a haphazard fashion... Most scenarios that illustrate conflicts of standard military doctrine have sneaky hoses that were overlooked in the design of the scenario. Ex. Equip your F-16's wi mavericks instead of Penguins... Approach at Vlow, release point 10 nm. Voila, 96 incomings will rollback almost anything. All in all, Harpoon is a good game that would be improved TREMENDOUSLY by the implementation of some form of 2-player interface, and re-sizable windows.
hui@landau.uchicago.edu (Hui Dong) (05/01/91)
Talking about turning on sensors when missles are after you, from the experience with Falcon2.2, the only thing you can do is fire chaff or flare depending on whether missles are radar guiding or heat tracking, both try to confuse the missle's sensors, and there is no way one can shoot down an anti-air missle, so have a good lock on them won't help while give away one's exact location. When topedo follows your sub, is similer situation, one better turn his sonar off (as well as engin) and change depth, launch a noisy decoy will help a lot. For surface ship, I agree one can only run like hell away from the topedos so knowing their exact positions will help.
deichman@cod.NOSC.MIL (Shane D. Deichman) (05/01/91)
In article <1991Apr30.213107.29355@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@control.uchicago.edu writes: > >When topedo follows your sub, is similer situation, >one better turn his sonar off (as well as engin) and change depth, launch >a noisy decoy will help a lot. And then PRAY! Torpedoes rely on active homers, so shutting everything down on your vessel will turn you into a 6,000 ton sitting duck. The noisemakers are only intended to confuse a torp (by saturating it's own receptors) and are of somewhat dubious effectiveness. The best approach is to run away from a torp as fast as possible, since most torps are pretty slow beasts (i.e., <40 knots!) and have pretty short lifetimes. The Soviet Alfa-class boats have a top speed of over 42 knots submerged! -shane
ted@cs.utexas.edu (Ted Woodward) (05/01/91)
In article <1991Apr30.213107.29355@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@control.uchicago.edu writes: > Talking about turning on sensors when missles are after you, from the >experience with Falcon2.2, the only thing you can do is fire chaff or flare >depending on whether missles are radar guiding or heat tracking, both >try to confuse the missle's sensors, and there is no way one can shoot down >an anti-air missle, so have a good lock on them won't help while give away >one's exact location. When topedo follows your sub, is similer situation, >one better turn his sonar off (as well as engin) and change depth, launch >a noisy decoy will help a lot. For surface ship, I agree one can only run >like hell away from the topedos so knowing their exact positions will help. But that's not the point. You may not hear all of the incoming torps, or detect all of the incoming missiles. You also may not detect the launching platform. Turning on the active sensors might get them for you. After all, he sees you. There is no reason to have your sensors turned off if the bad guys can see you... -- Ted Woodward (ted@cs.utexas.edu) "Mad scientists HATE shopping for shoes!" -- Peaches
ASB110@psuvm.psu.edu (Andre Sean Brown) (05/02/91)
The trick to find the US Carrier in GIUK is to use the Soviet ASW aircraft. They have the best surface radar available to the Soviets in this battleset (believe it or not) What I usually do is first use the Mainstay to find the US AWAC and than send out an ASW aircraft to the proximity of the battlegroup. 5 game minutes later, I send out my attack aircrafts and as soon as the CVN is discovered, I hammer it with every missile I got. It's true that your ASW air- craft might get shot down, but I think you get 6 of them in the scenario. It is more difficult, but not completely undo-able.
pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Paul S Shannon) (05/02/91)
In article <3024@cod.NOSC.MIL> deichman@cod.NOSC.MIL (Shane D. Deichman) writes: >In article <1991Apr30.213107.29355@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@control.uchicago.edu writes: >> >>When topedo follows your sub, is similer situation, >>one better turn his sonar off (as well as engin) and change depth, launch >>a noisy decoy will help a lot. > >And then PRAY! Torpedoes rely on active homers, so shutting everything >down on your vessel will turn you into a 6,000 ton sitting duck. The >noisemakers are only intended to confuse a torp (by saturating it's own >receptors) and are of somewhat dubious effectiveness. The best approach >is to run away from a torp as fast as possible, since most torps are >pretty slow beasts (i.e., <40 knots!) and have pretty short lifetimes. >The Soviet Alfa-class boats have a top speed of over 42 knots submerged! > >-shane And then the Orion drops another torpedo right in front of you, so you're toasted. How do you play subs successfully? ---------------------------------------------------------------- If you happen to fall off the Sears Tower, go limp, so people will think you're a dummy and they'll try to catch you, because, hey, free dummy.
