From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Thu May 16 17:32:42 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA00291; Thu, 16 May 91 17:32:42 -0700 Date: Thu, 16 May 91 17:32:42 -0700 Message-Id: <9105170032.AA00291@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #1 (msgs 1-4) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 16 May 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 1 First Message: 1 Messages: 4 Topics: (1) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (2) Computer Game Questions wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (3) Computer Game FTP Site kxb@math.ksu.edu (4) New Miniatures Rules robinro@ism.isc.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: Thu 16 May 1991 12:55:53 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (1) Editorial New members since last issue: boothr@arc.ab.ca (Robert Booth) broadley@schneider3.lrdc.pitt.edu (Bill Broadley) kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu (Karl Buck) obyrne@ac.dal.ca (Owen Byrne) rcross@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Robert Cross) mcuddy@rational.com (Mike Cuddy) grue@cs.uq.oz.au (Paul Dale) tom@dmr.com (Tom Flaherty) tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (Kenneth Jamieson) jessen@bend.ucsd.edu (Leif Jessen) cma5_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Chin Man) santa@math.mit.edu (Noel M. Nachtigal) rogopp@auto-trol.com (Roger Opperman) pfaff@think.com (Raymond Pfaff) n105er@tamuts.tamu.edu (Benjamin Rankin) allan@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Allan M. Sellers) mst@vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Markus Stumptner) ylsul@athena.mit.edu (Young Sul) sulaiman@ecs.umass.edu (Ameer Sulaiman) jeremy@wagner.lac.math.uic.edu (Jeremy Teitelbaum) dthompso@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (David G. Thompson) s892804@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Wee Willie) zen@utcs.utoronto.ca (Nick Zentena) Well, it happened again. Somehow, everything seemed to come up all at once and as a result, this issue is quite late. It has almost been a month since last issue. In that month, my machine ran out of disk space, I got busy with work, my machine had its hardware upgraded and the mail configuration was changed. I think I have now fixed things up to prevent unauthorized mail from getting out to the list, such as last month's reply to whole list. Also, I promise no more cryptic "laslkj" test messages. Official news: SITREP 7 is out. BattleSet 3 for the Mac is also out. (Egghead Software even had it on sale in my area for $19.99.) I still haven't seen South Atlantic War ("coming in October 1990"). Anyone know when this will hit the stores? Also, did BattleSet 2 for the Mac ever come out? Probably 360 is jumping up and down about Jerry Pournelle's April 1991 Byte "User's Column", which declares that "Harpoon from Microprose Software was easily the best modern war game of the year [1990]." -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 May 91 00:38:06 EDT From: wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (The Charlatan) Subject: Harpoon Questions Summary: (2) Computer Game Questions Comment: article reformatted Well here are question that I have pondering over the past couple of days. 1) Does anyone in CZ land, play PC Harpoon with any of the supported sound cards? Does it improve game play to any great extent? 2) Has battleset#4, been released yet? Does anyone know what part of the world this battleset will concentrate on? 3) The other day I was bored, so I examined my Harpoon.EXE file. In it undder the sensor section, along with the usual things, it said SATIELLiTE. Is this a currently unsupported part of the program, will it be added in future releases? Steaming Forward Alex Klaus ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 May 91 06:41:07 GMT From: kxb@math.ksu.edu (Karl Buck) Subject: ftp site for Harpoon has been born Summary: (3) Computer Game FTP Site Comment: news article from rec.games.board [This appeared as a news article from rec.games.board. I have taken the liberty of including it here for the benefit of computer game users. -ted] A new anonymous ftp site for Harpoon related files has been born. Playing tips, strategies, and especially scenarios made from the Harpoon scenario editor should be the majority of files uploaded to this site. Rules for uploading: 1. All files will be in zip format. If there are problems with this because of your type of computer let me know and we can work it out somehow. Try to keep file name lengths down to the standard dos 8.3: (ie: verylong.zip) 2. Each set of files should have a small plain text file describing the contents of the zip file. Make sure you include if needed, any machine specific information about the files (ie: for amiga, mac etc...). I'll review the contents, and add a short description to the file "pub/harpoon/00index". 3. Log in as "anonymous", give your "userid@host" has password so I can contact you in case of problems, and upload files to: "hilbert.math.ksu.edu" in the "pub/incoming" directory. If you need instructions on how to upload or download or if you have questions concerning this service, send mail to: kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu. This file will be available as: "pub/harpoon/00readme". -- Karl Buck KSU Dept. of Mathematics email: kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu Manhattan, Kansas 66506 voice: (913)532-6750 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 2 May 91 09:06:02 -0700 From: robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D Roberts) Subject: New Harpoon Rules from Larry Bond Summary: (4) New Miniatures Rules Comment: article reformatted This is a copy of a file Larry Bond recently uploaded onto GEnie. Modifications to Collision Rules It's never too late to be wrong. Recently two errors were found in the game system that have been in existence since the first edition. One relates to collisions, the other to surface gunfire. Here are fixes for both. 4.6 Collisions and Ramming. Whenever two ships not engaged in towing or underway replenishment pass within 500 yards (0.25 nm) of one another, there is a risk of collision. Any time a submarine is surfaced, or at Periscope depth (whether the periscope or snorkel is in use or not), there is a risk of collision with a surface vessel. Two submerged submarines are not at risk of collision unless a deliberate attempt to ram is made. Unless they are attacking a ship, aircraft at Very Low altitude are also at risk of collision if they pass within 500 yards of a ship or another aircraft. 4.6.1 Resolution. Whenever there is a risk of collision, the Collision Table is consulted and D6 is rolled. If the result, including modifiers, is a 6, then a collision has occurred. Both ships are dead in the water (speed zero). 4.6.2 Damage. When a collision occurs, Each ship inflicts damage on the other based on its size. Roll D6 for each ship and consult the right-hand column of the Collision Table. Each player takes the percentage he rolled and multiplies it times the original damage point value for his ship. This is the number of damage points suffered by the other vessel. A ship ramming with its bow (within 30 degrees of perpendicular impact) reduces the damage to itself by half. Critical hits are rolled for normally. Damage results are applied immediately (that is, during the Movement Phase). A glancing blow (an angle 30 degrees or less between the shipsU courses) halves the damage for both ships. Aircraft that collide with ships are destroyed. The ship suffers damage equal to D6* the aircraft's damage value. Any ordnance carried by the aircraft will not detonate. Aircraft ordnance is not fuzed to explode until after it has been dropped (exception: Kamikazes fused their ordnance before ramming a ship). COLLISION TABLE Die Roll Effect Ship Damage 1 No Effect 1% 2 No Effect 5% 3 No Effect 10% 4 No Effect 20% 5 No Effect 30% 6 Collision 50% Die Roll Modifiers for chance of collision: (modifiers on this table are cumulative) Per Small size ship (DD/SS/PC) -1 Per Large size ship (BB/CV/BC) +1 Per ship deliberately attempting to ram +2 Bridge/CIC critical hit and attempted ram -1 Bridge/CIC critical hit and attempted avoidance +1 One ship attempts to ram a stationary ship +3 Die roll modifiers for collision damage: For each level of armor less than the other ship, reduce the D6 roll (damage inflicted) by one. For each level of armor more than other ship, increase the D6 roll by one. Add 1% to the damage percentage for both ships for each knot of relative speed. To find out the relative speed, add the two speeds if the two bows are pointed toward each other, subtract the lower from the higher if the bows are pointed in the same direction, and use the higher of the two speeds if it is a bow-on ram. Example: USS Baltimore successfully rams a Fubuki class destroyer in the side, so it will be a bow-on ram for the cruiser. The relative speed was 15 knots. Baltimore's damage point rating is 343; the Fubuki's is 79. The cruiser's General armor rating is M, the destroyer's is none. Baltimore's player rolls D6 and gets a 2, modified by the armor difference to 4, Fubuki's player rolls D6 and gets a 4, modified by the armor difference to 2. Baltimore inflicts 20%+15% (for speed) of 343 or 120 damage points on the Fubuki. The destroyer inflicts 5%+15% (for speed) of 79 points or 16 points, halved because Baltimore rammed with its bow to 8 damage points. New Gunfire Rules These are draft rules and not yet an official part of the game system. Right now, players firing guns at a surface ship roll to hit separately for each gun mount. This is incorrect, since the guns are usually controlled by one director, which controls the fire of all the guns involved. For surface gunfire only, make a single D100 roll for each director firing. If the director hits, all the mounts/turrets firing hit. If it misses, all the guns miss. This will speed up play somewhat, since only one die roll instead of two, three, or four will have to be made. Antiaircraft firing will still be rolled independently for each mount, since the chance of a hit for AAA fire is much more dependent on the number of guns firing than the director's accuracy. The director does help, but numbers count more. This rule change may require an adjustment in gunfire damage points. In combination with a review of gunfire lethality for the WW II game, the modern values should probably be reduced by a factor of two to four, across the board. If reduced, the damage points inflicted should never be less than the damage inflicted by a single shell. I will be providing more data on this in a future SITREP, and possibly in time for Origins in Baltimore. I welcome comments on either of the modifications. [You can write to Larry Bond c/o GDW.] