From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU  Fri Jul  3 19:05:36 1992
Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu
	(Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.07pram8) id AA06996;
	Fri, 3 Jul 92 19:05:36 -0700
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 92 19:05:36 -0700
Message-Id: <9207040205.AA06996@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU
To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: CZ Digest v11 #1 (msgs 1-7)
Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU
Status: RO

			 The Convergence Zone

Date:		3 July 1992
Volume:		11
Issue:		1
Topics:		(1) Editorial			cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu
		(2) Sub Commander Wanted	felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
		(3) Re: Files Gone from Hilbert	kxb@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
		(4) Amiga Data Format		felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
		(5) Re: OS/2 Compatability	2330.1244@compuserve.com
		(6) Re: NACV South Crossing	dgil@ipsaint.ipsa.reuter.com
		(7) USNI Membership		creps@copper.ucs.indiana.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  3 Jul 1992 18:21:52 PDT
From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (1) Editorial
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg1@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

New members added since last issue:

sacpms!dac@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (David A. Carlton)
mf2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Raymond Feely)
felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu (Felix Hack)
lespa@pa.dec.com (Bob Lacey)
dyfl@kbs.citri.edu.au (Daniel Lam)
k17973@kyyppari.hkkk.fi (Ilkka Laurmaa)
lip@hazelrah.cs.colorado.edu (Paul Li)
petaja@kiloapo.ts.tele.nokia.fi (Juha Petaja)
debec@ensta.fr (Michel de Becdelievre)
solman@athena.mit.edu (Jason W. Solinsky)
atristan@ucru1.ucr.edu (Andrew Tristan)

A number of responses have come in on the subject of whether CZ should be a
newsgroup or not. Here is a summary of what I have heard. A newsgroup could
reach more people and would be easier to administrate (since I would not handle
sign ups). The drawback is that many people don't get news, and there might be
more pressure to get articles out faster. A mainstream group, like
rec.games.harpoon, also has to go through a lengthy, tedious approval procedure.
An alt group, like alt.games.harpoon, is much easier to get but is not carried
by many sites. I could still maintain a mailing list which would cover sites
without the proper newsgroup, but that eliminates any savings in effort. Since
CZ has many obscure addresses on it, I think the mailing list would not be
optional.

If there is anything else you would like me to consider, please tell me at the
administrator address. 

Hilbert's shutdown is described in message 3 below by Karl Buck. An effort is
underway to find a new North American Internet scenario archive site. PC users
can still use the archive at nic.funet.fi:pub/msdos/games/harpoon, but please be
polite with our friends in Finland. Mac users can try to contact Gary Snow 
(pro-freedom!gsnow@clark.edu) who has most of the Mac scenarios.

GDW recently sent out a letter stating that SITREP 12 has been delayed. It seems
the their new role playing game is taking up all their time. For those wishing
to subscribe, the SITREP is available from GDW for $8/year (4 issues) at:

	Harpoon SITREP
	P.O. Box 1646
	Bloomington, IL 61702-1646
	USA
	Tel: (309) 452-3632
	FAX: (309) 454-3127

In the last article, Steve Creps (creps@copper.ucs.indiana.edu) gives the
details in how to become a USNI member. I can personally say that the USNI is a
great deal if you make moderate use of their book service.

-ted (disguised as CZ Administrator)

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 14:13:19 PDT
From: felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu (Felix Hack)
Subject: (2) Sub Commander Wanted
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg2@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

In volume 4, msg 15 of CZ Terry Rooker mentions a second volume for Warship
Commander II containing air and submarine rules. He writes that it was called
Submarine Commander, and is presumably by Enola games. I've not seen this volume
though I've searched stores extensively for such a thing. I know the first
edition air/sub rules were called Sea Command, and it is a bit dated (1980).

Does anyone know anything more about Submarine Commander? I very much want to
get a hold of it and would gladly buy anyone's used copy, or even pay to xerox
it. Strangely, when I wrote Enola some time ago asking if a 2nd edition air/sub
volume existed they said that it didn't. If you know anyone who has this, or
when I can buy it, please email.

    Thank you!
 
-Felix
felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Jun 92 21:00:28 CDT
From: kxb@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Karl R. Buck)
Subject: (3) Re: Files Gone from Hilbert
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg3@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

The Harpoon scenario and related files are gone from ftp.math.ksu.edu.
Unfortunately, someone uploaded a file that was copyright 360 software bundled
with some other files that were public domain. I did not notice the file until
360 called to (rightly) complain and ask for its removal.

However, because of this complaint, the Department Head of Mathematics here at
KSU does not want to put any files up for anonymous ftp.

Well, that is the way it stands. Sorry for the trouble. Perhaps someone will
start a similar service in the future.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 28 Jun 92 06:06:59 PDT
From: felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu (Felix Hack)
Subject: (4) Amiga Data Format
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg4@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
 
This is a description of some aspects of the data format used for Amiga Harpoon.
The Mac layout may be similar, but the IBM data is compressed and cannot be
edited. I wrote this in April of '91, but dropped the project because it was too
time consuming, so it represents the latest knowledge I have. An Amiga program
called dump_harpoon was written which used this info as a starting point. This
program printed out all sorts of numbers about platform loadouts, sensors,
weapons, etc. Whoever programmed it obviously discovered more than I did!
However, I strongly feel that 360 should have provided an editing utility long
ago.
    
I did finally discover a fix for the type-65 torpedoes on board Echo class subs,
but have since forgotten it. Sorry! (I sold all my computer Harpoon stuff
because I wasn't satisfied with the game).
 
A final note: I found that after changing the sensor suites on platforms (e.g.
replacing one sonar with another, adding a radar, deleting a radar, or even just
swapping the positions of two sonars, NOT changing the stats of a sonar or
radar) it was necessary to load all scenarios into the scenario editor, and
immediatly save them. It seems some of the data is stored in the scenario files,
and the changes didn't 'take' otherwise.
 
I take no responsibility for the mess you make of your data files. :-)
 

		Harpoon Data Format Document V1.1

This text file describes the data structure used in Amiga Harpoon. Although I
haven't checked thoroughly, the Mac data also seems to follow this layout so
this document should still be useful. However I understand the IBM version's
data base is compressed, so no editing is possible there.

Players may use a sector editor to change the information in the data base.
There are several reasons one might wish to do so:
   - to fix mistakes
   - to update the data according to new information
   - to suit one's personal tastes

The best source of data directly usable in the required format is the Harpoon
1990-91 Data Annex by GDW, intended for the manual game. I can also highly
recommend Combat Fleets of the World (latest edition, unfortunately I can't
afford to get every new one as they come out) and World Naval Weapons Systems
(ditto).

Naturally, you should never modify your original copies of data files.

The following description is by no means complete but it represents most of what
I have discovered thus far. The data is found in GIUK.dat (or NACV.dat, etc.).
In GIUK.dat, most of the data is located (very roughly) around sector 250.

In general the name of the system/platform FOLLOWS its data.

Notation: Characters enclosed in quotes are ASCII, else they are hex.  A hyphen
stands for 00. Numeric data is generally in hexadecimal notation, e.g. 0A = 10
(decimal). For every system I will display a sample listing followed by a
detailed breakdown.

	Sonars
BQQ-5: - A0 - FA 02 50 3C "HBQQ-5           H"
	Breakdown:
00 A0: active detection range in hex and units of tenths of a mile. Thus, A0
	(hex) = 160 (dec) -> 16 miles  
00 FA: passive detection range, 25 miles
   02: number of convergence zones
   50: active detection chance (hex, 80%)
   3C: passive chance (60%)
    H: hull sonar. T = Towed sonar, D = Dipping Sonar, 2 = H/T. The H at the
	end of the name probably has no game effect 

	Radars
SPY-1: 07 D0 40 50 4B "SPY-1           HF"
	Breakdown:
07 D0: detection range vs a large target. Thus 7D0 (hex) = 2000 (dec) -> 200
	miles 
   40: Type, HF. 04 = SS, 08 = AS, 0C = AS/SS
   50: detection probability (80%)
   4B: unknown

	Torpedoes
Mk48 ADCAP: - 4B - 96 - 96 - FA 1A 80 02 3C 28 50 01 32 "Mk48 ADCAP Torp"
	Breakdown:
   00 4B: damage vs subs, 75 points
   00 96: damage vs ships, 150 points
   00 96: range at high speed, 15 miles
   00 FA: range at low speed, 25 miles
1A 80 02: unknown
      3C: max speed, 60 knots
      28: min speed, 40 knots
      50: probability of a hit, 80%
   01 32: unknown

	SSMs
Harpoon 1B: 2D 02 58 - - - 1E 02 31 01 4B - 0B 0B 03 23 - - "Harpoon 1B"
	Breakdown:
   2D: Damage
02 58: max range, 600 tenths of miles, or 60 miles
   1E: minimum range, 3 miles
02 31: speed, 561 knots
   01: unknown
   4B: probability of a hit, 75%
0B 0B: codes for the max and min altitudes the missile flies at, 0B = Very Low,
	0C = Low, 0D = Medium, 0E = High, and so on 

I don't know what the remainining codes do. I am wary of such unknowns because
they may interact with the known data in unpredicable ways. While they probably
don't relate to numerical data like ranges and speeds, they could perhaps
interact with height data to determine whether a missile on final approach is a
'crossing target' and so forth. Since the boardgame has two missile sizes I
would expect one of the unknowns to represent this, but I haven't cross-compared
yet.

	SAMs
These are broadly similar to SSMs in layout.
SM1ER: 05 - - 01 5E - 1E 05 9A 01 3C 3C 0E 0C 02 24 - - "SM1MR/RIM-66B"
	Breakdown:
   05: damage (vs ships)
01 5E: air range, 35 miles
   1E: minimum range, 3 miles
05 9A: Speed, 1434 knots
   01: unknown
   3C: prob. of hit vs surface targets, 60%
   3C: prob. of hit vs air targets, 60%
   0E: max altitude of target, high
   0C: min altitude of target, low
02 24: unknown

	Stand-off ASW
SS-N-14: 8A 68 0F 01 2C - 28 02 70
	Breakdown:
8A 68 0F: unknown
   01 2C: Max range
      28: Min range
   02 70: Speed

	Air-Air missiles
Sky Flash: 01 0E - - 08 F7 0B -  . . . .
	Breakdown:
01 0E: Range, 27 miles
08 F7: Speed, 2295 knots

	Subs
Note that all sensors have implied reference numbers determined by the order of
listing and starting at zero within each type. Hence the type 162 sonar, being
the first sonar listed (sector 295 in GIUK.dat) is number 0, the BQQ-5, being
the 16th, gets hex number 0F, and so on. This number doesn't appear within the
sensor data itself.

LA (not improved) sub
	Because there's so much code I'm going to exhibit it in pieces. First

	1B 0F E8 9F [18 x FF]

I presume the first four bytes relate to which weapons 'package' the sub
carries, and perhaps firing arcs. The FF are most likely dummy placeholders/
Next is the sequence:

	B8 0F  B8 10  B8 1C  A8 0A  [4 x FF]

These are the sensors. The codes are two-byte pairs, with B8 standing for sonar
and A8 for radar, followed by the ID number of the sensor as described above.
The trailing dummy FFs pad out the listing. Other platforms with more or less
radars and sonars would have a correspondingly changed number of FFs. Here 
"B8 0F" is the BQQ-5, "B8 10" is BQS-15, "B8 1C" is the TB 16 array, and "A8 0A"
is the BPS-15 radar. Then follows:

	- 6B - 37 - 30 - 6E - F6 20 0F 05 02 03 00 08 1C 04 00 4E 00 

6B : damage points
37 : An ID number for the text message to use when displaying the sub
30 : An ID number for the picture to use when displaying the sub
6E : Length in meters, used when displaying the sub
F6 : unknown
20 : Maximum submerged speed, 32 knots
0F : Maximum surfaced speed, 15 knots
05 : Creep speed, 5 knots
02 : Code for max attainable depth, Deep. I believe it runs backwards, i.e. 01 =
	Very Deep 
03 : unknown
00 : Nation ID, US. 01 = UK, 04 = USSR
08 : Type of vessel, SSN.  09 = SSGN, 0A = SSBN, 0B = SS, 0C = SSGN
1C : Also corresponds to type, value is 20 (decimal) greater than the previous
	byte 
04 : unknown
00 : Class ID number. For example, Tango is 11, Sturgeon is 02
4E : Nuclear power. 44 = Diesel
00 : Hostile passive sonar modifier. Includes negative numbers. Example:
	Trafalgar is F6 = -10 (dec), Victor I is 0F = +15. 

	Ships
Sensor data is laid out the same way as for subs.

	Aircraft
Again, sensors are as described for subs.