gerson@parc.xerox.com (Dan Gerson) (05/02/91)
I don't recall seeing this mentioned before, so for those of you who don't mind occasionally cheating (as in, I've accomplished my mission, and have had an overwhelming victory, but shucks, I really want to have a TOTAL victory and they have a couple of subs somewhere sitting around not moving and I want to experiment with how to attack with subs effectively - yeah, I'm a bit crazy), option-s will toggle the display of all enemy units. I was experimenting with how to attack subs using this option. I got on both sides of a pair of NATO subs (oscar class) which had much better range than my foxtrot and something, maybe victor, class subs. I tried charging around on the surface going top speed (a dismal 18 knots) with the foxtrots to try to lead the NATO subs into the stopped victors, but the NATO subs refused to take the bait. Besides, their sensors always seemed to detect even the stopped victors, and they would always fire right when the victors got within range. So instead, I tried charging them from top speed from two opposite sides, where I would charge into range, fire a whole load of torps from both directions, and then charge back out (with a following torp of course). Even the 18 knot foxtrot could outrun the torps in this scenario (they wouldn't get as close as my victors), and so this technique worked. However, other than for trying to figure out how the computer plays and what its sensor limits really are, the option-s thing isn't very useful. Even this technique isn't really too valid since it only works when you know exactly what the other subs position is, and in this case, the active sensor range is pretty lousy compared to the oscar subs attack range, so I wouldn't have been able to detect them in real life very easily. The best I could have hoped for would have been to charge around in a search pattern until I detected a torpedo, and then (after running away from the torp) charging in the direction of the torp bearing at top speed until I ran right into the oscar. Kind of dicey about whether I would detect them before I would detect the torp a couple of inches from my nose (sorry, millimeters - I am the USSR after all). -- Dan Gerson gerson@parc.xerox.com Xerox Palo Alto Research Center 415-494-4745 3333 Coyote Hill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA
stur0832@mstr.hgc.edu (douglas sturim) (05/02/91)
In article <1991Apr28.225341.13085@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@rainbow.uchicago.edu writes: > > In harpoon, when run away from incoming missles or topedos, should one >turn the active sensor off so they may lost track of you, why computer >always ask you to turn sensors on? KEEP them suckers OFF! I play harpoon but I also work for Naval Defense contractor. My advise is to stay with passive sonar and no ship radar. at all times I even turn my AEGIS off (if I am given onef. IThis is a trade off. You won't be seen as easily but you can't see as well yourself. This is where the AWACS comes in. The AWACS is the only thing I turn on (if I am given one). IMHO. BTW all of the naval systems I work on are simulated very well in Harpoon. Doug Sturim TRW Defense Sector New London, CT (I'm not a real Doctor but I play one on TV) att!chinet!mcdchg!clyde!ds stur0832@sz8.hgc.edu
d90-mwd@sm.luth.se (Michael Westlund) (05/02/91)
hui@landau.uchicago.edu (Hui Dong) writes: > Harpoon is a great game, but would it be better to allow two person >play against each other over appletalk? I feel it maybe easier to program >than to write a good computer strategy. I agree! After seeing the computer making the same mistakes again and again, one wishes that there was somebody else "at the other end" who at least could give you SOME competition... In that matter, I prefer Strategic Conquest - despite the unrealistic simulation! Even the computer can be hard to beat sometimes... -- | Michael Westlund | c/o Rocklin | Voice natl. 0920 - 132 91 | | University of Luleaa | Lingonstigen 77 | intl. +46 920 132 91 | | SWEDEN | S-951 55 Luleaa | Internet: d90-mwd@sm.luth.se |
randy@sif.isp.nwu.edu (Randy Roman) (05/03/91)
In article <Ic7S1Ze00VpN8b4Epd@andrew.cmu.edu> sr26+@andrew.cmu.edu (Stephen Alexander Racunas) writes: > >Subs are toast. No one I know can play them well against the computer. Western subs can outrun Soviet airlaunched torpedoes if you are quick enough. Go to max speed at deep depth and you should be able to outrun the torpedo as its max speed is 33 knots. Changing depth and speed and course also helps. > >The Computer seems to use it's air assets somewhat foolishly.... unescorted >bombers, helicopters outside the SAM range of the fleet, allocating defensive >SAM fire in a haphazard fashion... And SSM's that are launched at only one target. I had a Knox frigate killed by 61 SSM's. For some reason my VLS Tico would not fire (a bug?) but fortunately, the computer only targeted the frigate. Had they mixed their targets around the formation, I would have been dead. > >Most scenarios that illustrate conflicts of standard military doctrine have >sneaky hoses that were overlooked in the design of the scenario. Ex. Equip >your F-16's wi mavericks instead of Penguins... Approach at Vlow, release point >10 nm. Voila, 96 incomings will rollback almost anything. > >All in all, Harpoon is a good game that would be improved TREMENDOUSLY >by the implementation of some form of 2-player interface, and re-sizable >windows.