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Wed May 22 18:53:19 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA03085; Wed, 22 May 91 18:53:19 -0700 Date: Wed, 22 May 91 18:53:19 -0700 Message-Id: <9105230153.AA03085@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #2 (msgs 5-11) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 22 May 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 2 First Message: 5 Messages: 7 Topics: (5) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (6) Mac BattleSets stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (7) Mac News shaggy@cs.utexas.edu (8) Mac Availability eco861771@ecostat.aau.dk (9) South Atlantic War robinro@ism.isc.com (10) Silkworm Missile davisje@crdgw2.crd.ge.com (11) Pilot Experience tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 22 May 1991 16:01:24 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (5) Editorial New members since last issue: bboards@optical.bms.com (Jay Anderson) dave@ucscb.ucsc.edu (Dave Ferrell) zam@athena.mit.edu (Zam) Recently, Larry Bond's new novel, VORTEX, hit the book stores. In this one, the action centers around South Africa. Does anyone know if Mac Harpoon has any problems with System 7 compatibility? I am starting to collect my next batch of miniatures games rules/data questions for Larry Bond. If you have a specific question, I will be glad to pass it along. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 16 May 91 22:04:48 EDT From: stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (James Stricherz) Subject: (6) Mac BattleSets As of now, the additional mac battlesets are: NAVC - North Atlantic MEDC - Mediterranean If there are anymore, I am unaware of them. James stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 May 91 04:12:17 CDT From: shaggy@cs.utexas.edu (James Blieden) Subject: (7) Mac News Comment: article edited slightly I'm a beta tester for 360. Color Harpoon (final version) is 'out' I've been notified that my copy is in the mail so it should be in store very soon (I hope or I'm eating it...). There are two scenario disks (extra not GUIK that comes with it). They are 1) NACV or North Atlantic Convoys 2) MED or Mediterranean Sea So far I like NACV with things like REAL size battle groups. As I've said before the computer can always be beat at the hardest levels with basic strategy. I think that is must be the most difficult part to program (hail 360) and the fact that it can play at all is amazing. Now if they can get modem/network play I'd be a happy camper. I've been told that all Harpoon development is for the IBM first then ported to the other platforms. This is sensable as it is by FAR the best selling platform, so I guess we (Mac/Amiga) wait... Color is cool and a STEAL at $15 upgrade price. For one the map viewing area is bigger (yeah), and everthing is in color, including the ships/planes in the info boxes, and it uses the full screen (of my 14" Magnavox). jAMES 601 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 May 91 21:10 +0200 From: Povl H. Pedersen Subject: (8) Mac Availability I recently ordered Harpoon from MacZone. They actually did sent me a copy of NACV, the Harpoon battleset 2 for the Macintosh. The manual is the DOS version, but it is a mac version, as listed on the cover. It was $22 from MacZone as I decided to keep it. There is also included a coupom that tells you how to get a COLOR version of NACV for $10. MacZone also told me that they had the scenario editor ready for the Macintosh when they tried to help me in getting the original program. MACINTOSH RULES. I hate IBM (I Buy Mac next time :-) ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 17 May 91 12:51:56 -0700 From: robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D Roberts) Subject: (9) South Atlantic War In CZ 6.1 some one was asking about South Atlantic War. On GEnie, Ed Kettler [who is writing South Atlantic War - the update of the old Resolution 502 module on the Falklands War] mentioned that he had turned it in to GDW. He also said - after some remarks about GDW and lost data files - that he expected it to be on their publishing schedule soon. Evidently GDW was publishing an updated version of their Desert Shield Fact Book and would put South Atlantic war on the printer after that. So it's a little vague and amounts to: Real Soon Now! Robin Roberts Robin D. Roberts { The Dread Pirate Roberts } Internet: robinro@ism.isc.com CompuServe: 72330,1244 GEnie: R.ROBERTS10 "Never do anything that you won't be able to explain to the paramedics" - Wook ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 20 May 91 08:45 EST From: Jonathan E. Davis Subject: (10) Silkworm Missile Have any statistics on the Silkworm land-based anti-ship missile been prepared by Bond? I recall that the missile is based on the Styx missiles, but I'm interested in information regarding range, warhead size, and estimated hit probability. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 14 May 1991 15:22:27 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (11) Pilot Experience New rules for the miniatures game that take into account pilot experience are introduced in SITREP 7. This is an official rule change. The new rules are summarized here with permission of Larry Bond. 8.4 Pilot Experience - Individual pilot skill is a major consideration in the outcome of air combat. In no other part of Harpoon, can an individual's skill and experience have so much impact. In Harpoon, pilot skill impacts air combat maneuvering, unguided ordnance attacks, gun attacks and low-level flying ability. Pilot experience and skill classifications: Recruit: barely competent, shouldn't really be in combat Novice ("Nugget"): basics of combat training, not seasoned yet Experienced: flown several combat missions, developed a sense of "situational awareness" Veteran: hundreds of combat sorties, a survivor In WWII, typical Kamikaze pilots would be considered Recruits. In typical peacetime squadron today, most pilots are considered Novices or Experienced with only one or two Veterans. Unless otherwise stated, all pilots are considered Experienced. Pilot Experience Modifier Table Recruit Novice Exper. Veteran --------------------------------------------------------------- Gaining Position in Dogfight -20% 0% +20% +40% Unguided Surface Ordnance -10% 0% +5% +10% Surface Gun Attack % Chance of Crash/Turn +3% +2% 0% -2% in VLow/Terrain-Following Flight Air to Air Gun Attack Modifier -40% -20% 0% +20% -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Mon Jun 3 10:00:17 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA08018; Mon, 3 Jun 91 10:00:17 -0700 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 91 10:00:17 -0700 Message-Id: <9106031700.AA08018@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #3 (msgs 12-16) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 3 June 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 3 First Message: 12 Messages: 5 Topics: (12) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (13) Silkworm SSM frank0@ibmpcug.co.uk (14) Mac News shaggy@cs.utexas.edu (15) SITREP #8 robinro@ism.isc.com (16) Shallow Water tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 3 Jun 1991 09:05:58 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (12) Editorial New members since last issue: davis@po.cwru.edu (Palmer Davis) andy@ucsd.edu (Andy Ferrell) dgerman@orca.tamu.edu (Duane German) lhuston@ifs.umich.edu (Larry Huston) SITREP #8 is out. The long awaited "South Atlantic War" has finally come out for the miniatures game. It's 136 pages long and also has new rules for VLow flying and attacks against land targets. The module costs $12. During the weeks of 9 June and 16 June, I will be out of town. Any requests sent during this period will have to wait until I get back. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 28 May 91 09:42:55 BST (Tue) Subject: (13) Silkworm SSM From: frank0@ibmpcug.co.uk (Frank Dunn) In v6 msg 10, Jonathan E. Davis writes: >Have any statistics on the Silkworm land-based anti-ship missile been >prepared by Bond? I recall that the missile is based on the Styx >missiles, but I'm interested in information regarding range, warhead >size, and estimated hit probability. The Silkworm is the export variant of the Chinese HY-2 SSM which itself is based on the Styx as you say. In the 1990-1991 Harpoon Data Annexe the relevant entry is on p 102 under PRC HY-2. The latest ed of Warship World has a useful boxed out article on Sea Dart and its shooting down of a Silkworm during Desert Storm (Warship World v 3 no. 11 Summer 1991 pp 7). The raw data given by Richard Scott is: 95 km range, 450 kg warhead, Mach 0.9 with a "high cruising altitude". Reports of the incident indicate that it was cruising at 100 ft AFAICR. The engagement sequence was thus: HMS Gloucester acting as goalkeeper for USS Missouri E of Faylaka Island, 2 Silkworms launched of which one falls splashes shortly after launch. The sole inbound is detected by Gloucester at 0450 local time. FC radar locks on and 2 Sea Darts launched within 7 secs of lock on, first hits at a range of 7.5 km (from Missouri) and second explodes after flying through the debris. Frank. fdunn@cix fdunn@bix 100012,23 CIS Frank Dunn@MacTel "It must be jelly 'cos jam don't shake like that" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 29 May 91 01:51:21 CDT From: shaggy@cs.utexas.edu (James Blieden) Subject: (14) Mac News Greetings. More from three-sixty on Harpoon for the mac: All harpoons come with the IBM manual, the mac version has a 4 page 'flyer' with the keyboard changes listed (for the alt keys...). As I had said, the color version IS out and I have my copy. The color upgrades for the scenario disks are $10 bux. This is worth it as the maps are screwed up without it. They, of course are not out to the public, YET. Tim never asked me to try out Harpoon with system seven, so I dunno. I have it on floppy as I have to upgrade too much to switch cold turkey... jAMES p.s. Also color scenarios have the ships/planes/etc. in color. Nice pictures! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 30 May 91 11:33:47 -0700 From: robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D. Roberts) Subject: (15) SITREP #8 SITREP #8 is out. I mention this in case others have had as much trouble as I with GDW keeping their subscriptions straight. SITREP #8 has an interesting scenario from Origins '90 which involves a conflict between forces in a hypothetical Russian Civil War. In addition a third player operates a lone U.S. Improved Los Angeles class. The Russian forces are divided between "Loyalist" [i.e. loyal to Gorbachev] and "Nationalist" [adherents of Yeltsin] with the Loyalists in control of a naval base and the Nationalists launching an amphib assault to take it. It is evidently a large scenario and Larry Bond states that it wasn't completed at Origins '90. In addition SITREP #8 has more of the Data Annex 1990-91 errata begun in #7, with the Su-24 Fencer being republished in its entirety; also an updated entry for "Admiral Kuznetsov" the conventional carrier previously known as Tbilisi, a kitbashing article on updating the Superior Long Beach cruiser data on the F117A, and the beginning of a series on U.S. Coast Guard In both SITREP #8 and on GEnie Larry Bond states that South Atlantic War is out on dealer shelves now ... I'm going to get out to a game store right away myself! Robin D. Roberts robinro@ism.isc.com GEnie: R.ROBERTS10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 14 May 1991 15:16:56 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (16) Shallow Water The following article is a summary of the shallow water rules presented in SITREP #7. They are not noted as being "official changes", so I would regard them as being optional. This material is presented here by permission of Larry Bond. Sea areas are divided into general types, depending on how far down the sea floor is. The rules already describe "open ocean" conditions. Half-Channel Depth conditions apply in areas with depths between 600 and 1000 feet. Continental Shelf conditions are used in areas less than 600 feet deep. If two units attempting to detect each other are in areas