Not yet done: It appears that weapons loadouts are not described within the
platform data itself, but in another location that is 'pointed to' by platform
data. Thus one can find many repeated data codes for "533mm Torp" each of which
must contain information about a set of 533mm torpedo tubes for some specific
submarine or group of submarines (if they have identical loadouts).

I haven't yet matched these weapon launcher listings up against platforms, nor
have I tried to decipher what their codes mean. Thus I am not yet able to
eliminate the error whereby the Echo II sub gets the dread Type 65 torpedo.
Ack!

{Correction. There is a byte one can change to fix this, but I don't remember
what or where}
 
-Felix
felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
GEnie: F.HACK1

------------------------------

Date: 30 Jun 92 02:03:22 EDT
From: 2330.1244@compuserve.com (Robin D. Roberts)
Subject: (5) Re: OS/2 Compatability
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg5@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Regarding running Computer Harpoon under OS/2 2.0

I have found that it does run. Unfortunately, for obvious reasons, it is much
slower. One advantage however is that OS/2 2.0's MSDOS 5.0 based emulation
provides an enormous amount of free ram for those scenarios that you just can't
get to fit any other way ...

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 15:32:40 -0400
From: dgil@ipsaint.ipsa.reuter.com (David Gillett)
Subject: (6) Re: NACV South Crossing 
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg6@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Gavin Rewell asks about this scenario (in CZ v10 msg 46 and 48), which I have
been enjoying recently.

I've found that fighter cover from Brest and La Coruna is quite sufficient to
protect the French task force. I did find myself slowing the French and Spanish
task forces to creep speed, and spreading them out more, in order to improve
their detection of hostile subs. And I ferried a couple of Seahawks to each of
them, so that when I got nuclear release (after I had made a good dent in the
population of Backfires and Bears with my Eagles and Phantoms) I had
nuclear-capable choppers in each task force. (Okay, I admit it: I was playing to
win, and not to simulate current naval doctrine.)

I believe I also sent the S-3s to the Clemenceau for a while, since there was
plenty of land-based ASW around the convoy. And the Fencers (I assume these were
intended to be Harriers ...) I sent to England, loaded them with Keglers, and
sent them on a one-way mission to Keflavik.

The 'Seawolf' in this scenario, by the way, seems to be an ordinary Los Angeles
class sub and not an SSN-21.

The first thing I do with subs is put each sub in the center of its own group.
That buys me three big advantages: precise location on the group display,
individual depth control (mixed sub/surface groups don't allow depth control),
and precision speed/course control. The latter is crucial, because a sub on
sector patrol -- or changing sectors -- on the formation display seems to move
at creep speed when the group is stopped, and full speed when the group is
creeping.  A sub in the centre of its own group stops when you stop the group
and creeps when the group creeps, and that seems to make a difference.

                                           Dave Gillett

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1992 14:01:09 -0500
From: creps@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: (7) USNI Membership
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg7@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Full membership in the United States Naval Institute is available to any current
or former member of the Navy, Marines, or Coast Guard (and I believe their
foreign counterparts). Associate membership includes anyone else with an
interest in naval matters, and includes all rights and privileges except voting.

I forget what the annual dues are, but I think they're $28. Also life
memberships start at $450.00, depending on your age at enrollment. A phone
number for membership inquiries is (800) 233-USNI. If and when you decide to
join, if you were to find a current USNI member as a sponsor, I'm sure that
member would be ever so grateful if you would give them his or her name and
membership number; it gets the sponsor a couple of months free membership.  I'm
not trying to advertise myself (or I would give my membership number here), but
if anyone is looking for a sponsor, and doesn't have a friend who is a member,
feel free to contact me or any other member who makes his or her presence here
known. You are not, however, required to have a sponsor in order to join.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps
creps@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
Associate (civilian) Member, United States Naval Institute

------------------------------

End of CZ Digest
****************


From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU  Wed Jul 15 12:37:07 1992
Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu
	(Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.07pram8) id AA29935;
	Wed, 15 Jul 92 12:37:07 -0700
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 12:37:07 -0700
Message-Id: <9207151937.AA29935@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU
To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: CZ Digest v11 #2 (msgs 8-14)
Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU
Status: RO

			 The Convergence Zone

Date:		15 July 1992
Volume:		11
Issue:		2
Topics:		(8) Editorial			cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu
		(9) 360 Speaks			76711.240@compuserve.com
		(10) Re: Sub Commander Wanted	trooker%xobu@relay.nswc.navy.mil
		(11) Surface Combat		ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
		(12) Re: Read any Good Books?	fontana@pavia.infn.it
		(13) PC v1.3			lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
		(14) Mac Versions		brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org

"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: Wed 15 Jul 1992 11:58:38 PDT
From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (8) Editorial
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg8@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

New members added since last issue:

vtp@lehtori.cc.tut.fi (Ville Pietikainen)
rogers@itech.com (Bob Rogers)

We are still looking for a North American scenario archive site. If anyone has
any leads please contact me at the administrator address. Mark Lam
(lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu) is working on setting up support for the PC funet
archives.

-ted (disguised as CZ Administrator)

------------------------------

Date: 04 Jul 92 13:05:22 EDT
From: 76711.240@compuserve.com (Three-Sixty)
Subject: (9) 360 Speaks
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg9@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

CZ Readers,

It is unfortunate that the FTP site at MATH.KS.EDU has decided not to allow
Harpoon scenarios to be available following the USNI BattleSet Episode. In my
discussions with the manager of the site I indicated that Three-Sixty did not
have any problem with the continued availability of user-created scenarios, we
were only concerned about the USNI BattleSet being available for download.
 
The USNI BattleSet is a 5 scenario BattleSet that comes with Harpoon if
purchased directly from the United States Naval Institute. USNI sells Harpoon
through their bookstore. We have an agreement with USNI that provides them this
unique BattleSet for their use only. The only way to get this BattleSet is to
purchase Harpoon through the USNI.
 
Please understand that Three-Sixty encourages the exchange of user-created
scenarios. I feel bad that this incident has resulted in a loss for everyone,
that was not my intention at all. I will contact the manager at the FTP site and
see what I can do about getting them to permit exchange of scenarios, but I
can't blame them for reacting the way they did.
 
If anyone else desires to start an FTP site for Harpoon scenarios, please do,
just be careful that proprietary software is not made available. Please contact
me if you have any questions or if I can help in any effort to get scenario
exchange back up to speed.
 
Scenario are also available from the Harpoon Scenario Warehouse BBS located near
New York City. The BBS can be accessed via modem at 516-829-2557. The BBS is
very active so don't be surprised if you recieve a busy signal. The Harpoon
Users' Group operates the BBS and is planning on starting one here in Texas and
another one in Southern California.
 
On to more agreeable things ... Harpoon V1.3 for PC is in final testing, as is
the Harpoon Designers' Series. We have run into some snags with both but are
working them out and expect to be finished within a week or so. Thanks to all
who volunteered to beta test, there were many of you who asked for applications
and we are sending out hundreds of packets, please do not be upset if you are
not initially selected to test at this time, we need to consolidate our total
testing population to the most optimum spread of configurations and computer
types. We will have a major title to test just about every quarter so please
hang in there (V for Victory PC version is coming as is Patriot).
 
Please contact me at 76711.240@compuserve.com if you have any questions. I can
also be reached by phone at 409-776-3047.

Later,
     Carl C. Norman, Manager
     Customer Support
     Three-Sixty Pacific, Inc.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 4 Jul 92 09:00:42 EDT
From: trooker%xobu@relay.nswc.navy.mil (T. Rooker)
Subject: (10) Re: Sub Commander Wanted
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg10@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Mea Culpa. I'm sorry for the confusion. As a friend of mine used to say, "I had
a brain fart". There are only two volumes in the Warship Commander "series". The
second is Sea Command. Unfortunately the last time I got a response from Enola
games only WC II was still in print.

Yes, both books are dated, even with the update of WCII. Presumably, the game
mechanics are still accurate. The ship data is similar to Harpoon. You can do
your own data update by translating the Harpoon data sheets to a WC II format.
Actually the data in Harpoon is largely taken directly from Combat Fleets of the
World (USNI Press), and if you find a copy of that book (or Janes) you can make
your own ship information. You can also update weapon performance by
extrapolating from weapon data in the existing game. I did this before WWC II
was released and was close on everythin except the 16" guns. Again, sorry for
the confusion. Email me if you have any other questions about WC II.

Terry
trooker@xobu.nswc.navy.mil

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Jul 92 22:51:38 CDT
From: ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau)
Subject: (11) Surface Combat
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg11@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I had some time to kill this evening so I thought that I'd try the playing 'The
Duel' from the GIUK battle set. I got within 250 nm, but decided to hold off my
Tomahawks to combine with my Harpoons try to over load the defences. I got with
in range and fired. It looked good.

112 incoming missles on the enemy surface fleet. I figured that alot, even half,
should get shot down by the enemy SAM's. To my dismay, about 100 got shot
down!! Of the remaining 12 or so that got though about, 5 hit. I sunk on ship
and lightly damaged another. I know that you are suposed to fire ALOT to
overload defences, but this is getting silly. 

Now on to my next peeve. I figured that I get in real close to finish them off
with guns (yah, I here the snickering). Now they start firing, I detect 3
incoming missles. My ships fire automaticly to intercept. They get 2 and ignore
the 3rd while firing at the ones farther out. The missle hits a ship and it
sinks (didn't even sound nuclear). Now what's going on here? It takes me about 4
missles to sink a ship, but the computer can do it with one. What gives?

-- 
Gene Moreau                |"Hold up a one iron and walk, even God can't hit
University of Manitoba     | a one iron."
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada |  - Once struck golfer, Lee Trevino, on how not 
ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca  |    to get struck by lightning.

------------------------------

Date:  Tue, 14 JUL 92 09:34 GMT
From: fontana@pavia.infn.it
Subject: (12) Re: Read any Good Books?
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg12@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hello from the Med!

In CZ v10 msg 36, todd.klaus@csu36.cfsat.honeywell.com asked for some books on
Naval warfare and related topics. The first answer came up in msg 42 from
tcomeau@stsci.edu. Here my tribute to the quest:

Fiction book:
1) Laurence Delaney, "The Triton Ultimatum", 1979
   It is mostly on submarine topics, with some interesting technical notes.

2) Harold Coyle, "Sword Point", 1990
   A possible scenario in the Gulf, very realistic!

Non-Fiction:
1) Antony Preston, "Fighting Ships", 1989
   A good list of photos very impressive and a good introductory text to the
   naval warfare. 

Hope this may be useful to someone!
                                         -Drew

Andrea Fontana                                  INet:fontana@pavia.infn.it
Department of Nuclear and Theoretical Physics   Voice:39-382-392423/4
University of Pavia - Italy

        "Alcuni guardano le cose come sono e si chiedono PERCHE'?
     Io guardo le cose come potrebbero essere e mi chiedo PERCHE' NO?"

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 14 Jul 92 11:55:59 MDT
From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam)
Subject: (13) PC v1.3
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg13@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Good news!

Harpoon version 1.3 for the PC is just about finished up. I was fortunate enough
to be chosen as a beta tester for version 1.3, and I thought I would pass along
some of the new features that you can look forward to.

Note, many of these were mentioned in the last issue of C3I, the Harpoon Users'
Group newsletter, in an article by Carl Norman, Three-Sixty Customer Support
manager.

Bases can repair themselves. Runways are always under repair, as well as
sensors. Don't count on taking out the radars once during a game.

You can now order individual or Group ASW aircraft to drop sonobuoys whereever
you want to, without interupting their normal search pattern.

You can load user scenarios from the scenario selection screen. This means no
more Alt-F1 sequences. Another nice feature is that double-clicking is now
supported on a lot of selection screens.

Anti-Radiation Missiles are just that: anti-radiation. Don't expect HARMs to
destroy airbases anymore, nor will they destroy ships (unless you get lucky!).
They will however, if they hit, kill the radar for a short period of time.
Remember, the radars will come back on line after a while.

Torpedoes work much more realistically now. Torpedoes now have to acquire their
targets independently of the launching platforms. If they happen to acquire the
launching platform in their search pattern ... :-).

As I mentioned above, ARMs no longer kill bases. Neither do Harpoons. Also, land
attack missiles (such as the Tomahawk TLAM-C) can't attack ships. 

SAM missiles are modeled better, in that the guiding radar has to have a lock on
the target before the missiles will fire, and if applicable, the missiles will
only impact if there is still a lock on the target.

Realistic Rates of Fire have been implemented for missile and torpedo launches.