jch@public.BTR.COM (Jack Hwang) (05/05/91)
In article <1991Apr29.164547.16179@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> pss4@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Paul S Shannon) writes: >hunting scenarios extremely difficult. Also, the USSR defense against >the Carrier Battle Group seems just about impossible, since the F-14s >shoot down your attack planes before they can find the Nato force, and >the Mainstays have no surface search radar (this totally sucks, and I sort >pity the Soviet commander that has to find a ship). If I were you, I would try to lure all F-14s out and kill all of them before sending out ASW planes to search for NATO carrier group. Used the following tactics: 1. Send out a Mainstay fly south slowly to probe for NATO air combat patrols. 2. Positioned two pairs of Su-27 in front of Mainstay. All planes should be at hight alt. and radar on. 3. Turn on the range circle option to show the best air to air missles range of both side. 4. With all the radar on, F-14s can be easily identified before your Su-27 enter their AIM-54 range. 5. Stay at the margin. Whenever F-14s shoot AIM-54 to you, dove for very low level and back out of its reach. Most Phoenix will drop before reach you. Even if you reacted not fast enought to clear, a change of altitude from high to vlow will make AIM-54 losing the track. (They were aiming at a high alt. target). 6. After luring F-14s to use out of all Phoenix, you can come in for a kill. Your AA-10 will outrange their remaining AIM-9. Remember, there are only 24 Tomcats in NATO carrier group. They seemed to commit the similar mistake as Japanese in Midway -- holding valuable assests (F-18s) for a ground attack instead of using them to deal with the other threats. My best record was 5 to 24. One was lost in very low alt. flying. Two to out of fuels. Only two todogfight. Jack
jch@public.BTR.COM (Jack Hwang) (05/05/91)
>In article <1991Apr30.213107.29355@midway.uchicago.edu> hui@control.uchicago.edu writes: > Talking about turning on sensors when missles are after you, from the >experience with Falcon2.2, the only thing you can do is fire chaff or flare >depending on whether missles are radar guiding or heat tracking, both >try to confuse the missle's sensors, and there is no way one can shoot down >an anti-air missle, so have a good lock on them won't help while give away >one's exact location. When topedo follows your sub, is similer situation, >one better turn his sonar off (as well as engin) and change depth, launch >a noisy decoy will help a lot. For surface ship, I agree one can only run >like hell away from the topedos so knowing their exact positions will help. Turning on your sensors is for your weapon systems to be activated to treat the imcoming missles. You need radars to guide your anti-missle missles and guns. Of course, you should not turn on your sonars. But even not, your dodging and high speed will still reveal you locations. Jack
hui@landau.uchicago.edu (Hui Dong) (05/05/91)
Playing against NATO, I use bear D (which has the best surface radar) with bear J (which has a strong radar jamming pod) to search NATO surface ships, followed by all the bombers in close range. When closing in to approximatly in radar range, turn radar on and change to VeryHigh, after have a firm fix at the carrier, throw all your missles at her, if got fired upon, I usually afterburner back with radar off,usually can survive. Use this tactic playing NACV #14, I could completely destroy all (three) NATO carrier groups and one base without lose a single USSR plane or ship, which ends the excitment though.(note, I am not sure about the "D" or "J",look at the USSR planes information in the program).
ppe@niksula.hut.fi (Petri Pellinen) (05/07/91)
I have played harpoon quite a lot. I enjoyed the game at first, but now it is beginning to bore me. Don't you think that the computer is _very_ easy to beat in nearly every scenario. It simply doesn't know how to use its forces properly. Another gripe I have about the game is about its command level. I thought that the player is supposed to be in the role of a fleet commander (or something like that). Well, IMHO it is not the job of an officer of such honorable rank to tell an individual sub/plane/ship how to dodge a torpedo/missile. It is extremely irritating to enter detailed instructions to a largish number of units. So if anyone is about to buy harpoon, think twice about what you would like to do with it. If you are looking for a competitive opponent, leave it. On the other hand, if you would like to show 10 - 20 units how to evade a missile go ahead and buy it. -- Petri Pellinen 'The killer awoke before dawn He put his boots on He took a face from the ancient gallery ppe@niksula.hut.fi And he walked on down the hall' -- Mr. Mojo Risin'
hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu (HP48SX Archive Maintainer) (05/27/91)
I have now been playing Harpoon for quite some days, and it is the best game/simulation I have playede on my mac yet. It is correct that it crashes sometimes, and I have now found another bug. When you save a GIUK game in progress, and later decides to overwrite the same file by a NACV scenario game, then the creator is not changed. This means that you can only load the stuff into the wrong map. Also double clicking the game from the finder will give you problems. I also have a few questions, if I buy the GIUK color extension, is it then only this scenario that can use my 13" screen ? I guess this is the only scenario where I get the color. Also does the scenario editor allow you to add color to homemade/bought scenarios ? And how about creating new equipment ? I WANT A F-15E STRIKE EAGLE, and strike capable Tornado fighters. -- ******************************************************* Povl H. Pedersen hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu HP48sx archive maintainer