with different acoustic conditions, the modifiers to the detection chances and ranges are based on the position of the contact, not the detecting unit. Half-Channel Depth There is no thermocline and submarines may only operate at surface, periscope, shallow or intermediate depths. Any sonar listed as having CZ capability are considered low-frequency sonars. Half-Channel Depths are too shallow to form CZs, so low-frequency sonars may not use CZ capabilities. In addition, due to high reverberation and ambient noise, low-frequency sonars are subject to a -30% Active and -20% Passive Pd modifier. Sonar ranges are (3 + D6) * 10% of normal (40-90%) and cannot be higher than the open ocean performance value in the same scenario. Homing torpedoes are -20% Ph, unless listed in Annex F as "shallow-water capable". Continental Shelf Submarines may only operate at surface, periscope or shallow depths. Towed sonars cannot be deployed or used, because of the risk of getting snarled on the bottom. Dipping sonars, however, can be used. Low-frequency sonars are subject to a -50% Active and -30% Passive Pd modifier. All other sonars are affected by -30% Active and -20% Passive Pd modifier. Sonar ranges are D6 * 10% of normal (10-60%) and cannot be higher than open ocean or half-channel performance values in the same scenario. Homing torpedoes are -40% Ph, unless shallow-water capable, in which case they are -10% Ph. If a submerged submarine in Continental Shelf waters moves two thirds or more of its original maximum speed at ANY depth, it leaves a Kelvin Wake (see rule 4.2.3.2 as amended by errata). Navigational Depths Submarines cannot submerge in water less than 150 feet deep and they cannot operate surfaced in water less than 60 feet deep. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Wed Jun 26 16:22:00 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA07578; Wed, 26 Jun 91 16:22:00 -0700 Date: Wed, 26 Jun 91 16:22:00 -0700 Message-Id: <9106262322.AA07578@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #4 (msgs 17-24) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 26 June 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 4 First Message: 17 Messages: 8 Topics: (17) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (18) On the Bottom sandia!ralph@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (19) Aircraft Acceleration tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (20) South Atlantic War robinro@ism.isc.com (21) Submarine Propulsors tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (22) Rocket Pod Damage robinro@ism.isc.com (23) Recent Naval Devlopments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (24) Undocumented Features chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de "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 26 Jun 1991 15:20:12 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (17) Editorial New members added since last issue: chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Kai Hortmann) elil@sco.com (Eli Liang) rwright@convex.com (Randy Wright) eyee@us.oracle.com (Eddie Yee) The current list numbers 205 entries, some of which are local redistributions. An upcoming issue will have the latest errata out for the miniatures game. Anyone know if the computer game or battlesets are going to be upgraded? I remember sending in a customer registration card for the computer game which promised news on the latest developments. Has anyone gotten anything in the mail? -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 03 Jun 91 15:43:52 -0600 From: sandia!sandia.gov!ralph@unmvax.cs.unm.edu Subject: Sittin' on the bottom of the bay... Summary: (18) On the Bottom Comment: article reformatted Here's a question for the experts on modern sub tactics... In numerous WWII sub flicks we see the sub sit on the bottom of the ocean to avoid the sonar search or depth charge attack of the surface vessels. You don't, however, hear about this tactic is conjunction with modern submarine tactics. So, that leads us to questions like: Is there any advantage against sonar if you are sitting against the bottom? I can't think of any, but snugging up against the underside of an ice pack helps hide you in the noise. Are sea bottoms noisy places? (Nothing down there except a bunch of shrimp throwing a party, sir!) Might it effect active sonar even if it has no effect against passive? And as an aside, is/was this a valid tactic for diesel-electric subs, or is Hollywood throwing us a line (as usual)? Are you any quieter resting on the bottom instead of floating along at a dead stop? Ralph Keyser Albuquerque, NM InterNet: unmvax.unm.edu!sandia!ralph or sandia!ralph@unmvax.unm.edu Uucp: ...{ucbvax | gatech}!unmvax!sandia!ralph ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 29 May 1991 09:36:19 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (19) Aircraft Acceleration In SITREP 8, the following official rules change is made for the miniatures game. It is presented here by permission of Larry Bond. Aircraft climbing more than 50% of allowed rate cannot accelerate. Aircraft climbing more than 50% of allowed rate can double their acceleration rate. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 91 18:04:41 -0700 From: robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D. Roberts) Subject: (20) South Atlantic War Well after many trials I got my copy of South Atlantic War ... With ~130 pages, there is certainly a lot of material. About 50 pages of background text and scenarios, 60 pages of ship and aircraft forms [ which are reflective of the spring 1982 state of the ships and aircraft ], 5 pages of new/updated rules and the rest is linking info to link to GDW's Combined Arms land warfare minatures rules. Among the interesting items is a table of observed weather at Port Stanly day by day, sometimes hour by hour. The scenarios look very good although I haven't been able to play any yet. But there are some annoyances. One example is that the ship types nomenclature isn't consistent. In the scenarios, there are references to "Type 21" ships which are listed in the ship forms as "Amazon" class without any note as to what a type 21 is. I had to find the ship "Alacrity" listed down in the small print of the Amazon class to find the Alacrity listed as a Type 21 in the scenario. Among the new items discussed in the added rules section is a "Laser Dazzle Sight" used to blind or dazzle attacking aircraft albeit at such short range that only aircraft armed with unguided munitions need fear it. Also appearing are rules for land attack with Harpoon specified weapons; a welcome addition. Robin D. Roberts { The Dread Pirate Roberts } Internet: robinro@ism.isc.com CompuServe: 72330,1244 GEnie: R.ROBERTS10 "Just how far apart, geographically speaking, are Bell Labs' Holmdel New Jersey and Grover's Mill New Jersey? " - Me ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 29 May 1991 09:37:24 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (21) Submarine Propulsors SITREP 8 has an article on the back page about submarine pump jet propulsors, which are quieter than the standard submarine propellers. The following information from that article is presented here by permission of Larry Bond. As far as the miniatures game is concerned, the effects of this technology can be simulated through the following rules: First Generation Propulsors Passive Pd reduced by 10%. Cavitation speed increased by 10 knots at all depths. Maximum Creep Speed increased to 10 knots. Second Generation Propulsor Passive Pd reduced by 10%. Propulsor itself does not cavitate at any depth or speed. Maximum Creep Speed increased to 20 knots. The UK Trafalgar class SSNs use a first generation model. The US Seawolf class SSNs use a second generation design. The 90-91 Data Annex already incorporates this information for the Seawolf, though the Trafalgar entry is incomplete. -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, 18 Jun 91 13:51:01 -0700 From: robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D Roberts) Subject: more South Atlantic War Summary: (22) Rocket Pod Damage OK, who wants to try to explain this item to me: In the Aircraft Data forms for South Atlantic War all multiple rocket pods contain language like this [I am only quoting the French Matra 155 listing]: Matra155. Guidance: none. See 6.2.3.3. Throw 2D6-2x10% (reroll 2) for percentage of rockets which hit. Multiply percentage times DP below for actual DP inflicted. 16x68mm SNEB rockets. 2.1 (60%). 4 DP vs. surface ship only. My challenge is for someone to give me a clear example of hit and damage resolution for this weapon. Robin D. Roberts { The Dread Pirate Roberts } Internet: robinro@ism.isc.com CompuServe: 72330,1244 GEnie: R.ROBERTS10 "Just how far apart, geographically speaking, are Bell Labs' Holmdel New Jersey and Grover's Mill New Jersey? " - Me ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 14 May 1991 15:23:39 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (23) Recent Naval Devlopments With the current budget squeeze, the US Navy has cancelled these systems mentioned in the 90-91 Data Annex: AGM-136 Tacit Rainbow RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile F-14D Super Tomcat In the case of the F-14D, the program was cancelled after a handful were already produced or upgraded from the F-14A or F-14A+. Of course, this probably is not the last word on the subject as Congress is not done with the budget yet. According to an article by RADM Brooks (Director of Naval Intelligence) in May 1991 USNI Proceedings, it appears that Soviet Victor III SSN production will end after current construction is finished. This still leaves the Soviets producing two SSN classes: Akula and Sierra. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 91 17:08:32 MEZ From: Kai Hortmann Subject: Keys not mentioned in the Amiga manual Summary: (24) Undocumented Features While playing around with my keyboard I discovered several key combinations that weren't mentioned in my manual: alt T - shows the intended courses of all visible groups, including enemies alt F2 - shows all group names and unit numbers on the maps alt F6 - shows memory (this was mentioned on this list before) Has anybody found any other useful key combinations? Are this keyboard commands mentioned in other manuals? I've got only the German translation of the Amiga manual that came with my copy of the game. I would have preferred the original, but its hard to get a English manual in Germany. <* Kai Hortmann - University of Konstanz - Germany *> <* chbrin5@dknkurz1.bitnet or chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de *> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Mon Jul 1 10:41:22 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA10382; Mon, 1 Jul 91 10:41:22 -0700 Date: Mon, 1 Jul 91 10:41:22 -0700 Message-Id: <9107011741.AA10382@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #5 (msgs 25-33) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 1 July 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 5 First Message: 25 Messages: 9 Topics: (25) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (26) GIUK Gatekeeper Scenario chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (27) Re: Aircraft Acceleration tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (28) Mac Cheat Keys csmsets@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (29) Re: South Atlantic War tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (30) GIUK Rapier, NACV, SITREP lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (31) Re: On the Bottom tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (32) Re: Submarine Propulsors gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (33) Re: Submarine Propulsors tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 1 Jul 1991 08:49:39 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (25) Editorial New members added since last issue: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) If you haven't heard, the Mac Scenario Editor is now available. I assume the Amiga version is here or is coming soon also. In order to facilitate scenario exchange, I was wondering if someone could submit something about the best way to do encoding/compression and uploading/downloading of Mac scenarios. Karl, do you have a place on your archive site for Mac scenarios as well? Is anyone playing the miniatures game by e-mail lately? -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 91 10:58:31 MEZ From: chbrin5%dknkurz1.bitnet@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Kai Hortmann) Subject: Computer Harpoon: Scenario 5 (Gatekeeper) Summary: (26) GIUK Gatekeeper Scenario Last weekend I tried to win scenario 5.0 of computer Harpoon (Gatekeeper), playing the USSR. I failed miserabily. Has anybody else ever tried and succeeded? The USSR has to cross the GIUK gap with a majority of its 31 subs (most of the Foxtrotts). The USSR has neither planes nor anything else that carries anti-air missiles. NATO has 13 P-3C Orions and 21 Nimrods, and the USSR player usually sees nothing else of NATO until 10 of his subs are sunk and he is informed that NATO has achieved its minimum victory conditions. If he should get any further there are two ships groups with lots of helicopters and some subs waiting for him. Am I just angry or is this scenario heavily weighed in favor of NATO? Or is there any way to avoid the MADs of the Orions and Nimrods? <* Kai Hortmann - University of Konstanz - Germany *> <* chbrin5@dknkurz1.bitnet or chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de *> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu 27 Jun 1991 09:54:22 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (27) Re: Aircraft Acceleration I didn't quite get it right in v6 msg 19. I should have said: Aircraft climbing more than 50% of allowed rate cannot accelerate. Aircraft **DIVING** more than 50% of allowed rate can double their acceleration rate. Thanks to Robin Roberts and Gary Snow for pointing out the typo. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 91 12:05 PDT From: csmsets@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (Ed Sakabu) Subject: Undocumented keys (Cheat keys for the MAC). Summary: (28) Mac Cheat Keys There are some keys that you can use on the MAC that aren't documented (but they kinda take the fun out of playing the game). The one that is of most use (especially if you know you've lost and you want to know why) is the option(alt)-s key. This shows you all units (yours and his). There are others but I can't remember what they are, just try them... --Ed ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue 25 Jun 1991 17:49:05 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (29) Re: South Atlantic War In CZ v6 msg 20, robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D. Roberts) writes: >I had to find the ship "Alacrity" listed down in the small >print of the Amazon class to find the Alacrity listed as a Type 21 in >the scenario. The trick here is to refer to Naval Order of Battle on pages 16 (UK) and 21 (Argentina). It lists both ship names and classes. Unfortunately, it is not in alphabetical order. On another topic, one of South Atlantic War's scenarios (17. Big Game Hunting) has an interesting optional rule (p.45) to cover attacks against non-warships (eg the unfortunate "Atlantic Conveyor"). The rule reads: If a ship is not protected by chaff launchers and is attacked by missiles with TARH guidance, the missile receives a +10% hit modifier against that ship only. Personally, I am thinking of applying the +10% rule to any circumstance in which the target doesn't have the "standard" warship countermeasures, like chaff or jamming vs TARH missiles or maybe flares vs. TIRH missiles. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 91 16:29:45 -0600 From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: Computer Harpoon Summary: (30) GIUK Rapier, NACV, SITREP Howdy! Has anyone beat the computer on the Rapier scenario? I play the NATO side, and at most, I can destroy one Soviet base. By them, either all my subs are history, or I'm out of missiles. Any ideas? Also, I'm having trouble with NACV. When I make scenarios using the editor and NACV, something always seems to go wrong. For instance, I tried to launch a group of 12 C-141s from Norfolk on a ferry mission to Keflavik. The air group icon appeared, then I was kindly informed that "0 C-141B's" of the group "have run out of fuel and crashed!" Anybody else have problems with NACV? Finally, where can I subscribe to SITREP? I'm definately interested in getting it, and I'm also interested in getting the back issues. Thanks! Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 28 Jun 1991 18:03:42 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (31) Re: On the Bottom In CZ v6 msg 18, sandia!ralph@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (Ralph Keyser) writes: >Is there any advantage against sonar if you are sitting against the >bottom? I don't really know, but here is my speculation. Against, passive sonar, I suppose, some of your radiated sound goes into the mud rather than the water. >Are sea bottoms noisy places? They can be. According to "Principles of Naval Weapons Systems", sonic marine animals, including Snapping shrimp, can create a lot of noise. Snapping shrimp live near land between 35 N and 40 S latitude down to 250 fathoms, though the largest beds are at less than 30 fathoms. They create a crackling sound in the 1-50 kHz range with 86 db re 1uPa intensity (don't ask me what those units mean). Maybe a submarine can use this noise to mask its own sounds. Against active sonar, it would depend if it could distinguish your submarine from the rest of the bottom bounce. Maybe some sonars listen for secondary reverberation from the ping, allowing them to tell the difference between pinging metal and mud. I suppose some higher frequency sonars with better resolution could pick out any suspicious looking "bumps" on the bottom. But high frequency also means very short range. Nobody wants to use under-ice or mine-hunting sonar for these purposes; you have to get too close! It is interesting to note that the Dutch Zeeleeuw class SS use stern fins which are in an "X" configuration rather than a vertical- horizontal setup. "Modern Naval Combat" (hardly an authoritative source though) claims this is to prevent the fins from projecting beneath the keel, `easing operations near the seabed'. So maybe there is something good about being down there ... -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 91 14:57:41 PDT From: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) Subject: (32) Re: Submarine Propulsors In CZ v6 msg 21, tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) writes: >The UK Trafalgar class SSNs use a first generation propulsor model. >The US Seawolf class SSNs use a second generation design. The 90-91 >Data Annex already incorporates this information for the Seawolf, >though the Trafalgar entry is incomplete. Doesn't the Improved Los Angeles Class also have a propulsor...what generation would it be? Gary --- UUCP: ogicse!clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/253-9389 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, Wa ARPANet: crash!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com | Vancouver Apple Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 28 Jun 1991 18:02:05 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (33) Re: Submarine Propulsors In CZ v6 msg 32, gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) writes: >Doesn't the Improved Los Angeles Class also have a propulsor...what >generation would it be? According to the article in SITREP 8, Improved Los Angeles class does NOT have a pump jet propulsor. Apparently, a first generation propulsor was planned for the class, but it turned out that the weight margin on the class was insufficient. Thus, I think the propulsor remarks ought to be deleted from the Data Annex entry for the Improved LosAngeles. The article also mentioned that a future improved French Amethyste SSN may use a pump jet. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Fri Jul 5 16:08:59 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA03536; Fri, 5 Jul 91 16:08:59 -0700 Date: Fri, 5 Jul 91 16:08:59 -0700 Message-Id: <9107052308.AA03536@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #6 (msgs 34-41) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 5 July 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 6 First Message: 34 Messages: 8 Topics: (34) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (35) GEnie Harpoon robinro@ism.isc.com (36) Re: Rocket Pod Damage tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (37) Mac Editor Price gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (38) SAM Algorithm pjenny@cco.bbn.com (39) Scenario FTP Archive kxb@math.ksu.edu (40) 360 News lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (41) Mac Files gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.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: Fri 5 Jul 1991 14:59:02 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (34) Editorial New members added since last issue: randy@isp.nwu.edu (Randy Roman) mav@lizardo.huji.ac.il (Marc A. Volovic) Those of you wanting to exchange Mac scenarios can do so by using the scenario FTP archive on hilbert.math.ksu.edu. You should compress/archive your scenarios with StuffIt 1.5.1 and encode the archive with BinHex 4.0 (built into StuffIt). Apparently, these versions are the most widespread and are shareware. You should avoid StuffIt Deluxe unless using the StuffIt 1.5.1 compatible format. Please see further details below. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 30 Jun 91 10:54:36 -0700 From: robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D. Roberts) Subject: Computer Harpoon Summary: (35) GEnie Harpoon No, not the personal computer version 360 sells, but a multi-player version. I have been seeing tidbits about a multi-player version of Harpoon for a while now. This month's _PC Sources_ magazine claims that a multi-player version would become available on GEnie on July 1st. I haven't seen any mention of a specific start date on GEnie myself on the Games RT that I normally frequent. But I haven't spent any time on the multi-player games roundtable. If this announcement is correct, there should be a multiplayer Harpoon soon on GEnie. Robin D. Roberts [Do I speak for this co.? If I told you, I'd have to kill you.] Internet: robinro@ism.isc.com CompuServe: 72330,1244 GEnie: R.ROBERTS10 "Just how far apart, geographically speaking, are Bell Labs' Holmdel New Jersey and Grover's Mill New Jersey? " - Me ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 28 Jun 1991 18:02:05 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (36) Re: Rocket Pod Damage In CZ v6 msg 22, robinro@ism.isc.com (Robin D Roberts) writes: >[Data Entry from South Atlantic War:] > Matra 155. Guidance: none. See 6.2.3.3. Throw 2D6-2x10% (reroll 2) > for percentage of rockets which hit. Multiply percentage times DP > below for actual DP inflicted. 