The new sonar model, IMHO, is the best change to the program. It's too detailed
for me to get into right now, but suffice it to say that your subs will become
much more effective. The Seawolfs can actually sneak up on ships (I played Here
there be dragons ... in IOPG, took my Seawolf right up underneath the Soviet
fleet, and they never heard me until I fired my torps. And then, their return
shots didn't come anywhere close to me! :-)) On the flip side, ASW is much more
difficult. On playing the first NACV scenario, where your goal is to sink four
subs, I never found one. I found lots of inbound torpedoes, but never found a
sub.

You can have your aircraft jettison their ordnance to live to fight another day.
This has the side effect of reducing aircraft range, if there were drop tanks
onboard. Aircraft endurance has been revamped also, so those range circles
dealing with aircraft range come in a lot more handy now.

Another nice feature added is that users of the Scenario Editor can make text
files of orders for both sides, and these will be displayed in the program. In
other words, when you select a user scenario, a box will come up containing the
orders for your particular side. For existing user scenarios, you will have to
change some of formatting, as word-wraps and such are handled automatically by
the program.

These are some of the major changes. There are others, but I don't want to spoil
the whole thing! :-).

To head off some questions, I don't know about Mac and Amiga versions of Harpoon
1.3. I know that they are supposed to come out, but as to when, and what changes
from the PC version (if any), I don't know.

Three-Sixty did a beautiful job with Harpoon 1.3! Kudos to them! You will
definetely want to get this upgrade. 

Enjoy! 

-- 
Mark R. Lam                       InterNet Address: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu 
Colorado State University                           lam@lamar.colostate.edu
Fort Collins, Colorado

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 12:01 CET
From: brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org (Tales from Topographic Oceans)
Subject: (14) Mac Versions
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg14@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Good day people. Quick question. I'm running Harpoon on my Mac using version
1.0. Does anyone know how I can obtain a later version without having to pay out
the nose? 

I recently bought the scenario editor and it won't work with version 1.0. I
could actually buy it here in Germany where I live but, you wanna talk about
paying out the nose? Most places here want about $300 for the software. I
purchased my copy of harpoon from Macwarehouse but they don't supply any free,
or minimal cost upgrades. Lemme know if anyone has any ideas.

[Mod Note: I suggest trying to contact 360 and getting an upgrade directly from
 them. The latest version I know for the Mac is v1.01. It works fine with the
 Scenario Editor.] 

Thanks in advance.

  Richard Brock
  Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
  Munich, Germany
  Internet:  BROCKR@RFERL.ORG

------------------------------

End of CZ Digest
****************


From root@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU  Tue Jul 28 17:14:02 1992
Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu
	(Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.19pram11) id AA29548;
	Tue, 28 Jul 92 17:14:02 -0700
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 17:14:02 -0700
Message-Id: <9207290014.AA29548@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
From: cz@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: CZ Digest v11 #3 (msgs 15-24)
Errors-To: cz-request@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
Status: RO

			 The Convergence Zone

Date:		28 July 1992
Volume:		11
Issue:		3
Topics:		(15) Editorial			cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu
		(16) Survey			lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
		(17) Computer Version 1.3	paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu
		(18) Modem Play			dyfl@kbs.citri.edu.au
		(19) Re: Read any Good Books?	pgolden@nhgs.vak12ed.edu
		(20) Missiles, Rapier, Radar	sscotten@email.bony.com
		(21) Reloading			s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au
		(22) Mac Coprocessor		brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org
		(23) Tidbits...			gmartin@cory.berkeley.edu
		(24) Editor Versions		zen%hophead@canrem.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: Tue 28 Jul 1992 16:31:55 PDT
From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (15) Editorial
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg15@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

New members added since last issue:

trystro!kaya@think.com (Kaya Bekiroglu)
slan@teal.csn.org (Todd Bradley)
gmartin@cory.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero)
kevin.hill@um.cc.umich.edu (Kevin Hill)
emory!seaweed!ken@uunet.uu.net (Ken Seefried III)
ksoutor@unlinfo.unl.edu (Kevin Soutor)

The new North American scenario archive will probably materialize on Sunbane
shortly. The official announcement should appear in the next issue. We still
need someone who wants to administrate Amiga user scenarios. We are having
problems with getting a European archive set up. If you have any leads, please
tell us.

I have been informed, if you still have Mac version 1.0, you can simply forward
360 your warranty card, and they will send you a free upgrade to Mac v1.1.

-ted (disguised as CZ Administrator)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 92 12:51:58 MDT
From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam)
Subject: (16) Survey
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg16@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I thought it might be interesting to see how the membership of CZ breaks down in
relation to the version of the game they play (computer vs. paper), and what
their favorite part of the game is.  So, I decided to put this little survey
together.  Here's what I propose: fill out the survey and email it to
lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu.  I'll tabulate the data over the course of volume
11 (this was supposed to get into volume 11 issue 1, but I didn't get it
together in time.)  After the last issue of volume 11 is posted, I'll put the
data together and present it to the group.  Hopefully, this will spur some
discussion as well as give people a feel for the list membership.

====
1.  What versions of the game do you have (computer/paper/both):
	a.  What type of computer do you play Harpoon on:

2.  Which version is your favorite, if you have both:

====
PAPER VERSION
1.  Please rank your favorite types of scenarios (ASW, ASuW, AAW, other) with
    one being your favorite, two your second favorite, etc.:
	a.  If you have one, what is your favorite scenario:

2.  What Harpoon supplements do you own, other than the basic game (Ship Forms,
    ASW Forms, etc.):

3.  Do you prefer large games (ie Carrier Battle Groups involved) or small
    games (ie two or three ships total):

4.  Do you prefer a game with a referee or without:

5.  How long does a typical game session last:

6.  What is the single most important facet of the game that needs improvement:

====
COMPUTER VERSION
1.  Do you own the Scenario Editor:

2.  What BattleSets do you own, other than GIUK:

3.  Please rank the BattleSets in order of preference, with one being your
    favorite, two your second favorite, etc.:

4.  Do you prefer playing user scenarios or built-in scenarios:

5.  What is your favorite type of scenario:
	a.  If you have one, what is your favorite scenario:

6.  What is the single most important facet of the game that needs improvement:

====
Please take a few minutes to fill this out and send it to me.  I think the whole
list will be interested in the results.

Thank you!

-- 
Mark R. Lam                       InterNet Address: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu 
Colorado State University                           lam@lamar.colostate.edu
Fort Collins, Colorado

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1992 13:18:22 -0700
From: paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu (Paul Wang)
Subject: (17) Computer Version 1.3
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg17@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I talked to a representative at Three-Sixty about Harpoon 1.3 and here are some
info about Harpoon 1.3.

New sonar modeling: Torpedo now have search patterns giving wire-guided torpedos
a big advantages since it can be controlled.  Apparently this new modeling is
suppose to make submarines actually challenging instead of being a moving
target.

New missile modeling: Phoenix missile now use inertial guidance (I assume other
missles also) and after radar turn on can hit any plane in the area.  That means
if Phoenix missiles are fired into a group of dogfighting a/c it can hit your
plane as well as the enemy planes.  Phoenix missile hit problem at Vlow is also
fixed.

New base repair: Bases can now repair themselves.  Things like weapon mounts and
sensors will be fixed as soon as the damage is taken.  Also, certain SAMs now
need the radar to be active to be fired.  HARMs will fail to hit when bases turn
off their active radars.  Harpoons etc will no longer able to attack bases.  I
think that only leaves Tomahawk TLAM as the only missile capable of hitting
bases from ships.

That's about all I got about the new features in 1.3.  Apparently Harpoon 1.3
has been released and will start shipping Friday, July 24.  It'll probably start
appearing in stores first week of August.  Three-Sixty is also offering a
packaged deal with Harpoon Designer Series and 1.3 that'll cost $44.95 with UPS
two day shipping.  1.3 by itself is $19.95 from Three-Sixty.  If you buy the
Designer series package deal you can also get any battleset for $15.00.

I also asked the representative about the possibility of ever releasing an
editor to change the specs on ships and missiles etc.  The answer's no.

Harpoon II is mentioned being released next year.  It'll feature SVGA graphics
and use of SoundBlaster (I also assume other sound boards too)

Phew, that's about all I got out of that representative.  One more thing I'm not
totally clear is whether Harpoon 1.3 will be included in Harpoon Designer
Series.

Paul Wang
paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu
paulwang@soda.berkeley.edu

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 12:33:40 EST
From: dyfl@kbs.citri.edu.au (Daniel Lam)
Subject: (18) Modem Play
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg18@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hi all:

It seems to me that computer Harpoon is very well suited for 2-person
play via modem or direct link.  Does anybody know if this is on
Three-Sixty's agenda?

	Daniel Lam

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Jul 92 17:11:09 EDT
From: pgolden@nhgs.vak12ed.edu (Patrick S. Golden)
Subject: (19) Re: Read any Good Books?
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg19@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

On the "Read any Good Books?" thread started in CZ v10 msg 36 ...

I'm not an avid reader of military fiction, or techno-thrillers, or whatever you
call them.  I've read my share, but they tire me after a while.

Having been in the active military (and still a member of the naval reserve), I
find many of the representations less than realistic.  Maybe that's for two
reasons:

1) I've never taken part in a global conflict on which the fate of the free
world rests on who uses the most super-secret technology now available (a basic
premise for most of these writers), and

2) My memories revolve around the people more than the hardware, and most of
these writers don't capture people too well (especially Clancy -- I know that's
heretical to those who feel Tom is the greatest thing to literature since the
White Whale!)

Having said all that (and presumably destroyed my credibility with a sizable
percentage of the readership of CZ), allow me to recommend an author who does
seem to capture the experience of modern life at sea -- David Poyer.

Dave has several books out -- "The Med," "The Gulf," and, his latest "The
Circle".  (I will gladly e-mail location summaries for the geography-impaired!)
While his novels have plenty of action, some of which are improbable, he
captures the essence of what it's like to serve at sea in the modern Navy.  "The
Med" in particular recalled to me my most frequent memory of deployment:
exhaustion (I once missed an entire country of port visits to catch up on sleep
I missed from watchstanding!)  Dave is an academy grad and still in the
reserves, so he keeps current.

Although I've gone on too long already (sorry about the length), and while this
is not germane to modern naval operations, I can't resist plugging another
author of the sea.  Patrick O'Brian writes of the British Navy in the Napoleonic
Wars, and he does so in a way that no one (not even Forrester) does.  A master
of the technical details of ships, O'Brian also has an eye for the period
touches as only a scholar of the period can.  His language follows the cadences
of early 19th century speech and draws you into the rhythm.

Try Poyer for modern fiction and give O'Brian a try when you're tired of haze
gray.  They're both in libraries and available in paperback.

-- 
|-------------------------------|
|++Patrick Golden++             | 
|Virginia Space Grant Consortium| 
|Hampton, VA  (804-865-0726)    |
|pgolden@nhgs.vak12ed.edu       | 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 19 Jul 92 17:20:41 -0400
From: sscotten@email.bony.com
Subject: (20) Missiles, Rapier, Radar
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg20@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Greetings, fellow Harpooners.  I'm writing just to give my two cents on a few
popular subjects.

Gene Moreau (in CZ v11 msg 11) wants to know why it is that it took him four
harpoons to sink a Soviet ship, but the Soviets could sink one of his ships with
a single non-nuclear missle. That's because Harpoons carry a 500 pound warhead
whereas most Soviet missle have 1, 2, or 3 thousand pound warheads.

When attacking airbases with carrier aircraft, I've found the best strategy is
to use FA-18's with HARMs followed A-6's with Walleyes.  With other aircraft I
try the same basic approach: an anti-radiation mission followed by an attack
with a guided loadout.  If I don't have a good anti-radiation plane, I use a
very-low altitude attack with a guided or ironbomb load (whichever is more
damaging).

On the subject of the hardest scenario (started in CZ v10 msg 32) ...

I've beaten Rapier (with nuclear release).  I pulled back all the attack subs
and sent the Imp. LA's creeping along the Soviet coast and down the inlets till
they were as close as possible to the two nearest bases, then launched all my
missles. The two bases were nuked and I pulled out the same way.

The computer's most serious flaw in air combat seems to be that he never turns
on the radar of his strike missions, even when they have fighter escorts, making
them sitting ducks.  Does anybody anybody know if this has been corrected in
1.3?

Hagan Scotten
sscotten@email.bony.com

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Jul 92 9:17:05 EST
From: s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell)
Subject: (21) Reloading
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg21@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I am not sure what to make of this, so perhaps someone out there can help?

I am running IBM v1.2, and was disappointed to discover that I have never (in
around two years of play) had a NATO SAM/SSM/ASROC launcher reload.

I have been notified by the computer assistant that a Kiev and Kirov have
reloaded their SSMs (much to my dismay!) in the GIUK battleset a couple of
times, but that is it.  A couple of other people have said the same thing.

However, I was shocked to see a friend's copy of the Battlebook that came with
his Amiga challenger pack...it had a whole table saying that many weapons mounts
were reloadable.

Does anyone understand this?

Gavin Rewell
s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 10:32 CET
From: brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org (The Black Knight)
Subject: (22) Mac Coprocessor
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg22@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hello all,

A quick question.  Does anyone out there who's running Harpoon on the Mac ever
suffer from the system crashing whilst running a scenario?  Occasionally I get
an error message stating that a coprocessor is not installed and then the system
hangs necessitating a reboot.  Funny thing is, I do have a coprocessor
installed.

  Richard Brock
  Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
  Munich, Germany
  Internet: BROCKR@RFERL.ORG

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 22:12:19 -0700
From: gmartin@cory.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero)
Subject: (23) Tidbits...
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg23@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Some additions I might want to see in the next generation of Harpoon:

1) Tanker capability -- i.e. F-111s which can go from a U.S. Base to Libya for
example via air based tanker. Tankers would make a great target, too.

2) Mines -- Mines are a real danger out there and somehow, they should be
implemented.  You have mine clearing ships, subs which have to go through
Minefields in the Bastions, the Straight of Hormuz, etc.

3) Two player capability -- I know this is very difficult to do in real time or
anywhere close, but at least make some workable alternative to two-player
interaction

4) A Pacific Theatre Scenario with the U.S. Seventh Fleet!

5) Maybe a whole new Harpoon which is capable of handling old-time warships.
One example is to relive Midway, Pearl Harbor, the U-Boat attacks, etc.  I know
you might have to do changes to the lack of missiles, missile defense, effective
radar, etc., but wouldn't you like to relive these historical events?  I'd
certainly like to see some of our Corsairs against the Zeros once again.  Or
else our early fighters fight against the MIGs in Korea.  Harpoon (computer) can
be a good base for this type of set-up.  Harpoon is user-friendly and I hope it
stays that way.

6) Option to dock from the F3 screen.  Everytime I want to dock, I have to wait
for the ship to reach near port then I have to split a group.  An option would
be nice.

7) Stunning 3-D graphics! (yeah, right!  But it's worth trying! 8-))

8) B-2 Stealth Bombers

9) The F-22?? (or is going to be the F-23?)

10) A little bit more going into communications/intelligence, etc. -- For
example, by destroying a commucations facility, or else the commanding ship,
effectiveness will be reduced.

Blabbed too much.  Talk to you all later.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:32:09 -0400
From: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena)
Subject: (24) Editor Versions
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg24@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hi,
        Have there been any updates to the editor? My copy
        is version 1.0.
        Thanks

        Nick

******************************************
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen%hophead@canrem.com
******************************************

------------------------------

End of CZ Digest
****************


From root@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU  Mon Aug 24 15:46:50 1992
Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu
	(Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.19ficus1) id AA04190;
	Mon, 24 Aug 92 15:46:50 -0700
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 15:46:50 -0700
Message-Id: <9208242246.AA04190@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
From: cz@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: CZ Digest v11 #4 (msgs 25-32)
Errors-To: cz-request@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
Status: RO

			 The Convergence Zone

Date:		24 August 1992
Volume:		11
Issue:		4
Topics:		(25) Editorial			cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(26) PC Archive Information	lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
		(27) Version 1.3		dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
		(28) Where is SLAM?		zen%hophead@canrem.com
		(29) Re: Tidbits		slan@csn.org
		(30) HDS Errors?		zen%hophead@canrem.com
		(31) Airbase Strike		fontana@pavia.infn.it
		(32) Good Naval Books		felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.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@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
Administration:	cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
Archives:	sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon 24 Aug 1992 13:56:11 PDT
From: cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (25) Editorial
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg25@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

New members added since last issue:

marv.conn@medinfo.jax.fl.us (Marv Conn)
fontana@pavia.infn.it (Andrea Fontana)
rayg@vnet.ibm.com (Ray G.)
holmanji@ohsu.edu (Jim Holman)
lapointe@mv83a.nusc.navy.mil (Kenneth Lapointe)
alewis@icarus.weber.edu (Alan Lewis)
pmadden@fnal.fnal.gov (Pat Madden)
janm@moskva.docs.uu.se (Jan Mattsson)
dennis@hecate.ngs.noaa.gov (Dennis Milbert)
lim1!jon@cs.utexas.edu (Jon R. Nials)
rinkleff@ksuvm.ksu.edu (Stuart C. Rinkleff)
bande@lut.fi (Panu Rissanen)
rouhier@wpdis02.hq.aflc.af.mil (Chuck Rouhier)
penfold@bnr.ca (Harvey Schwartz)
j.trolinger@genie.geis.com (John Trolinger)
e.weller@bull.com (Ed Weller)
mkbmfav@dutrex.tudelft.nl (F. A. Veer)
rkwillis@digex.com (Robert K. Willis)
glngar01@uctvax.uct.ac.za (Gary Glen Young)
fzimmerm@erim.org (Fred Zimmerman)

I must apologize for the long gap between issues. It has been nearly a month.
For part of that month, I was on vacation and had to move my office. But I am
back now. By next issue, I should have cleared the submission backlog.

The good news is that the North American scenario archive is now up on the same
site (sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca) as the CZ archive. Dan Corrin was kind enough to
give us space there. Everything is now organized under the pub/harpoon
directory, with separate subdirectories for cz and scenarios. The details for
the PC section is included in an article below. Similar information can be found
on the archive site for the other machine types. Please read the appropriate
information before up/down-loading. Special thanks are in order to our scenario
archive administrator team:

	Mark Lam (PC Admnistrator): lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
	Gary Snow (Macintosh Administrator): gsnow@clark.edu
	Larry Cline (Amiga Administrator): lcline@agora.rain.com
	Kolin Hand (Drop-Off Site Administrator): hand@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov

While sunbane will be our primary scenario archive, we are still interested in
finding other sites which would be willing to mirror sunbane, especially in
Europe. If you have any leads, please inform us.

SITREP #12 came out about a week ago. The main item of note is a set of stats
for land-based SAMs. A summary will appear in the next issue.

-ted (disguised as CZ Administrator)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 11:46:32 MDT
From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam)
Subject: (26) PC Archive Information
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg26@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>


Welcome to the PC section of the Harpoon Scenario Archive!

Please take a moment to read through this README to get a brief idea of how to
submit scenarios and whom to contact if you have trouble with them.

Some ground rules:

When submitting scenarios, please use PKZIP to compress the files. We have a
limited amount of space, and would like to have as many scenarios available as
possible.

Along with your scenario, include three text files. One text file should contain
just general information, such as version of the program you ran your scenario
on, version of the Scenario Editor that you created it on, memory requirements,
and any editorial comments you would like to include. Also, leave an email
address where other players can contact you with comments on your scenario.

Your other two text files should be orders for both the BLUE RED side. To allow
for HARPOON version 1.3 users to see the orders while in the game, use the
following proceedure:
     
1. Put the name of the scenario on the first line of your file. HARPOON 1.3 will
   then put it in the center of the title bar.

2. Your orders file should have no control characters in them. HARPOON 1.3 will
   balk at this. This includes hard-carriage returns at the ends of lines. Only
   use these to separate paragraphs. HARPOON 1.3 will automatically word-wrap
   your orders.

3. The orders files should be named the same as the scenario file itself. See
   the example below: 

   EXAMPLE:  scenario is named ASSAULT.HP1
             Blue orders file should be named ASSAULT.BL1
             Red orders file should be named ASSAULT.RD1

   Please note that the .hp1, .bl1 and .rd1 extensions will change based on the
   BattleSet you're using (in other words, an NACV scenario would have .hp2,
   .bl2, and .rd2 extensions.)

4. Note: we reserve the right to edit any of your documentation. This means
   spelling errors, typos, etc. If we make any changes, we will properly note
   them. BE ASSURED, we will NEVER edit the scenario itself. Also, we will never
   change the intention of your documentation (like telling the BLUE player he
   has to invade Keflavik when he/she really has to invade Narvik! :-))

To upload scenarios, simply set up an FTP session with spc7.jpl.nasa.gov
(137.79.114.145). Then, drop me a note at lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu informing
me that it's there. I will take the scenario from spc7.jpl.nasa.gov and run a
virus check and see if the scenario loads properly into Harpoon. If your
scenario does not pass those checks, I will send you email to inform you about
it. If your scenario does pass, it will be uploaded to the pub/harpoon/pc sub
directory at sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca and will be available to all.

PLEASE NOTE: DO NOT ATTEMPT TO UPLOAD ANY "PROPRIETARY" FILES! 
By this, I mean copyrighted material. Our former FTP archive site,
hilbert.math.ksu.edu was shut down because the USNI BattleSet published
especially for those Naval Institute members who bought the program through the
USNI (and therefore not available to anyone else!) was uploaded to hilbert. We
do not want to see this happen again! If you attempt to upload this type of file
(ie any BattleSet or other part of the HARPOON/SCENARIO EDITOR programs) they
will not be transferred to sunbane. Also, please only upload HARPOON scenarios.
This archive is only for HARPOON scenarios.

Take note: there will be an INDEX file in the pub/harpoon/pc sub directory
listing all the scenarios in the directory, and will include each the address of
the author (to encourage feedback), memory requirements, and a short,
one-or-two-line description of the scenario, drawn from your text files.

Following these guidelines will allow us to build a quality archive of scenarios
to make available to all HARPOON users.

Some addresses to take note of if you have any problems:

	Mark Lam (PC Admnistrator): lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
	Gary Snow (Macintosh Administrator): gsnow@clark.edu
	Larry Cline (Amiga Administrator): lcline@agora.rain.com
	Kolin Hand (Drop-Off Site Administrator): hand@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov

Thank you for taking time to read this. If you have any questions, please leave
me an email. 

HAPPY HARPOONING!

Mark R. Lam
P.C. Administrator, Harpoon Scenario Archive
lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 23:30:00 -0500
From: dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Daniel L. Schneider)
Subject: (27) Version 1.3 
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg27@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

With version 1.3, antiradar attacks are handled more realistically, so I've been
experimenting with other loadouts to eliminate enemy bases. After toasting the
radars with a first wave attack, I come in with antirunway loadouts and crater
the airfields, reducing them to "small helopad". However, it seems as if
aircraft are still able to take off from these cratered runways. My experience
is with the the scenario "Mother of All Brawls" in the Designer Series new IOPG
Battleset, playing Red. The Blue coastal airbase just south of Kuwait contains
about 18 attack planes before the attack, (F-5's I think), but less than a
couple of hours after the attack, reducing it to small helopad, there are F-5's
everywhere, and no planes at the base, and the base is still a "small helopad".
I know bases can be repaired, but this is only a couple of hours after tilling
the runway, and the game still calls it small helopad.

Dan
dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 09:58:41 -0400
From: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena)
Subject: (28) Where is SLAM?
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg28@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hi,

It's been mentioned that the new version does not allow Harpoons to be used
versus bases. Does this mean that the SLAM version of Harpoon is modeled as a
different missile or are we being deprived?

	 Nick

*****************************************************************************
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen%hophead@canrem.com
*****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 12:18:33 -0600
From: slan@csn.org (Slan Markovic)
Subject: (29) Re: Tidbits
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg29@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

In Volume 11, Issue 3, Topic 23, Martin Guerrero listed several things he'd like
to see added to the next generation of Harpoon.

It seems that many of the great sounding additions to the game are just beyond
the capabilities of the DOS operating system. I recall seeing in several places
in the documentation that there are a lot of features they would like to add to
the game, but which had to be left out due to memory constraints.

Of course, better operating systems (Mac and Amiga) don't have this problem. I
was wondering if the Mac and Amiga versions do have additional features over the
DOS version. Also, does anyone know if 360 has considered an OS/2 port? OS/2
seems like it would be the ideal OS for Harpoon, given that it can access all
the memory of today's PC clones and it has great features like threads. I'm
already impressed with Harpoon's ability to handle lots of things at once, but a
multi-threaded version of it would be awesome.

With respect to a two player modem version, it seems to me that the biggest
problem wouldn't be in making it work, but in making the time scales synch up.
For example, one of the nice things about computer Harpoon is that if nothing
exciting is happening or if you're just out searching for subs, you can turn the
time increments way up to 1 or 5 minutes. But what if the other player does want
to do fine detail things at the 1 second setting? You're gonna get really bored
waiting around for your opponent in real time.