16x68mm SNEB rockets. > 2.1 (60%). 4 DP vs. surface ship only. > > My challenge is for someone to give me a clear example of hit and > damage resolution for this [rocket pod] weapon. While the data entry in says to see 6.2.3.3, you should really look at the rules supplement in the back of South Atlantic War (SAW), especially 6.2.3.1.4. Apparently, from the notation on the damage rating, we can only attack surface ship targets with this weapon. The plane equipped with the Matra 155 must fly directly at the target until within 2.1 nm (6.2.3.3 says you must fly directly over the target, but then what is the point of having a 2.1 nm range?). The plane must be at Very Low or in a dive at Low altitude (SAW 6.2.3.1.4). The plane must travel subsonic, because the weapon is not rated for supersonic use (or at least the data entry does not mention it). You roll to hit, with each fired pod rolled separately. Base Ph will be 60% plus modifiers for pilot (see CZ v6 msg 11), bomb computer (SAW 6.2.3) and target aspect (SAW 6.2.3.2.1). If you roll the Ph, at least some of the rockets hit. The percentage of rockets which hit determined by rolling 2D6 (reroll a 2), subtracting 2 and multiplying by 10. (Yes, I know this can mean a fractional number of rockets hit.) If target aspect is within 20 degrees of centerline, you add 20% to result of this roll (it is not stated, but I assume a maximum of 100%). If all rockets hit, the listed damage is done. If not all hit, multiply the percentage by the listed damge to determine how much damage was actually done and round off. Generally speaking, these rocket pods are not worth much except against small craft with very light AA (eg Osa II PTM). Only small craft have low enough damage point ratings to be hurt by such weapon. Also, pods with a 2 nm range can fire outside of the range of AA guns of 30mm or less and the old 40mm/60 mount. Example: A Mirage 5 with two Matra 155 attacks a ship. The plane flies head-on directly towards the ship at 480 knots in a shallow dive at Low altitude until 2 nm away. The Ph modifiers are experienced pilot (+5%), ballistic bombing system (+10%) and attacking with in 20 degrees of centerline (+10%). The final Ph is 85%. The rolls are 25 and 75. Both pods hit. Now, rolls must be made for how many rockets hit. The rolls are (2D6 - 2) * 10% (reroll 2) plus 20% for target aspect (maximum 100%). The rolls are 3 and 11, yielding 30% and 100% of the rockets hit damage. The resulting damage is 1.2 and 4.0 damage points or a total of 5.2. After rounding off, five damage points are inflicted, plus you should do the normal check for critical hits. -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, 2 Jul 91 15:08:29 PDT From: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) Subject: (37) Mac Editor Price In CZ v6 msg 25, cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu writes: |If you haven't heard, the Mac Scenario Editor is now available. How much.....I've been waiting for that to come out for quite some time now. Gary --- UUCP: ogicse!clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/253-9389 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, Wa ARPANet: crash!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com | Vancouver Apple Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 91 10:28:35 EDT From: pjenny@cco.bbn.com (Peter Jenny) Subject: Mac Harpoon SAM fire algorithm Summary: (38) SAM Algorithm Better late than never? I observed this a while ago regarding SAM fire behavior from a Soviet ship group being attacked by F-16s. I should have sent it in sooner, so I could be more precise, but here's what I remember. My Soviet battle group had a Kirov, Sovremenys, Udaloys, etc. The F-16s managed to get in real close - they dodged the long range SA-N-6s by going very low, I think. The thing that surprized (and frustrated) me though was that my group kept auto-firing the very long range SAMs from the Kirov at the F-16s, even when (**I think**) the Sovremeny's SAMs (which have a good hit probability) were in range. It was frustrating because most of the SAMs kept missing, and I would have preferred to keep the long range SAMs for future waves of attackers. The Sovremenys never opened fire, because the Kirov still had missiles left. This agrees with what some others have said that "they've never seen a Sovremeny fire...". However, in some "easier" GUIK scenarios, with Sovremenys but no Slavas or Kirovs, I've seen Sovremenys put up a heck of a fight with SAM fire. I concluded that the SAM fire algorithm now says "shoot the longest range SAMs available in the group". I would rather it "shoot the shortest range SAMs that are in range of the target." Peter Jenny ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 91 16:53:08 CDT From: kxb@math.ksu.edu (Karl R. Buck) Subject: Uploads to hilbert.math.ksu.edu welcome Summary: (39) Scenario FTP Archive I have received several questions concerning the Harpoon ftp site and would like to echo some of the answers to some of the more frequently asked questions. Q. Are Mac/Amiga files ok to upload? A. Sure, although I have yet to receive a single file for these machines. Q. I have a Mac/Amiga. What compression scheme should I use before I upload? A. Beats me. I'll trust you on this one. :) Q. My system's nameserver can't resolve hilbert.math.ksu.edu, and I get "unknown host" when I try to ftp to your site. A. Try: ftp 129.130.30.2 and tell your system administrator to start using a decent NIS server instead of a host table. Q. I don't have ftp access. How can I get scenario X? A. Email me and I'll uuencode and send you any scenarios I have. There isn't a lot to choose from so far, so I'm not too worried about being snowed in with requests. Q. How do I use ftp to download/upload? A. Email me and I'll send you a detailed description on how to ftp. Q. This ftp site stinks! There is hardly anything available. A. Get busy and make some scenarios, hint files, etc... and upload them. I've started to archive all these cz mailings, so if you would like to look at some recent issues, they are in the pub/harpoon/misc directory. Let's see some uploads! -- Karl Buck email: kxb@hilbert.math.ksu.edu Kansas State University Phone: 913.532.6750 Manhattan, KS 66506 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 91 14:39:27 -0600 From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: Computer Harpoon Summary: (40) 360 News Howdy! Thought I would pass this along: I got a message from a guy at Three-Sixty who answered my e-mail about the next BattleSet. BattleSet #4 will cover the Indian Ocean (and the Persian Gulf, I think) and he said it would be out in September. In Three-Sixty's Harpoon Newsletter #2, they talk about a Harpoon Battlebook by Jim DeGoey. Anybody have this? Is it worth the money? Also, does anyone out there get Three-Sixty's newsletter on a regular basis? I had to call to get my one copy. Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 91 12:54:11 PDT From: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) Subject: Re: Mac Scenario Editor Summary: (41) Mac Files In private e-mail, your moderator asked: |Being ignorant of many Mac issues, I am looking for any advice on |how to archive and compress Mac files (ie Mac Harpoon scenarios) |for transmission and FTP archival on the Internet? |Someone told me the way to go was use Binhex or possibly Stuffit. |Do you have any advice to give? Yes, the most common and best way to do it is to pack the file with either Stuffit 1.51 (Not Stuffit Deluxe) or Compactor (now called Compact Pro). Then convert the resulting archive into a BINHEX file. This can be done with either Compactor or Stuffit. The result will be a text file that can be transfered via FTP, and archived on most any FTP server. Hope this helps..... Gary --- UUCP: ogicse!clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/253-9389 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, Wa ARPANet: crash!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com | Vancouver Apple Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Mon Jul 15 11:18:20 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA00816; Mon, 15 Jul 91 11:18:20 -0700 Date: Mon, 15 Jul 91 11:18:20 -0700 Message-Id: <9107151818.AA00816@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #7 (msgs 42-46) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 15 July 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 7 First Message: 42 Messages: 5 Topics: (42) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (43) Harpoon BattleSet #4 lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (44) Errata Update tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (45) GIUK: Duel Scenario lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (46) Harpoon/Air Superiority lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon 15 Jul 1991 10:57:26 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (42) Editorial New members added since last issue: dmarcher@acsu.buffalo.edu (David M. Archer) charbonneau@crd.ge.com (Michael R. Charbonneau) rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil (Robert S. Dean) paschall@postgres.berkeley.edu (Greg Paschall) In the last issue, Gary Snow asked how much the Mac Scenario Editor was. A COMP USA catalog gave these prices: Mac Harpoon 36.98 Mac Harpoon Scenario Editor 25.99 Mac Harpoon BattleSet #2 (NAVC) 19.99 Mac Harpoon BattleSet #3 (MEDC) 19.99 I have no idea if these are good prices or not. If you want to talk to them, their phone number is (800) 451-7638. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Jul 91 13:31:07 -0600 From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (43) Harpoon BattleSet #4 More news on Indian Ocean, BattleSet #4: I asked Three-Sixty if the following platforms would be supported in the Indian Ocean: F-15E Strike Eagle B-52 Stratofortress F-117A NightHawk E-8 JSTARS F/A-18C/D Hornet AH-64A Apache MiG-31 Foxhound F-4G 'Wild Weasel' Phantom II I was told that, minus the Apache, JSTARS, and MiG-31, they would be in there. Also new to Computer Harpoon will be a Kusnetsov-class carrier. Of course, all the regional navies will also be included, so all Computer Users can put Teds information on the Indian Navy to use. In an earlier posting, I mentioned that BattleSet #4 will be out in September, but failed to mention that this will be the PC version. Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed 29 May 1991 09:40:05 PDT From: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) Subject: (44) Errata Update This is latest batch of errata that I have for the miniatures game. The material here assumes you have the 90-91 Data Annex and have applied all the previous updates appearing in CZ. Much of this comes from SITREP 7 and 8. Annex A ------- Argentina Comodoro Py DD: Add to remarks, "Ship must point directly at target to fire Hedgehog." Argentina Ex-US Allen M. Sumner DD: Add to remarks, "Ship must point directly at target to fire Hedgehog." Argentina Ex-US Fletcher DD: Add to remarks, "Ship must point directly at target to fire Hedgehog." Canada Irouois DD: In last line of remarks, change "1992" to "1993". Italy Salvatore Pelosi SS: Delete "MD 100s" from Sensors. Add to remarks, "Fitted with MD 100/s passive ranging sonar (not a search sensor). Add 10% to Passive Fire Control Solution is target detected by this sonar." Italy Sauro SS: Delete "MD 100/s" from Sensors. Add to remarks, "Fitted with MD 100/s passive ranging sonar (not a search sensor). Add 10% to Passive Fire Control Solution is target detected by this sonar." PRC Luda DDG: Add to remarks, "Two units to be upgraded with French Crotale (with Castor II directors) and Sea Tiger radar." Portugal Vasco Da Gama FF: Change helicopter type to "Lynx Mk95". USSR Alfa SSN: Change "Shark Teeth" to "Squid Arm". USSR Slava CG: Add to remarks, "Fitted with stabilizers." USSR Tbilisi CVHG: Make the following modifications: Change name to "Admiral Kuznetsov". In Service: 1990 Crew: 2100 Total Mounts: 22 Change "50 Aircraft" to "30 Aircraft (see remarks)". Change "New CIWS" to "PB/SB/PQ/SQ 8 CADS-N-1 w/8 SA-N-11 msls & 15 bursts // 8 Hot Rod & Laser Desig. C,D". Delete SS-N-19. Change RBU to "PQ/SQ(10)2 RBU 12000 w/5 salvoes E". Add "2P/2S/PQ/SQ(R)6 AK-630 30mm w/15 bursts C". Change radars to "4 Sky Watch, Top Plate, 2 Strut Curve, 3 Palm Frond". Change remarks to: Full name Admiral of the Fleet Kuznetsov. Ex-Tbilisi. 