Just a few thoughts,
Slan.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1992 19:20:55 -0400
From: zen%hophead@canrem.com (Nick Zentena)
Subject: (30) HDS Errors?
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg30@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hi,

I just got the HDS. While trying to write a scenario for the HDS Med battleset I
noticed that the Yugo sub class Sava is listed with LA VLS class weapons
[Tomahawks and all the rest] Are their any other errors in the database I should
know about?

	Nick

*****************************************************************************
I drink Beer I don't collect cute bottles!
zen%hophead@canrem.com
*****************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 6 AUG 92 11:06 GMT
From: fontana@pavia.infn.it
Subject: (31) Airbase Strike
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg31@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hello to all the Harpooners around the World!

There are several ways to striking an airbase heavily guarded by sam batteries
and I'd like to syntethize various strategies, suggested in previous issues, and
tested on our PC:

The first idea is to strike with F18 configured Standoff (ie, armed with 'poons)
and this guarantee a safety position of attack due to the range of 70nm. But the
damage inflicted is very poor and the attack must protract in time and cannot be
quick and effective. Even with successive waves of strike we cannot destroy or
seriously damage the Opfor before 3 or 4 strikes, with a great waste of time and
forces.

Better to distinguish the primary from secondary objectives: first, we have to
blind the enemy, by setting up the Intruder with HARM and sending an antiradar
strike (the air coverture is now necessary due to the poor defense and
manovrability of the A6, as result of many tries). Then a more effective attack
can be sent arming the A6 with Walleye II, as suggested by D. Guidry in a
previous issue (Vol. 8, Issue 3, Msg. 18). So, with a few bombs we can destroy
an airbase within a tolerable risk factor.

In this second case we have to send before the strike a coverture group in high
altitude (F14 or F15 may works well) to guarantee protection for the strikers.

A third chance is allotted in some scenarios (1990 Strike vs. Libya) of MEDC
battleset: to strike with F111 configured guided. Here we didn't collect many
data, but our impression is that the F111 is easily intercepted by enemy bandits
or by SAM batteries. Very often, all squadrons of Aardvark were destroyed or
heavily damaged before entering in operations area.

Does anyone have suggestions on how to use effectively the F111? Moreover in
this scenarios, how protect and defend the Incirlik airbase? The Syrian's
strikes are very oppressive and we cannot manage to stop them, performing in the
same time an attack vs. Libya.

                                               -Drew

Andrea Fontana                                  INet:fontana@pavia.infn.it
Department of Nuclear and Theoretical Physics   Voice:39-382-392423/4
University of Pavia - Italy

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 9 Aug 92 14:27:30 PDT
From: felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu (Felix Hack)
Subject: (32) Good Naval Books
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg32@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I've found the following books to be extremely valuable in helping me understand
naval weapons and tactics. While reading good works of fiction (like Hunt for
Red October) originally whetted my appetite, these books provide 'real'
substance. They are among the core sources for many naval games. They should be
useful to any players of Harpoon, computer or miniatures, as well as fans of the
Victory Games Fleet Series, the Simulations Canada Fleet series, and players of
Warship Commander.


Combat Fleets of the World (Couhat, Baker, USNI) - This large book lists
warships and auxiliaries, including coast guard vessels, for all nations. It is
published biannually by the US Naval Institute. It's expensive (over $100), so I
can't afford to get every edition. Still, most of the data from slightly older
edition should be fine. In particular, if you want to know what ships were in
service at what time, you'll probably need the contemporary edition. The latest
I own is for 1988/89.


World Naval Weapons Systems (Friedman, USNI) - The second edition of this book
just came out. Almost as long as Combat Fleets, it is a thoroughly comprehensive
reference for weapons and sensors for all currently deployed naval (and
naval-related) forces. The book is particularly good at cautioning about the
uncertainties of performance data, especially for Soviet systems. For example,
while a certain specific range or speed figure is quoted under the main heading,
the discussion will point out the source and uncertainty of such estimates. The
section on modern Soviet torpedoes references the original source, a single
magazine article. This cautionary approach is very welcome and refreshing, and
reminds us how weapons data from various games is not carved in stone, but
merely represents a best guess.
  
There are very helpful and interesting articles that precede the main listings,
which are divided into sections like strike warfare, ASW, anti-air warfare
(AAW), etc. Each elucidates the principles of operation of the associated
systems in some detail. After reading this you'll know why later US SAMS are
more accurate than earlier Soviet ones, why anti-ship homing torpedoes use
passive sonar and anti-sub homing torps use active sonar, and so on.

Friedman also explains how the performance of a given weapon is not determined
solely by its own physical characteristics, but is governed by the whole
interaction of relevant ship systems. To fire a SAM, the search radar must
detect a target. Target data is communicated to a fire-control system, which
must direct a fire-control radar at the target, get a lock-on, and compute the
relevant weapon firing parameters. Only then can you actually launch the weapon.
If you only look at, say, the rate at which you can pump SAMs out of the
launcher you'd be overlooking equally important contstraints set by the rest of
your system. These include how quickly and accurately the information from the
search radar is sent to the fire-control radar, how fast the fire-control radar
can find and lock up the target, and so on. Here a fully automatic system like
Aegis would have a tremendous speed advantage over older, manual systems. Soviet
ships without centralized CIC facilities would be at a disadvantage.
   

Modern Warship Design and Development (Friedman) - This book is a little old (c.
1980), but is extremely valuable nonetheless. Hey USNI, how about a new edition?
The book discusses the important constraints and trade-offs that govern the
design of modern warships. It is full of specific examples and talks about the
gains and sacrifices that were made. For example, Soviet ships typically litter
their decks with weapons systems, have a forest of radar antennas, and put in
high-speed gas turbine engines. The trade-off is range and crew habitability.
Gas turbines really suck fuel fast and require specialized space-robbing stack
design. The small craw quarters mean conditions are not amenable to extended
cruises. The relatively low standard of technical training for Russian conscript
sailors means that things which break can't be fixed at sea. Thus, they have to
have lots of missile launchers and radars so if some fail they'll have some left
over that work.

The choice of high speed along with the cramped conditions means that
operational ranges are short. The amount of high explosives placed on and about
the decks means that a weapons hit almost anywhere along the upper hull has a
chance of setting off devastating secondary explosions.  Western warships
typically centralize their ammunition in below-decks magazines, thus the chances
of a 'critical' hit are smaller.

Ship survivability is discussed near the end of the book. It explains how
passive defense (armor) has had to be sacrificed in order to save weight (armor
weighs a LOT) that's needed for the ship's active systems (radars, electronics,
missiles). The theory is that a ship can defend itself actively from missiles
(i.e. jam them or shoot them down) and thus won't need armor. That's the theory,
at least. Some modern ships nevertheless are well protected even against direct
hits. For example, no large US CV has ever been sunk (including WW II) [I don't
recall the exact WW II class name.] Modern carriers have extremely well
protected central magazines, and their sheer hull size makes them tough to sink.
Further, US ships are always overmanned so that there can be more damage control
parties. Compare the records of Stark, Roberts, and Princeton to the Soviet
Udaloy which recently burned beyond repair. The tradeoff is that you need to
allocate more space to crew quarters. And so on.
    

Fighter Combat (Shaw, USNI) - Not exactly about naval combat. This fantastic
book offers a complete discussion of fighter weapons and tactics. There are all
manner of suggested tactics and maneuvers for combat between one or several
fighters, of similar or different performance. There is a valuable discussion of
fighter weapons, including how they work, and when they'll work well and when
not. Throughout there are choice quotes from fighter pilots through the ages.
There is no other book like it. If you have any interest whatever in air combat,
GET THIS BOOK!
    

Over the years I've also bought a bunch of other books which are more notable
for their pretty artwork than for sober technical discussions. They don't cite
sources, and sometimes the data conflicts rather strongly with that in the
'core' references above. Still, at the time I couldn't afford Combat Fleets so
there was no real choice.

------------------------------

End of CZ Digest
****************


From root@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU  Tue Aug 25 18:47:48 1992
Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu
	(Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.19ficus1) id AA11963;
	Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:47:48 -0700
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:47:48 -0700
Message-Id: <9208260147.AA11963@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
From: cz@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: CZ Digest v11 #5 (msgs 33-45)
Errors-To: cz-request@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
Status: RO

			 The Convergence Zone

Date:		25 August 1992
Volume:		11
Issue:		5
Topics:		(33) Editorial 			cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(34) Mac Versions		ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
		(35) Re: Surface Combat		yuqian@bvc.edu
		(36) Same Bug is Back		frankie@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu
		(37) V1.3 Upgrade Price?	yuqian@bvc.edu
		(38) CGA Tricks?		atubbiol@ccit.arizona.edu
		(39) Re: Reloading		yuqian@bvc.edu
		(40) Re: Tidbits		lcline@agora.rain.com
		(41) DOS 5 + Windows 3.1	s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au
		(42) SITREP 12			tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu
		(43) Amiga Archive Information	lcline@agora.rain.com
		(44) Amstrad + MCGA Tricks	yvesb@minas.lockheed.on.ca
		(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@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
Administration:	cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
Archives:	sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/harpoon/cz
		via anonymous FTP

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue 25 Aug 1992 17:38:47 PDT
From: cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (33) Editorial
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg33@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

New members added since last issue:

barnes@ektron.kodak.com (John Barnes)
jbarnesi@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Barnes III)
s1029708@giaeb.cc.monash.edu.au (Bob Blanchett)
hards4@evans.ee.adfa.oz.au (Brad Hards)
janne.mikkola@lut.fi (Janne Mikkola)
brad_murray@mindlink.bc.ca (Brad Murray)
atubbiol@ccit.arizona.edu (Unknown)

This issue should finally clear out the backlog of articles.

I had Felix Hack relay a question over to Larry Bond on Genie. Here is what
Larry had to say on 12 August 92 about the 4th edition of the print game. (Note,
the current edition is 3.2.)

	Thanks for your interest in Harpoon. There's no plan to bring out a 4th
	editon right now. It's a topic with GDW, though. Our annual planning
	meeting is coming up in late August at Origins and I'm pushing for the
	4th edition there. If we do it, It won't appear before Origins '93. We
	have a new sonar system, but it's pretty intensive. We implemented it in
	version 1.3 successfully, but what works on a computer doesn't work for
	a manual game. We're working on it.

So it looks like print game players will have to put up with the patch work of
errata for a while longer.

Amiga users will want to read Larry Cline's article below introducing the Amiga
section of the scenario archive.

-ted (disguised as CZ Administrator)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 11:25:27 CDT
From: ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
Subject: (34) Mac Versions
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg34@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I was reading comp.sys.mac.games today and got this from a game release list:

Game Title   		Company		Release Date	Notes
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harpoon Designer Series Three-Sixty     September      	(ST,WG) ? 
                                                        More info needed

Harpoon  v1.3           Three-Sixty     Fall           	(ST,WG) Bug fixes, etc..
                
Harpoon Challenger Pack: Signature Edition
			Three-Sixty 	August 		(ST,WG) ? What is this? 

Patriot 		Three-Sixty 	?  		(ST,WG) New Series
                                                       	More info appieciated! 

Now what I want to know is how are all these versions relate to each other. What
is the different between the plain Challenger Pack, that I bought last month,
and the Signature Edition?  Will there be an update availible from 1.1 to 1.3?
What is the Designer Series? Is it a version done to better suit the Mac
interface(just a small wish), or does it include better AI for the computer?

As for the line about Patriot, is this the land version of Harpoon that
Three-Sixty was talking about a while back? If so any one have any new news of
that?  In general are these release dates accurate?

-- 
Gene Moreau                |"I don't care where my dammed trailer is, just
University of Manitoba     | just get me another Scotch!"
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada |  -Jack Nicholson
ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca  |    

------------------------------

Date: 19 Aug 1992 13:24:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: yuqian@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman)
Subject: (35) Re: Surface Combat
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg35@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
Comment: original message split into two articles

In CZ v11 msg 11, ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau) writes 
about the GIUK: Duel scenario ...

> 112 incoming missles on the enemy surface fleet. I figured that alot, even
> half, should get shot down by the enemy SAM's. To my dismay, about 100 got
> shot down!! Of the remaining 12 or so that got though about, 5 hit. I sunk on
> ship and lightly damaged another. I know that you are suposed to fire ALOT to 
> overload defences, but this is getting silly. 

One way I can win that scenario is use the SH-60 Seahawk or the LA sub to detect
the battle group and move in the sub to knock down the Slava and the Kirov
before my group's missle launching. To do this there are also a few ways.

1. Move the subs very close to the group (within the AAW circle) and launch your
   missiles. 

2. Good old torpedos for 1/2 max range.

Once the SA-N-6 ships are down, they are almost defenseless.

Another way is to concentrate you missles to attack the Slava and Kirov.  Maybe
a few ships with SSMs (like the Sovremmy). Leave the Udaloy alone, they can do
nothing.

> Now on to my next peeve. I figured that I get in real close to finish them off
> with guns (yah, I here the snickering). Now they start firing, I detect 3
> incoming missles. My ships fire automaticly to intercept. They get 2 and
> ignore the 3rd while firing at the ones farther out. The missle hits a ship
> and it sinks (didn't even sound nuclear). Now what's going on here? It takes
> me about 4 missiles to sink a ship, but the computer can do it with one. What
> gives? 

Look at the damage points for the Harpoon and SS-N-19 (or what ever), you will
see a big difference. 

Now about that 3rd missile. Once missiles are coming, set you defense fire to
heavy and 1/2 max range, you will stand a much better chance shooting down
double digits incoming missles. It can be accessed via Alt-F8 (I think, check
all the function keys).

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 21:02:55 -0400
From: frankie@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu (Schick III Frank J. 410-997-0812)
Subject: (36) Same Bug is Back
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg36@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I was using Version 1.3 of harpoon on the Yugoslav crisis in the designers
edition of the MEDC. I was using my 486, with 4MB of XMS memory, and 2MB of EMS,
and I had a flight of 4 planes landing at an airfield. The computer jumped them,
but only shot down 1. The other planes had already landed. The computer showed 3
planes as landing. They never landed. They were the "flying dutchmen" of this
scenario. I had halfway hoped that this bug from Version 1.1, and 1.2 would be
fixed in Ver 1.3. Is this being addressed in Ver 2.0?

			frank j schick iii
			frankie@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu

------------------------------

Date: 19 Aug 1992 13:24:06 -0500 (CDT)
From: yuqian@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman)
Subject: (37) V1.3 Upgrade Price?
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg37@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Just one question: Are they going to upgrade registered owners free of charge
like the previous versions?

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:46 MST
From: atubbiol@ccit.arizona.edu
Subject: (38) CGA Tricks?
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg38@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Dear sirs:

Please send me any information on the possabilities of using the Harpoon
designers series on cga. Any tricks or are there any patches that would allow
this? Do you have any FTP sites that may have this information?

                                   Thank You
                                 atubbiol@ccit.arizona.edu

------------------------------

Date: 19 Aug 1992 13:44:29 -0500 (CDT)
From: yuqian@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman)
Subject: (39) Re: Reloading
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg39@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
Comment: slightly edited

In CZ v11 msg 21, s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell) writes:
> I am not sure what to make of this, so perhaps someone out there can help?
> I am running IBM v1.2, and was disappointed to discover that I have never (in
> around two years of play) had a NATO SAM/SSM/ASROC launcher reload.

Harpoon is one shot only, no magazine; container is launcher. So is Tomahawk.
SAM reload immediately after firing. ASROC reloads if you fire all of them from
the oct-launcher. Combined launcher loads immediately after firing.

> I have been notified by the computer assistant that a Kiev and Kirov have
> reloaded their SSMs (much to my dismay!) in the GIUK battleset a couple of
> times, but that is it.  A couple of other people have said the same thing.

They have a magazine. Another ship often see with reloading is Slava's SS-N-12.

> However, I was shocked to see a friend's copy of the Battlebook that came with
> his Amiga challenger pack ... it had a whole table saying that many weapons
> mounts were reloadable.

Yup, lots of them, I think the staff only tell you the SSM reloading.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 2:33:20 PDT
From: lcline@agora.rain.com (Larry Cline)
Subject: (40) Re: Tidbits
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg40@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

In CZ 11 msg 29, slan@csn.org (Slan Markovic) writes:
> Of course, better operating systems (Mac and Amiga) don't have this problem. I
> was wondering if the Mac and Amiga versions do have additional features over
> the DOS version. Also, does anyone know if 360 has considered an OS/2 port?

Unfortunately, the Amiga version lags behind the DOS version. Probably because
of economic reasons, which is a shame. Also the Amiga version is somewhat more
prone to problems than the DOS version. Mainly the features from Alt-F8 are not
available. The one main advantage is the memory management. I can run scenarios
on the Amiga that wouldn't even load on DOS.

-- 
Larry Cline (Amiga Harpoon Scenario Administrator)
lcline@agora.rain.com
C_________   Industrial Graphics

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 11:35:35 EST
From: s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell)
Subject: (41) DOS 5 + Windows 3.1
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg41@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
Comment: slightly edited

Unfortunately, I need some help with my PC version. Due to getting a new 386-33
and the incredibly stupid way PCs are designed, I have had some problems running
Harpoon v 1.2 under DOS 5 and the new Windows 3.1 memory management drivers ...
could you help, or get someone else who could?

The wonderful user-friendly nature of Harpoon means it gives me memory
allocation error messages before crashing, often corrupting my FAT, and/or
damaging the integrity of the save files.

Thanks in advance.

DAX

------------------------------

Date: Tue 25 Aug 1992 12:20:27 PDT
From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim)
Subject: (42) SITREP 12
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg42@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

SITREP 12 contains new rules for Stealth technology, new weapon/platform data,
(CIS LGBs, F/A-18E/F, F-22 ATF, Mod Udaloy, Nanuchka E), rules and information
for land-based SAMs and the usual short news items. Some of SITREP 12 material
is presented below by permission of Larry Bond. The new platform and SAM data
will be presented in later issues.

The Stealth rules add a new RCS class, Stealthy. Stealthy targets can be
detected at 10% the range stated for Large targets. The relationship between the
different RCS classes is:
	
	 Class		 RCS	 Range Factor	
	Large		10 m^2	1.00
	Small		1	0.66
	VSmall		.1	0.32
	Stealthy	.001	0.10

Radar guided weapons targeted against stealthy aircraft have a -10% Ph 
modification. Most Stealthy planes also have IR stealth features as well. IR
homing weapons targeted against such planes have a -10% Ph modification. Also,
FLIR and IRST can detect such planes only at 25% of normal range. However, all
IR benefits are lost if the plane is travelling at supersonic speeds. Some
platforms are classified as "low-RCS" but are not truly Stealthy. Such platforms
will have remarks stating that they are treated as a different RCS class.

According to the "Alerts" section of SITREP 12, the CIS has cancelled both the
carrier based version of the Fulcrum (MiG-29K Fulcrum D) and the follow-on for
the Forger (Yak-141 Freehand). The US Seawolf SSN will be limited to 3 units.
Iran has made a deal for 100 MiG-29s, 48 Mig-31s and 24 Su-24.

-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, 25 Aug 92 2:44:13 PDT
From: lcline@agora.rain.com (Larry Cline)
Subject: (43) Amiga Archive Information
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg43@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Greetings to Harpooneers (particularly Amiga Harpooneers). Here is the
README.AMIGA file from the Amiga Harpoon Scenario Archive. There are some
scenarios in place already (mostly converted from PC scenarios) but I am looking
for a lot more good Amiga scenarios. Please take the time to read this before
sending or downloading any scenarios. It will save us both a lot of time. As of
this moment, the amiga.index is current. Depending on time constraints, the
index may lag a bit. Right now my plan is to add a amiganew.index for a couple
of weeks when new scenarios come in, then join that to the existing index.

The naming conventions for text files follow the PC v1.3 of Harpoon, strictly
for convenience sake. If you do not use the conventions, then I just have to
rename the files and/or separate them, which slows everything down.

- -----------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to the Amiga section of the Harpoon Scenario Archive!

Please take a moment to read through this README to get a brief idea of how to
submit scenarios and whom to contact if you have trouble with them.

Some ground rules:

OBLIGATORY DISCLAIMER
The system administrators of each FTP site and the Harpoon Scenario
Administrators make no warranties, express or implied, with respect to this
software, their quality, performance or fitness for any particular purpose. The
software is provided "As Is". The entire risk as to their quality and
performance is with the recipient. In no event will any of the aformentioned
persons be liable for direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages
resulting from any defect or effect in the program or datafile even if we have
been advised of the possibility of such damages.


When submitting scenarios, please use LHarc to compress the files. We have a
limited amount of space, and would like to have as many scenarios available as
possible. If you are unable to ftp or do not have LHarc available, please
contact me for other arrangements. I am currently using LHarc 1.30 and this
program along with its documentation is available at wuarchive.wustl.edu in the
systems/amiga/utilities/cli/archive sub directory as lharc-1.39.zoo if you do
not currently have it.

If you are sending a Scenario converted from the PC version with the utility
from the Scenario Editor, please indicate this in the scenario description and
give due credit to the original creator. I will be converting the available PC
scenarios myself (for the benefit of those who do not have the Scenario Editor)
so you might want to check before sending it up.

Along with your scenario, include three text files. One text file should contain
just general information, such as version of the program you ran your scenario
on, version of the Scenario Editor that you created it on, memory requirements,
and any editorial comments you would like to include. Also, leave an email
address where other players can contact you with comments on your scenario.

Your other two text files should be orders for both the BLUE and RED side. 

1. The orders files should be named the same as the scenario file itself. See
   the example below:  

	EXAMPLE: scenario is named ASSAULT.HP1
		 Blue orders file should be named ASSAULT.BL1
		 Red orders file should be named ASSAULT.RD1
		 Information file should be named ASSAULT.TXT
 
   Please note that the .hp1, .bl1 and .rd1 extensions will change based on the
   BattleSet you're using (in other words, an NACV scenario would have .hp2,
   .bl2, and .rd2 extensions.)

2. Note: we reserve the right to edit any of your documentation. This means
   spelling errors, typos, etc. If we make any changes, we will properly note
   them. BE ASSURED, we will NEVER edit the scenario itself. Also, we will never
   change the intention of your documentation (like telling the BLUE player he
   has to invade Keflavik when he/she really has to invade Narvik! :-)) (I will
   add a general statement requesting any comments to the author be Cc'd to me
   for possible inclusion into a commentary digest. These comments are subject
   to editing also.) 

3. If I receive any useful comments from people playing a scenario, I will
   include a digest of these comments. If a scenario gets enough comments to
   justify it, I will make a file called SCENARIO.CMT where SCENARIO is the name
   of the scenario. Otherwise all the comments will be put in a digest called
   COMMENTS.TXT. 

To upload scenarios, simply set up an FTP session with spc7.jpl.nasa.gov
(137.79.114.145) in the pub/uploads sub directory (please make sure it has a
unique name). Then, drop me a note at lcline@agora.rain.com informing me that
it's there. I will take the scenario from spc7.jpl.nasa.gov and run a virus
check and see if the scenario loads properly into Harpoon. If your scenario does
not pass those checks, I will send you email to inform you about it. If your
scenario does pass, it will be uploaded to the pub/harpoon/amiga sub directory
at sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca and will be available to all.

PLEASE NOTE:  DO NOT ATTEMPT TO UPLOAD ANY "PROPRIETARY" FILES!
By this, I mean copyrighted material. Our former FTP archive site,
hilbert.math.ksu.edu was shut down because the USNI BattleSet published
especially for those Naval Institute members who bought the program through the
USNI (and therefore not available to anyone else!) was uploaded to hilbert. We
do not want to see this happen again! If you attempt to upload this type of file
(ie any BattleSet or other part of the HARPOON/SCENARIO EDITOR programs) they
will not be transferred to sunbane. Also, please only upload HARPOON scenarios.
This archive is only for HARPOON scenarios.

Take note: there will be an INDEX file in the pub/harpoon/amiga sub directory
listing all the scenarios in the directory, and will include each the address of
the author (to encourage feedback), memory requirements, and a short,
one-or-two-line description of the scenario, drawn from your text files.

Following these guidelines will allow us to build a quality archive of scenarios
to make available to all HARPOON users.

Some addresses to take note of if you have any problems:

	Mark Lam (PC Admnistrator): lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
	Gary Snow (Macintosh Administrator): gsnow@clark.edu
	Larry Cline (Amiga Administrator): lcline@agora.rain.com
	Kolin Hand (Drop-Off Site Administrator): hand@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov

Thank you for taking time to read this. If you have any questions, please leave
me an email.

	HAPPY HARPOONING!

Larry T. Cline
Amiga Administrator, Harpoon Scenario Archive
lcline@agora.rain.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 13:46:41 EDT
From: yvesb@minas.lockheed.on.ca (Yves Boudreault)
Subject: (44) Amstrad + MCGA Tricks
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg44@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Hello,

A friend of mine bought a copy of Computer Harpoon for the PC after playing it
on my Macintosh. He is not very computer litterate and could not get it to work
on his PC. I tried to give him a hand but I am not very familiar with PC
terminology and standards, so I was not able to install it either. A few phone
calls to 360 did not help too much.

Has anyone tried to install PC_Harpoon on the following hardware:

	Amstrad PC model 1640 with monochrome monitor
	It has something called MCGA mode (monochrome CGA ?).

If anyone has experience with the AMSTRAD, I would appreciate help because I
kind of gave up on trying to install it on the PC.

Thanks.

-- 
     Yves Boudreault           If I express opinions, they have to be mine.
 yvesb@minas.lockheed.on.ca

------------------------------

Date: Tue 25 Aug 1992 12:20:31 PDT
From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim)
Subject: (45) Recent Naval Developments
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg45@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

August 1992 USNI Proceedings described the Navy's new LX90 amphibious ship
design. These ships are to replace the capability of the Austin (LPD-4),
Charleston (LKA-1135), Anchorage (LSD-36) and Newport (LST-1179) classes which
are to be retired. The new design is 684 feet long and can embark 700 troops,
25000 cubic feet of carge, 4 CH-46E helos (or equivalents) and 2 LCACs. No
further details are given, but the illustration has two small missile launchers
which look like the light-weight RAM mount. The USN amphibious fleet of the next
century will consist of: 6 Wasp (LHD-1), 5 Tarawa (LHA-1), 8 Whidbey Island
(LSD-41), 3 Harpers Ferry (LSD-49), plus some number (probably 11+) of LX90s.
The plan is to have 11 amphibious ready groups (ARGs), each of which consists
one LHD or LHA, one LSD, and one LX90. 

The Proceedings also summarized parts of RADM Sheafer's (Director of Naval
Intelligence) testimony on 5 February 1992 before Congress. He stated that CIS
"general-purpose" submarine production level stood at six per year. In 1991, the
six submarines produced included the 26th (and last) Victor III SSN and
submarines in the Akula, Oscar II and Kilo classes. The Sierra class is also
still being built. Some Kilo production is for export. He also expected that the
last Yankee SSBNs would be retired or converted in 1992. It also seems that the
plan to equip submarines with the SS-NX-24 has been halted.

For the future, Fleet ADM Chernavin has stated that the CIS will eventually be
producing about two "general purpose" nuclear and two diesel-electric submarines
(one for export) per year. Further cuts, though, may reduce the rate to about
1.5 per year. 

-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

------------------------------

End of CZ Digest
****************


From root@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU  Mon Aug 31 15:38:32 1992
Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu
	(Sendmail 5.61c+YP/3.19ficus1) id AA13741;
	Mon, 31 Aug 92 15:38:32 -0700
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 15:38:32 -0700
Message-Id: <9208312238.AA13741@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>
From: cz@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU
Subject: CZ Digest v11 #6 (msgs 46-56)
Errors-To: cz-request@FICUS.CS.UCLA.EDU
Status: RO

			 The Convergence Zone

Date:		31 August 1992
Volume:		11
Issue:		6
Topics:		(46) Editorial			cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(47) Re: Airbase Strike		gjb@fig.citib.com
		(48) HDS			bruce.macintosh@bonnie
		(49) Re: Reloading		trooker@bombe.nswc.navy.mil
		(50) European Sales		mkbmfav@dutrex.tudelft.nl
		(51) Radar in Desert Storm	tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu
		(52) SS-N-2 Missiles		felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
		(53) Miscellaneous		lapointe@mv83a.nusc.navy.mil
		(54) Making Scenarios		ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
		(55) Volume 11 Index		cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(56) CZ Guidelines		cz-request@ficus.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@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
Administration:	cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
Archives:	sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/harpoon/cz 
		via anonymous FTP

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon 31 Aug 1992 15:22:03 PDT
From: cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (46) Editorial
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg46@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

New members added since last issue:

gbrown@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil (Gary Brown)
g_holt@icrf.icnet.uk (George Holt)
eeiwmc@eeiua.ericsson.se (William McCarthy)
mckee@hpmckee.fc.hp.com (Bret McKee)
mckinney@athena.mit.edu (Ethan McKinney)

I finally saw HDS for PCs in the stores. According to the box, it includes the
version 1.3 upgrade as a bonus. 

This issue wraps up volume 11 and thus contains the usual index and guide.

-ted (disguised as CZ Administrator)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:41:19 EDT
From: gjb@fig.citib.com (Greg Brail)
Subject: (47) Re: Airbase Strike
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg47@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

When striking an airbase using F-111s, try flying them at VLow altitude.
According to the Battlebook, tne F-111s and Tornados in the MEDC scenario have
terrain-following radar installed (and, in fact, this radar shows up in the
on-line platform database). This is supposed to make it possible to fly these
planes at VLow altitude without having them crash.  Since many Soviet-made SAMs
cannot intercept planes flying that low, you're pretty much immune to SAMs that
way. The bad guys and gals will also have a much harder time finding your planes
on radar.

However, I have seen F-111s in the MEDC scenario crash at VLow altitude, so
there may be a bug there. Nonetheless, try it. In fact, when your attacking
planes get within SAM range of the base, do either of two things -- either drop
to VLow altitude and hit the afterburner, or climb to High altitude and do the
same.

Of course, it's more fun to lob HARMs or Harpoons from 60nm away. However, you
can't really do this in real life, and it takes an awful lot of Harpoons to wipe
out an airbase. A few of those TV-guided bombs from the F-111 "Guided" loadout,
however, will do the job quite nicely, despite their short range.

				greg

------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 1992 11:24:50 EST
From: bruce.macintosh@bonnie.astro.ucla.edu
Subject: (48) HDS
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg48@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Before I go out and spend $40 on the designers series, I'd like to get some info
from people who've purchased it about its worth. I've read everything about the
1.3 upgrade, so I'm more interested in the scenarios and platforms in the
designers series upgrade:

1. Are the scenarios reasonable? That is to say, do they concentrate on
conflicts that are likely or at least *possible* in the current world, as
opposed to NATO-vs-(USSR/CIS) mass warfare? (Something like Russia vs. Ukraine
in the Med, for example)

2. Are the scenarios balanced under the 1.3 rules? Tough enough to be
interesting?

3. With the upgrade, will the scenario editor now allow you to put arbitrary
forces on either side (to set up the aforementioned Russia vs. Ukraine, or any
similar civil war, or shuffling sides in NATO ... )

Also, what kind of prices have people payed for the Designer's Series upgrade?

Bruce Macintosh			macintosh@bonnie.astro.ucla.edu
UCLA Astronomy Department	Infrared Imaging Detector Lab

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 08:16:39 GMT-0500
From: trooker@bombe.nswc.navy.mil (Terry Rooker)
Subject: (49) Re: Reloading
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg49@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

In CZ v11 msg 21, s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au (Gavin Rewell) writes:
> I am not sure what to make of this, so perhaps someone out there can help?
> I am running IBM v1.2, and was disappointed to discover that I have never (in
> around two years of play) had a NATO SAM/SSM/ASROC launcher reload.

In CZ v11 msg 39, yuqian@bvc.edu (Suicidal Freshman) responds:
> Harpoon is one shot only, no magazine; container is launcher. So is Tomahawk. 
> SAM reload immediately after firing. ASROC reloads if you fire all of them 
> from the oct-launcher. Combined launcher loads immediately after firing.

This answer is only 80%(?) correct. Reloadable launchers is very class
dependant. For example there are (have been) ship classes with ASROC that did
not have relaods. Only the Harpoon single cell launchers are not reloadable.
Some ships fire Harpoon from the single arm launcher (specifically the Perry
class). In this case the number of reloads is dependant upon the weapon mix in
the magazine, and usually there are not many Harpoons. The vertical launching
systems are a different animal, but the still the number of weapons of each type
is determined by the initial loadout.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 09:07:40 +0200
From: mkbmfav@dutrex.tudelft.nl (Veer F)
Subject: (50) European Sales
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg50@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

In CZ v11 message 17, a package was mentioned which included Harpoon 1.3 for PC
and the Harppon Designer Series and some BattleSets.

Can anybody tell tell me if 360 takes European credit card orders for this
package and how I can contact them by (snail) mail. Also what BattleSets are
currently available.

Thanks for the info,

Frederic Veer
mkbmfav@dutrex.tud.nl

------------------------------

Date: Thu 27 Aug 1992 12:07:10 PDT
From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim)
Subject: (51) Radar in Desert Storm 
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg51@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Radar is much less affected by environmental conditions than sonar and visual
means. However, in some cases it definitely can be affected. In the August 1992
USNI Proceedings, there were some descriptions of Desert Storm experiences of
Aegis cruisers. 

Iraqi Exocets were a potential threat to naval operations in the Gulf. The
article stated that under ideal radar conditions, they could be faced with
having less than a minute to engage a potential Exocet attack. However,
conditions significantly degraded the performance of SPY-1A/B and other radars.
Problems included the rocky Iranian coastal land mass, sand storms, oil fires
and temperature inversions. These sorts of problems are apparently rare in
blue-water deployment.

Because the SPY-1A/B uses computer controlled electronic scanning, it was
possible to apply "fixes" to the allocation of output power and computer
processing to compensate for conditions. Other radars would be limited to minor
adjustments and other ships would basically have to live with what they got. The
Exocet threat (which is a seaskimmer) made the horizon-search frame time
critical.

On CG-55, SPY-1 was optimized for a 2 second horizon-search frame time, and
maximum power and sensitivity in a 40 degree threat sector. However, this was
not without cost. Instead of the 250nm+ nearly hemispherical converage, we
usually associate with Aegis, the result was a "bizzare patchwork quilt" which
was "nearly worn through in some areas". Probably, high altitude search was much
more thinly covered. If the Iranian coast was considered to have high threat
potential (thus demanding much wider detailed coverage), the ship would probably
have had to consider a different deployment position.

Other Aegis ships in the Gulf acted as CAP controllers. Environmental conditions
limited performance here too, though this involved higher altitude tracking.
Radar contact could not be continuously maintained beyond some 60-75nm. Beyond
those ranges, controllers often had to rely on IFF symbols or 2-way Link 4A. In
addition, there were some difficulties in integrating E-3A AWACS data links.

Perhaps, Harpoon needs some environmental modifiers for radar also, especially
in situations like those in the Gulf. 

-ted

Ted Kim                           Internet: tek@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
UCLA Computer Science Department  UUCP:     ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek
3680A Boelter Hall                Phone:    (310) 825-8524
Los Angeles, CA 90024             FAX:      (310) 825-2273

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 02:29:15 PDT
From: felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu (Felix Hack)
Subject: (52) SS-N-2 Missiles
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg52@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

	Some Notes on Soviet SS-N-2 SSMs
 
It's always fun to set up naval actions with the latest and greatest. Kirov on
one side, Aegis cruisers on the other, SS-N-19s screaming in at mach 3, SM-2s
reaching out to counter them, SA-N-6s lancing out at mach 5, seeking to bring
down massive volleys of Harpoons and Tomahawks, who will win?  However, many
potential naval battles don't involve the height of technology, they may be
fought with ships designed 30 years ago and missiles little younger. How do
these systems work, and how would they fare against one another?

This article represents the results of some research I've been doing in
preparation for running a Warship Commander game at an upcoming convention.
Players of the manual version of Harpoon may find this interesting and useful,
unfortunately the computer version is 'closed' to us, so we can't modify it. In
addition to hard facts, I've insinuated my own assumptions into the analysis.
Happily, my reference sources contradict each other just as much as I contradict
them, so who's to say what's right and what's not?

	My sources are the following:

World Naval Weapons Systems, Norman Friedman, US Naval Institute Press.
My copy is the 1989 edition; my thanks to Ted Kim for relaying information from
the 1992 edition.

Combat Fleets of the World 1988/89, Couhat & Baker, US Naval Institue Press.

Harpoon, Modern Naval Wargame Rules, Larry Bond, GDW games.

Harpoon Data Annex 1990/91, as above.

Troubled Waters, Chris Carlson, GDW games.

Warship Commander II, Ken Smigelski, Enola Games.


The SS-N-2, Nato codename 'Styx', was first deployed in 1958. It served as the
main armament of patrol craft for the Soviet Union, and was widely exported.
Many navies around the world still deploy Osa patrol boats with Styx missiles.
Chinese variants of this missile include the famous land-based 'Silkworms'. The
Iranians have deployed these missiles along the Persian Gulf, and they were
frequently in the news during the Kuwaiti tanker escort operations in 1987. The
countries that operate Styxes may have improved the design, especially the
seeker heads.
 
There are three basic types of Styx, SS-N-2A,B, and C. The SS-N-2A is deployed
on Osa-I class boats. These small, fast boats would be useful in actions where
they could sneak around near coastlines and at night. They would be dead in the
open Ocean, and in any rough water their performance must be seriously
compromised. Their main radar is called Square Tie, and it performs both search
and fire-control functions. The missile needs information from the radar or an
optical director prior to launch. This means that a picket ship would not be
particularly useful, because it cannot usefully radio firing information back to
the other Osas. However, with the relatively short range of the missile this is
not a great concern. [This is my interpretation; I don't think these 200 ton
ships have the plotting and communications facilities to facilitate firing based
on second hand data.]
 
Standard procedure would be to set the missile's range gate from 3 to 15 miles
away. At least in the original version of the missile, firing at longer range
required a manual plot, which greatly decreased accuracy. This is not
represented in Warship Commander, and I haven't tried to come up with a model
for it or Harpoon. After launch the missile flies straight out, and is not in
communication with the launching ship. At the designated range, the active radar
seeker turns on and seeks out the largest radar target, which the missile will
strive to hit. If the target is too close to the point the seeker turns on, the
missile won't be able to react in time to make the intercept. The missile has a
minimum range of 5 miles in Harpoon (less in Warship Commander; in that game
targets close to the minimum range have a good chance of being 'overlooked').
The missile flies at an altitude from 300 to 1000 feet, so it is not a sea
skimmer, and being fairly large, should not be particularly difficult to detect.

In Warship Commander, the Osa's Square Tie radar must spend one phase (one
minute) between making initial radar contact with the target and allowing fire
with SS-N-2. (Aiming the missiles optically incurs the same delay). This can be
adapted for Harpoon: An Osa must spend one tactical turn tracking its target
after initially detecting it. That is, if the target is first visually spotted
or detected by radar on turn 4, missiles cannot be launched until turn 6. Note
that Osas apparently have to point their bows directly at their targets when
they launch.

The SS-N-2A is reportedly not very capable against small targets. (In Warship
Commander this applies to SS-N-1, all versions of SS-N-2, and SS-N-3. The chance
of a SS-N-2A hitting an undefended ship is 80%, but against a small (<1000 ton)
target this drops to 40%). The 'small' size class in Harpoon applies to ships of
1200 ton or less displacement; unfortunately the missile is already rated at
40%. Perhaps this low figure is meant to reflect the difficulty the missile,
without modern ECCM gear, has against modern targets equipped with jammers and
chaff. (These effects are explicitly represented in Warship Commander). However,
in the Troubled Waters module for Harpoon, the Styx is assigned an accuracy of
87% in 1973 scenarios. In scenarios of that era, I would assign a 50% chance
against small targets. In the modern era, I would drop this to 20%. Apparently,
standard doctrine would be to fire 4 missiles at a destroyer, and 2-4 against a
small target. Harpoon players should note that older missiles are not really
intrinsically less accurate than modern ones; when fired against undefended
target hulks I doubt Harpoons and Tomahawks hit twice as often as Styxes.
Harpoon merely builds the assumed effects of target electronic warfare into the
accuracy numbers, while EW is handled separately in Warship Commander.

The SS-N-2B version of the Styx is reportedly capable of alternative IR
guidance. This seems to require a separate missile. For example, the Chinese
Styx-derivative HY-2 missile apparently has a radar homer, while the HY-2A uses
IR. Warship Commander II states that missiles with radar/IR homing available use
both simultaneously; I would not do that with SS-N-2B. The loadout of both types
should be firmly specified beforehand, and players could shoot either or both
types.

The Harpoon data on SS-N-2A/B gives them CMD/TARH guidance. I don't agree with
the command guidance, as that disagrees with data that the missile is
independent after launch, and also would tend to limit the rate at which
missiles could be fired. Replace this listing with I/TARH, and note that there
is an alternative I/TIRH for SS-N-2B.

SS-N-2B (and probably 2C) reportedly sea-skims on its final approach. This is
too late to prevent early detection, but would hinder attempts to shoot the
missile down by SAMs or large-caliber guns.

The SS-N-2C is an improved long-range version of the Styx. It is carried by
Soviet Mod Kashin destroyers, the Indian Navy's custom-built Kashins, and
exported Soviet Nanuchka patrol craft, among others. The guidance is reputedly
more sophisticated, incorporating home-on-jam functions in Warship Commander,
and resulting in greater accuracy in Harpoon.

It is not normally possible for the launching platform of an SS-N-2C to acquire
its own data if it wants to shoot at 40 miles. This is well beyond the radar
horizon, except under exceptional circumstances like radar ducting. Therefore, a
forward observer is needed. Presumably the targetting information is relayed by
radio to the launching ship, where a manual plot is constructed and the missiles
are launched. To reflect the time delay involved in this operation, I would
recommend that Harpoon players not allow firing of SS-N-2Cs on the turn
following one in which a friendly unit found a target. The Band Stand radar used
on Nanuchkas apparently has the same sort of delay as described above for Square
Tie, so a Nanuchka finding its own target also suffers the delay.
 
Note that the Styx is not capable of bearing-only launch (BOL). That distinction
is reserved for missiles that fly beyond the horizon and can power their seeker
heads for the whole time of flight. While the SS-N-2C can fly beyond the
horizon, it cannot keep its seeker active indefinitely. The minimum recommended
seeker activation range of SS-N-2C from the target is 5 miles, the maximum is
15. Therefore, do not allow BOL launch of SS-N-2 missiles in Harpoon. Range
information is always required, as in Warship Commander.

The SS-N-9 'Siren' is carried by Charlie-II class submarines and Soviet Nanuchka
patrol boats, and succeeds the Styx. Although it has a range of 60 miles, it is
not capable of receiving mid-course guidance commands. Apparently there is a
specialized data link antenna associated with the Band Stand radar on Nanuchkas.
The missiles can be fired based on information provided by a friendly unit. I
would still require a one-turn delay in Harpoon as described above, but in
Warship Commander this limited data link should allow firing without waiting an
extra combat phase.

I would appreciate comments on the facts and opinions expressed in this article.
One point I'll mention right off is that I don't believe Osas have the same sort
of data link that Nanuchkas have, and I am inclined not to allow Osas to fire
their missiles based on second-hand information. I could be wrong. Since the
range of SS-N-2A/B isn't much farther than the radar horizon of an Osa against a
medium sized ship, the issue isn't critical.
 
-Felix Hack

      GEnie: F.HACK1
   Internet: felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 8:10:58 EDT
From: lapointe@mv83a.nusc.navy.mil
Subject: (53) Miscellaneous
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg53@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

OK, I upgraded to PC V1.3 and lost my land attack harpoons. HELP!! How can my
planes attack and still return unharmed? Or am I a brave little soilder and live
with my losses?

I was playing the IOPG Guam battle and received a message that Keyhole detected
a ship using sonar. Isn't Keyhole a satellite? Sonar?

Is there any comprehensive data on how harpoon thinks? What Harpoon takes into
account when it decides if your subs can be heard?  Most of the members try to
use real tactics (best guess tactics) in Harpoon. From a player standpoint it
would be good to know how Harpoon thinks and develop tactics from there.

On of the major faults of Harpoon is the lack of reality, i.e. carrier groups
must search for downed fliers.

Ken LaPointe : Surface ships are just TARGETS!! 

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:47:22 CDT
From: ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gene Moreau)
Subject: (54) Making Scenarios
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg54@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

I've been playing around with making a few scenarios and I have a few questions
that some of the more experienced players may be able to answer.

First, how does the computer attack? Say, I'm trying to get a convoy somewhere
and I want it to be attacked. If I give the computer recon aircraft and set some
long distance air patrols over the area where the convoy will be traveling, will
it spot it and set up it's own attacks, or do I have to set some base some where
to airstrike it? Along that line as well, if I give him recon aircraft will it
set up it's own long distance patrols, formation patrols, etc.? What do some of
you people do for this?

Now onto my next question. This one has to do with fleet organization for both
Red and Blue sides. For instance, what kind of escort ships would be suitable
for say Nimitz battle groups, Iowa battle groups, and some of the bigger Soviet
ones such as the Kiev and Kirov groups. I kind of figured out some ones for the
American one as I am a little bit more familier with those ships, but for the
Soviet ones, I don't have a clue. Any suggestions for the above would be much
appreciated.

-- 
Gene Moreau
University of Mantitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
ummorea0@cuu.umanitoba.ca

"I don't care where my dammed trailer is, just get me another Scotch!"
  -Jack Nicholson

------------------------------

Date: Mon 31 Aug 1992 15:21:59 PDT
From: cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (55) Volume 11 Index
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg55@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

Volume	Issue	Date	
		Messages			Author
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11	1	3 July 1992
		(1) Editorial			cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu
		(2) Sub Commander Wanted	felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
		(3) Re: Files Gone from Hilbert	kxb@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
		(4) Amiga Data Format		felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
		(5) Re: OS/2 Compatability	2330.1244@compuserve.com
		(6) Re: NACV South Crossing	dgil@ipsaint.ipsa.reuter.com
		(7) USNI Membership		creps@copper.ucs.indiana.edu

	2	15 July 1992
		(8) Editorial			cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu
		(9) 360 Speaks			76711.240@compuserve.com
		(10) Re: Sub Commander Wanted	trooker%xobu@relay.nswc.navy.mil
		(11) Surface Combat		ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
		(12) Re: Read any Good Books?	fontana@pavia.infn.it
		(13) PC v1.3			lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
		(14) Mac Versions		brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org

	3	28 July 1992
		(15) Editorial			cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu
		(16) Survey			lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
		(17) Computer Version 1.3	paulwang@ocf.berkeley.edu
		(18) Modem Play			dyfl@kbs.citri.edu.au
		(19) Re: Read any Good Books?	pgolden@nhgs.vak12ed.edu
		(20) Missiles, Rapier, Radar	sscotten@email.bony.com
		(21) Reloading			s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au
		(22) Mac Coprocessor		brockr@muvaxe.rferl.org
		(23) Tidbits...			gmartin@cory.berkeley.edu
		(24) Editor Versions		zen%hophead@canrem.com

	4	24 August 1992
		(25) Editorial			cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(26) PC Archive Information	lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu
		(27) Version 1.3		dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
		(28) Where is SLAM?		zen%hophead@canrem.com
		(29) Re: Tidbits		slan@csn.org
		(30) HDS Errors?		zen%hophead@canrem.com
		(31) Airbase Strike		fontana@pavia.infn.it
		(32) Good Naval Books		felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu

	5	25 August 1992
		(33) Editorial 			cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(34) Mac Versions		ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
		(35) Re: Surface Combat		yuqian@bvc.edu
		(36) Same Bug is Back		frankie@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu
		(37) V1.3 Upgrade Price?	yuqian@bvc.edu
		(38) CGA Tricks?		atubbiol@ccit.arizona.edu
		(39) Re: Reloading		yuqian@bvc.edu
		(40) Re: Tidbits		lcline@agora.rain.com
		(41) DOS 5 + Windows 3.1	s905066@otto.bf.rmit.oz.au
		(42) SITREP 12			tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu
		(43) Amiga Archive Information	lcline@agora.rain.com
		(44) Amstrad + MCGA Tricks	yvesb@minas.lockheed.on.ca
		(45) Recent Naval Developments	tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu

	6	31 August 1992
		(46) Editorial			cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(47) Re: Airbase Strike		gjb@fig.citib.com
		(48) HDS			bruce.macintosh@bonnie
		(49) Re: Reloading		trooker@bombe.nswc.navy.mil
		(50) European Sales		mkbmfav@dutrex.tudelft.nl
		(51) Radar in Desert Storm	tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu
		(52) SS-N-2 Missiles		felixh@sunspot.ssl.berkeley.edu
		(53) Miscellaneous		lapointe@mv83a.nusc.navy.mil
		(54) Making Scenarios		ummorea0@ccu.umanitoba.ca
		(55) Volume 11 Index		cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu
		(56) CZ Guidelines		cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon 31 Aug 1992 15:22:01 PDT
From: cz-request@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator)
Subject: (56) CZ Guidelines
Message-Id: <CZ.v11.msg56@penzance.cs.ucla.edu>

			      Guidelines
				 for
			 The Convergence Zone

Last Update:	24 August 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@ficus.cs.ucla.edu". CZ is published in digest form. Volumes 10 and
higher are in RFC 1153 compatible format. Earlier volumes are in an
incompatible format. 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@ficus.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/harpoon/cz" directory in UNIX compress 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".

	Scenarios

User written scenarios for Amiga, Macintosh and IBM-PC versions of the
computer game are also stored on the archive site in the directories
"pub/harpoon/{amiga,mac,pc}" respectively. Each directory contains a
file called "INDEX" and one called "README". The "INDEX" file lists the
contents of that directory. The "README" file describes the scenario
formats, procedures for uploading, who administrates the directory, etc.
The scenarios themselves are in compressed files. If "README" and
"INDEX" are sufficiently long they too will be in UNIX compress format
as "README.Z" and "INDEX.Z".

------------------------------

End of CZ Digest
****************