12 degree ski jump, flight deck angled 5.5 degrees. Six helo spots. Second unit Varyag (Ex-Riga) launched 1989. Air group consists of 9 Su-27 Flanker B, 9 MiG-29 Fulcrum, 15 Ka-27 Helix A and 3 Ka-27 Helix C. Each Cross Sword director can control 4 missiles at once, 2 each at two separate targets. SA-N-9 ROF = 16/turn (all mounts). The CADS-N-1 is hybrid mount with both cannon and missiles. The AK-630s may be tied to the CADS-N-1 for fire control. USSR Udaloy DD: To clarify, all units have 3 Palm Frond. Units 1 and 2 have 2 Strut Pair. Units 3 and on have Top Plate. UK Trafalgar SSN: Add to remarks about pump jet, "Cavitation speed increased by 10 knots at all depths. Creep Speed is 10 knots." UK Upholder SS: Change In Class to "1+3". USA Improved Los Angeles SSN: Delete remarks about pump-jet propulsor. USA Midway CV: Delete from remarks, "SPS-30 vice SPS-38, SPS-43 vice -37". USA O.H. Perry FFG: Add to remarks, "FFG-61 (the last ship) was completed with the Mk92 Mod 6 fire control system. The other units will be backfitted." USA Samuel Gompers AD: Delete from remarks, "(see rules for repelling boarders)". USA Seawolf SSN: Delete references to Sea Lance in remarks. (The weapon was cancelled.) Up the loadout of Tomahawk or Harpoon in remarks to a total of 16 to fill space left by Sea Lance. USA USCG Hamilton FRAM WHEC: Add entry for this class: USCG Hamilton FRAM WHEC ------------------ Displacement: 2056 light In Class: 12 Damage Points: 58 In Service: 1967 Damage Mod: 0.75 Speed: 29 knots Propulsion: CODOG Crew: 151 Weapons: Total Mounts: 7 F(1)1 Mk75 76mm/62 // 1 Mk92 C P/S(1)2 Mk67 20mm/80 C PB&SB(4)2 Mk141 w/4 Harpoon D A(R)1 Mk15 Phalanx w/5 bursts C Aft Pad(1)1 SH-2F Seasprite or HH-65A Falcon B Sensors: SPS-40, SPS-64 J SQS-38 M Remarks: Aluminum superstructure. Possible RAST. Bow thruster provides 3 knots backup speed. FRAM modifications originally included a towed array and ESM. Space may still be available for them. Gallatin had ESM van on helo deck in 1988 preventing helicopter operations. Pre-FRAM cutters do not have Harpoon, Phalanx, had SPS-29 vice SPS-40, had Mk30 127mm/38 // 1 Mk35 vice Mk75 gun and could not process SH-2F sonobouy data. Five ships modernized so far; all will be done by 1993. Damage and Speed Breakdown: Damage Points: 0 15 29 44 52 58 Surface Speed: 29 22 15 7 0 Sinks Annex B ------- Italy ASH-3D: Change "APS-702" to "APS-705" radar. USSR MiG-29 Fulcrum: Change cannon type to "one GSh-301 30mm". USSR MiG-31 Foxhound: Change cannon ATA to 4. Change cannon type to "one GSh-301 30mm". USSR Su-27 Flanker B: Add "Laser Rangefinder" to sensors. Change cannon type to "one GSh-301 30mm". Change "Tbilisi" in remarks to "Kuznetsov". Add to remarks, "IRST and Laser Rangefinder together give +10% to chance to gain dogfight position for IR missile launch." USA F-14A: Add to remarks, "Can engage 6 different targets with AIM-54. AIM-54 ROF = 2/phase." USA F-14D: Change "RWR" to "ESM". Add to remarks, "Can engage 6 different targets with AIM-54. AIM-54 ROF = 2/phase." USA F/A-18A: Change "RWR" to "ESM". USA F-117A: Add following entry for this plane: F-117A Stealth Fighter Attack ---------------------- Cannon ATA: 0 Def ATA: 3(2) Sensors: FLIR, Laser Designator, Advanced Bombsight. Performance: Speed: Knots (nm/phase) ---------- Throttle Setting -------------- Altitude Cruise Military Afterburner ----------------------------------------------------------- VLow/Low 460(1.9) 594(2.5) - Medium 460(1.9) 580(2.4) - High 460(1.9) 560(2.3) - Ceiling: 15,000 meters Endurance: Cruise Range: 1500 nm Internal Fuel: 6000 kg Inflight Refuel?: Y Ordnance Loadouts: Cannon: None Payload: 1800 kg * 2 Maverick, HARM, GBU-15, GBU-27 or B61 (1350 nm) * 2 AIM-9M and 1 Maverick, HARM, GBU-15, GBU-27 or B61 (1350 nm) Remarks: All performance values estimated. Stealth design. All weapons carried in internal bay. Engines baffled to reduce IR and noise signature. Fly-by-wire. Treat as VSmall contact for radar detection. Radar homing and IR homing weapons have -10% chance to hit. FLIR and other IR search systems detect it at one quarter normal range. Annex C ------- France M1953 100mm/55: Change as follows: Surf Ph .40(50%-), .25(51%+); Air Pk .25. Column Key: Most of the entries have their column numbers are off by one, because "Barrels/Mount" was skipped. Annex D ------- Column Headings: Delete "(m)" in Max Alt and Min Alt column headings. The altitudes are given in altitude bands, not meters. USSR SA-N-11: Change air range to 6.5 nm. Annex E ------- Column Key: The Remarks entry should be labeled as column 9, not 12. Annex G1 -------- Column Key: The Remarks entry should be labeled as column 7, not 9. Annex G3 -------- USSR GSh-301 30mm: Add entry for this weapon with .70 Ph, 4 damage points and ROF of 1800. Column Key: The Remarks entry should be labeled as column 7, not 6. Annex G4 -------- USA AGM-130: Change range to 40 nm. USA Tacit Rainbow: This weapon has been cancelled. Annex H ------- USSR AA-10 Alamo A: Change dogfight to "N". USSR AA-10 Alamo B: Change dogfight to "N". USSR AA-10 Alamo C: Change dogfight to "N". USSR AA-10 Alamo D: Change dogfight to "N". Annex J ------- Column Key: The VSmall Range entry should be labeled as column 5. The Function entry sould be labeled as column 7, not 6. Annex L ------- French Agave: Change function to "SS". Column Key: The Function entry sould be labeled as column 7, not 6. Abbreviations: Add to ISAR, "can identify class or type of detected targets". Annex M ------- Nethl Zwaaardvis sonar: Delete this entry. USSR Squid Arm: Add entry for this system: H type, 1 CZ, Active Range 5 nm, Passive Range 5 nm, Active Pd .65, Passive Pd .50, Sub Platform. Column Key: The Remarks entry should be labeled column 10, not 9. -ted Ted Kim Internet: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu UCLA Computer Science Department UUCP: ...!{uunet|ucbvax}!cs.ucla.edu!tek 3804C Boelter Hall Phone: (213)206-8696 Los Angeles, CA 90024 FAX: (213)825-2273 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 91 14:16:27 -0600 From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: The Duel Summary: (45) GIUK: Duel I was playing Scenario 13: The Duel (GIUK) the other day and had a most interesting experience. I bring this up because I want to know if what happened to me was a bug, pure chance, or a combination of the two. I run Harpoon on a Tandy 1000 (PC-compatible, I think :-) First off, my Improved Los Angeles class sub localizes and attacks a Soviet Submarine group composed of one Akula and (I think) one SSGN. 2 torps fired at each, no hits. Soviets fire back, one hit, one miss. I kiss my Los Angeles goodbye. This action is ENE of Iceland. So far, it's a typical scenario, but here's where I start having problems. I get a rash of breakdowns, one right after the other! My VLS Ticonderoga is first, losing one of her Mk145 guns. Next comes one of my C.F. Adams destroyers, which loses a 324mm TT (BTW, what type of torp do we have that's 12.76 inches?) Then comes _Virginia_'s turn, and she loses a Phalanx. Not much, but that Phalanx loss comes to play later on. I find the Soviet fleet, and launch a bunch of Tomahawks. Of course, all of them miss. At least, I didn't see any impact. A minute or so later, however, I get the message that one of the Sverdlov cruisers has been sunk. A little later, a Sovremenny goes down. I don't know how either of these ships were sunk. Next comes another breakdown: a Knox FF loses a 324mm TT. Now I'm in Harpoon range, and I volley all I can. The _Chernova Ukraina_ goes down (Slava Class). Next comes something I've never seen: the U.S. gets Nuke Release, but not because the Soviets fired any. (I guess the situation looked desparate.) I fire the nukes from the Iowa, and, of course, all miss. The Soviets fire, and _Virginia_ eats three or four missiles since she doesn't have a Phalanx to stop any of them (granted, Phalanx would probably only shoot one missile down, but at least I would feel better :-). Climax of the battle: Iowa gets into gun range. The Soviets are about twenty degrees to port. I attack, but I can only use one turret, even though two bear! One Mod Kashin is blown away, but I lose a Leahy CG. Udaloy goes down, as does my VLS Ticonderoga. However, just before the Tico sinks, I get a volley of SM-2's off at the Soviets. This shot sinks the Slava, Frunze, and a Udaloy. Later, a Sierra attack sub was sunk. My questions/comments: Has anyone else seen this rash of breakdowns occur? My feeling is that the computer got caught in a loop. There was no time elapsed between the first three failures. Why is it that American torpedoes mostly miss and Soviet torpedoes hardly ever miss? And for that matter, how come most of my Tomahawks get shot down against supposedly inferior SAMS, and most of their SS-N-19's get through the Aegis network? Finally, why did I only get to fire rounds from one of my turrets on the _Iowa_? The only reasoning I can think off is if all shots have to be broad- side? Is this true? Oh well, I guess I can't complain too much, I did win the scenario :-) Incidentally, I did play the scenario latter, and I got a much more common result: The Soviet fleet disappeared about thirty seconds *before* my missiles impacted! At least I know that was a bug! Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 91 15:53:03 -0600 From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (mark lam) Subject: (46) Harpoon/Air Superiority I hear, from time to time, bits about combining Air Superiority/Air Strike with Harpoon. Is there a supplement for these rules? Were they published in CZ? I have Air Superiority and Air Strike, and would be interested in learning about the combo. Thanks! Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * ********** From root@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Fri Jul 19 15:48:02 1991 Received: by penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Sendmail 5.61a+YP/3.07pram3) id AA07426; Fri, 19 Jul 91 15:48:02 -0700 Date: Fri, 19 Jul 91 15:48:02 -0700 Message-Id: <9107192248.AA07426@penzance.cs.ucla.edu> From: cz@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU To: cz-dist@penzance.CS.UCLA.EDU Subject: CZ v6 #8 (msgs 47-61) Errors-To: cz-request@PRAM.CS.UCLA.EDU Status: RO The Convergence Zone Date: 19 July 1991 Volume: 6 Issue: 8 First Message: 47 Messages: 15 Topics: (47) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (48) Re: GIUK Gatekeeper guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (49) New Computer Release ? fidder@druhi.att.com (50) Re: GIUK Duel lcline@agora.rain.com (51) Re: On the Bottom d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (52) Re: Shallow Water d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (53) Print Game lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (54) Re: BS4 & GIUK Duel dgil@ipsaint.ipsa.reuter.com (55) Re: Errata Update gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (56) Re: Harpoon BattleSet #4 gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (57) Amiga Problems charbonneau@crd.ge.com (58) Amiga Update caw@miroc.chi.il.us (59) Soviet Submarine Names lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (60) Volume 6 Index cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (61) CZ Guidelines cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. Submissions: cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu Administration: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu Archives: sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca (129.100.100.12): pub/cz via anonymous FTP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 19 Jul 1991 15:14:40 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (47) Editorial New members added since last issue: hand@kelvin.jpl.nasa.gov (Kolin E. Hand) izar@boojum.huji.ac.il (Izar Tarandach) Total list membership stands at 209. If you have been wondering, I don't announce people unsubscribing. This issue is pretty long, though it still should be short enough to prevent any mailer problems. This issue closes volume six and has the usual administrative stuff at the end. -ted (disguised as CZ Administrator) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Jul 91 15:46:39 CDT From: guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (David A. Guidry) Subject: Response Summary: (48) Re: GIUK Gatekeeper Comment: included message edited In CZ v6 msg 26, chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (Kai Hortmann) writes: >Last weekend I tried to win scenario 5.0 of computer Harpoon (Gatekeeper), >playing the USSR. I failed miserabily. Has anybody else ever tried and >succeeded? The USSR has to cross the GIUK gap with a majority of its 31 >subs (most of the Foxtrotts). The USSR has neither planes nor anything >else that carries anti-air missiles. NATO has 13 P-3C Orions and 21 >Nimrods, and the USSR player usually sees nothing else of NATO until >10 of his subs are sunk and he is informed that NATO has achieved its >minimum victory conditions. If he should get any further there are >two ships groups with lots of helicopters and some subs waiting for >him. Am I just angry or is this scenario heavily weighed in favor of >NATO? Or is there any way to avoid the MADs of the Orions and Nimrods? I have successfully played Gatekeeper from both ends of the battle. I suppose that it helped to know the NATO force distribution before trying it from the soviet side. It's all a matter of moving your subs very close to shorelines where they are harder to detect. For those subs which get trapped by NATO forces, change depth, speed and course rapidly. Best results are from popping up a thermocline and going at right angles to your previous course. Someone else posted about the scenario "Rapier". I have seen somebody win it once. I've tried about a dozen times and I always manage to get my butt kicked (how do those russians detect a creeping LA???) Dave -- David A. Guidry | On a clear disk, you | empire Student Consultant | can seek forever | Not just a game Academic Computing and Network Services | but a way of life | -- Gott im Himmel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Jul 91 15:27 MDT From: fidder@druhi.att.com (Ted Fidder) Subject: New Harpoon Release (?) Summary: (49) New Computer Release ? About 9 months ago there was some discussion on 360 putting out a new release of Harpoon. This release was suppose to add things like a modem interface, and improve the computer play. Since that time I have not seen much on this topic. Does anyone know if 360 is going to put out a new release anytime soon ? I am not interested in battle sets, since (as I understand it) they use the same brain damage software to run the oppenent. Ted Fidder fidder@druhi.att.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 91 2:04:59 PDT From: lcline@agora.rain.com (Larry Cline) Subject: (50) Re: GIUK Duel Comment: included message edited In CZ v6 msg 45, lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) writes: > I was playing Scenario 13: The Duel (GIUK) the other day and had a > most interesting experience. I bring this up because I want to know if > what happened to me was a bug, pure chance, or a combination of the two. > ... > I find the Soviet fleet, and launch a bunch of Tomahawks. Of course, > all of them miss. At least, I didn't see any impact. A minute or so later, > however, I get the message that one of the Sverdlov cruisers has been sunk. > A little later, a Sovremenny goes down. I don't know how either of > these ships were sunk. On not seeing the hits, you might check your game options to see if hit animations have been turned off. When I've got a bunch of missiles going in, I turn off the hit and point-defense animations to speed things up then turn them on again after my missiles are done. > Next comes another breakdown: a Knox FF loses a 324mm TT. > ... > The Soviets fire, and _Virginia_ eats three or four missiles > since she doesn't have a Phalanx to stop any of them (granted, > Phalanx would probably only shoot one missile down, but at least I > would feel better :-). > ... > Has anyone else seen this rash of breakdowns occur? My feeling is that > the computer got caught in a loop. There was no time elapsed > between the first three failures. I have had this happen to me, although not quite one on top of the other. I have played some scenarios where I just gave up because of too may failures. > Why is it that American torpedoes mostly miss and Soviet torpedoes hardly > ever miss? And for that matter, how come most of my Tomahawks get shot down > against supposedly inferior SAMS, and most of their SS-N-19's get through > the Aegis network? This has annoyed me too. One time I counted 12 torpedos (m48's, Barracuda's, and other types) to destroy one Foxtrot. The same time, they got my Seawolf with one shot from a Sierra. I do have a problem with the AI algorithm they use for SAM defense. Frequently, the target of an SSM will not fire a SAM because a picket (which the SSM has already passed and there is no way a SAM will catch up to it) has missiles in the air. A better interpretation would be to not fire a SAM if the missile has passed you and allow the next ring of defense to fire. It does not take me long to analyze the course and guess which vessel is the target manually. The Aegis system should be able to handle that. > Finally, why did I only get to fire rounds from one of my turrets on the > _Iowa_? The only reasoning I can think off is if all shots have to be broad- > side? Is this true? On the few occasions that I have used the Iowa's guns, I did not have this problem. I had not really noticed a facing problem when firing any weapon. As a matter of fact, I am not sure the computer game takes facing into account. I have not seen any evidence of this so far. > Incidentally, I did play the scenario latter, and I got a much more > common result: The Soviet fleet disappeared about thirty seconds *before* > my missiles impacted! At least I know that was a bug! That would depend on what time increment level you had set. Sometimes it appears that the ships disappear before the missiles get there because of the way the screen updates are handled. -- Larry Cline lcline@agora.rain.com C_________ Industrial Graphics ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 91 16:57:48 MET DST From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) Subject: Sitting on the bottom of the bay Summary: (51) Re: On the Bottom Some time ago here there were a question about what advantages a sub lying on the bottom would get. I asked around alittle and this is what I got: First of all, not all subs are constructed to be able to lay on the bottom. The rudder can't protrude below the keel and the keel has to be reinforced. As Ted said, an X tail configuration is a good indicator that the sub might be made to lie on the bottom. Not all navies require their subs to be able to do this. A good rule of thumb would be that the more blue-water the navy, the less likely the subs are to have this capability, since most subs have a maximum operational depth of 300-400 meters. Also, conventional subs are likelier to have it than nuclear subs. The main advantage versus active detection is that the sonar has to have an good enough resolution to recognize a lump on the bottom. If the bottom is rocky it becomes even harder for the sonar - not only does it have to find a lump on the bottom, it also has to find out if the lump is a rock or a sub. This requires extremely good resolution and large amounts of signal processing power. The resolution of the sonar is directly dependent on it's wavelength. Short wavelengths (high frequencies) gives good resolution and long wavelengths (low frequencies) gives bad resolution. Unfortunately, High-frequency sonars have very short ranges, so the area scanned is reduced to a few nautic miles or even less. (There are also some very disturbing thermocline effects on rocky bottoms which also affect active sonar, but more about that later) As for passive sonar, lying on the bottom will first of all reduce the self noice of the sub. For keeping it's depth a sub depends on zero boyancy and rudders. It is practically impossible to achieve absolutely zero boyancy for a sub so if it has to keep a certain depth, it has to pump a small amount of water into the tanks, then pump it out, and so on in intervals. This creates noice. Normally, the sub uses it's diving planes to keep an exact depth, but to do that, it has to have at least some speed through the water, and that also creates noice (propellors and engine). But on the bottom, everything can be shut down. And if it is a conventional sub, it is on battery power, so there will be *no* powerplant noices. Nuclear subs can also reduce their noice by letting the reactor go on self-circulation. But the biggest advantage against passive sonar is on rocky bottoms. To understand this one have to remember that there isn't *one* theremocline, there are *many* (While the rest of the game 688 attack sub is of doubtful realism, like the 3D bottom views, the occurance of several thermoclines is true. This is the only game I've seen that represents this). A expance of water is in reality many layers of water of differing temerature and saltiness stacked on top of eachother. 'Harpoon' simplifies matters when it talks about only one layer. And to speak the truth there is often one thermocline who's effect overshadows the others especially in the open ocean. But in shallow water close to a coast those secondary thermoclines will have an effect. With rivers and other sources of fresh water close by we will find that the situation becomes chaotic. To this we add a rocky, mountainous bottom, and the result is that there will appear 'holes' - small 'valleys' in the seafloor that is closed off by 'lids' of thermoclines (and different saltiness). To discover a sub hiding in one of these holes, you have to use a dipping sonar that is lowered through the lid down into the same valley, and this makes the chances of detection very small. Further complicating the situation in many shallow areas are many ferrous wrecks and dumping sites of industrial waste (in steel drums) and in some cases even dumping sites for chemical shells, all of which will cause false alarms for MAD gear. As a summary: A shut-down sub, lying in a valley on a rocky bottom close to a coast with lots of rivers has every facet of the environment working for it. -bertil- -- "Some people almost never think. They just reshuffle their prejudices." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 91 17:13:47 MET DST From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) Subject: (52) Re: Shallow Water In CZ v6 msg 16, tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) writes: > Half-Channel Depth > > There is no thermocline and submarines may only operate at surface, > periscope, shallow or intermediate depths. I must object. People that do for a living what we only talk about have told me that there *are* thermoclines in the Baltic sea, several of them and real nasty ones, in fact. [In my own defense, I plead ignorance! I am not the author of these rules. I just relayed them from the SITREP article. -Ted] > Homing torpedoes are -20% Ph, unless listed in Annex F as > "shallow-water capable". > > Continental Shelf > > Homing torpedoes are -40% Ph, unless shallow-water capable, in which > case they are -10% Ph. One distinction about torpedoes that 'Harpoon' overlooks is that there are both active and passive homing torpedoes. Active torpedoes looking for a sub in an shallow rocky area are very likely to mistake a large outcropping for as sub, even if they are shallow water capable. Passive torpedoes don't have this disadvantage, and the target can't discern when they have been aquired, but they have to be closer to the target to begin looking for it, and they probably have a lowered chance of hitting a silent sub. And it is not recommendable to air-drop torpedoes in really shallow water. If they come down too fast, they have a tendency of smashing in to the bottom before they can stabilize their depth. Also see my comments on sitting on the bottom. -bertil- -- "Some people almost never think. They just reshuffle their prejudices." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 91 10:02:13 -0600 From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (53) Print Game Is GDW going to print a new edition of the print game? If so, when is it going to be out? Also, are there any plans to update the Ship/Sub Forms? Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Jul 91 13:53:27 UT From: dgil@ipsaint.ipsa.reuter.com (David Gillett) Subject: BattleSet #4, Duel Summary: (54) Re: BS4 & GIUK Duel Mark Lam (lam@moxart.cs.colostate.edu) reports that 360 tells him that the AH-64 Apache will not be included in the Indian Ocean battleset. I don't think that's surprising. But I wish he had also asked about the Cobra/Sea Cobra. I'm not sure about during Desert Shield/Storm, but I do know that during the Iran/Iraq War there were a number of instances of (Marine Corps?) Cobras operating from U.S. warships in the gulf, against e.g. drilling platforms and speedboats. I'd like the chance to try such a scenario, if possible.... He also reports some mysterious phenomena during a couple of playings of the "Duel" scenario, and a couple of questions. 1. (BTW, what type of torp do we have that's 12.76 inches?) I believe this is the diameter of a Mk 44/46 torpedo, as fired from the standard Mk 32 triple launcher. (Chant, "Naval Forces of the World", lists it as 12.75 inches.) 2. I don't know how either of these ships were sunk. If you didn't have a detection of them at impact, you wouldn't get an impact animation. You may have either (a) lost them between firing and impact, or (b) weapons that you fired with "bearing only" contacts may have acquired targets that you couldn't see. [Note: I've seen the computer, as the Russians, take out one of its own cruisers by firing on "bearing only" contacts....] 3. ... I can only use one turret, even though two bear. I believe that the forward turrets show up as a single mount, unless perhaps you use "ungroup similar weapons" on the weapons display. [BTW: I've never had to use my guns in this scenario since I learned a couple of tips. Use Seahawks for targetting; hold your Tomahawks until you're in Harpoon range; try to kill the Soviet subs before they can get a fix on you for the SSN-19s. The way the computer plays the Americans, the Oscar (with a little luck) can often sink them before they ever find the Russians....] 4. Has anyone else seen this rash of breakdowns? I haven't, but my impression is that a check of every unit is done periodically, say on the minute or 5-minute mark. So if several units were found to have broken down on the same check, they would appear simultaneous. 5. Why is it that American torpedoes mostly miss and Soviet torpedoes hardly ever miss? In this particular case, your torpedoes travelled underwater toward the Soviets. This meant that (a) he had plenty of time to detect them, and (b) plenty of time to change depth/speed/course to evade them. He may even have run outside their range before they arrived. His counter-volley, however, was probably with an SSN-16, similar to Subroc. So that by the time it entered the water and became visible to your sensors, it was practically on top of you. (Note that if you had him detected, a launch animation could provide an unrealistic warning....) Did you take evasive action? You don't say. 5. Why do my Tomahawks get shot down, and their SS-N-19's get through? Consider that the SS-N-19's are moving 3-4 times as fast as the Tomahawks. There are also things you can do to improve the odds of a hit. First, as mentioned above, hold the Tomahawks as long as you can. Second, I find that the computer's default allocation of shots, while it may be realistic, is sub-optimal. Its allowances for enemy defences seem to be inadequate, although it's likely to concentrate fire on what it regards as the most important opponents. But I also find that by splitting up each attacker's salvoes amongst multiple targets, I can often double or triple the number of incoming target groups that the defender has to deal with; the penalty to his defensive fire usually more than offsets the advantage this gives his point defences. Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 91 16:54:23 PDT From: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) Subject: (55) Re: Errata Update In CZ v6 msg 44, tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim) writes: |This is latest batch of errata that I have for the miniatures game. |The material here assumes you have the 90-91 Data Annex and have |applied all the previous updates appearing in CZ. Much of this comes |from SITREP 7 and 8. Is there a place where a consolidated errata (maybe all the erata that has been posted here) is available for FTP? Gary --- UUCP: ogicse!clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/253-9389 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, Wa ARPANet: crash!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com | Vancouver Apple Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 16 Jul 91 16:52:39 PDT From: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (Gary Snow) Subject: (56) Re: Harpoon BattleSet #4 In CZ v6 msg 43, lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) writes: |I asked Three-Sixty if the following platforms would be supported in |the Indian Ocean: | | F-15E Strike Eagle | B-52 Stratofortress | F-117A NightHawk | E-8 JSTARS | F/A-18C/D Hornet | AH-64A Apache | MiG-31 Foxhound | F-4G 'Wild Weasel' Phantom II | |I was told that, minus the Apache, JSTARS, and MiG-31, they would be |in there. I'm not surprised on most of those (though I'm not sure what the JSTARS is,a new EWACS?), but as far as I know the MiG-31 hasn't been exported to any foreign country, except Soviet Bloc countries, and is not (again as far as I know) present in the Mid-East. |Also new to Computer Harpoon will be a Kusnetsov-class carrier. Isn't that just the Tbilisi renamed? Gary --- UUCP: ogicse!clark!pro-freedom!gsnow | Pro-Freedom: 206/253-9389 ProLine: gsnow@pro-freedom | Vancouver, Wa ARPANet: crash!pro-freedom!gsnow@nosc.mil | Apple*Van InterNet: gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com | Vancouver Apple Users Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 91 14:22:54 EDT From: charbonn@sol.crd.ge.com (Michael R. Charbonneau) Subject: Problems with 360's Computer Game Summary: (57) Amiga Problems I am using the Amiga version of harpoon, on a Amiga 2000 with 3 megabytes of memory. The game is great (while it's working) however I am getting frustrated with the game continually crashing. It seems to happen frequently when there are many pieces moving around, in fact it has crashed 5 out of 5 times in the 6th scenerio in the GIUK battleset (defense of keflavik I think). Sometimes the game locks up, once the screen went dark and I had to reboot - I already talked to the tech people, they suggested raising the stack to 12000 (I raised it to 25000) and the game still went under. I think the people at 360 have a great potential product, but I think they need to work on the amiga version and release a debugged update. michael email to charbonneau@crd.ge.com PS. send suggestions or fixes if you know of them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 91 06:19:07 CDT From: caw@miroc.chi.il.us (Christopher A. Wichura) Subject: Amiga Harpoon update available Summary: (58) Amiga Update For those that did not see the post in comp.sys.amiga.games, there is finally a new update to the Amiga version of Harpoon. This version is supposed to be KickStart 2.0 compliant (the previous version was not, and would lock the system up tighter than a drum). I do not know what other changes have been made. I called Three-Sixty on 7/17 and asked for the upgrade. Basically, as long as you sent in your registration card, they seem willing to send the update out for free. If they complain, tell them you need it because you're running KickStart 2.0 (I got the impression from something the guy said that they were doing the upgrade for KS2.0 people). Once I get the upgrade and have had a chance to play with it a bit, I will submit another article to let people know what they've done to the game. -=> CAW Christopher A. Wichura Multitasking. Just DO it. caw@miroc.chi.il.us (my amiga) ...the Amiga way... u12401@uicvm.uic.edu (school account) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 91 15:00:09 MDT From: lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Mark Lam) Subject: (59) Soviet Submarine Names I posted this question to the sci.military newsgroup a while ago and didn't get many responses, and since it's relevant, I'll ask this group. Do the Soviets ever name their subs? I get tired of seeing "unit O1234, an Oscar-class submarine, is sinking!" If we can get the names of some of the subs, we could give it to Three-Sixty and get some real names for the poor SSGN's :-) Mark Lam lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 19 Jul 1991 15:14:42 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (60) Volume 6 Index Volume Number Messages Author - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 1 16 May 1991 (1) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (2) Computer Game Questions wcsswag@ccs.carleton.ca (3) Computer Game FTP Site kxb@math.ksu.edu (4) New Miniatures Rules robinro@ism.isc.com 2 22 May 1991 (5) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (6) Mac BattleSets stricher@masig3.ocean.fsu.edu (7) Mac News shaggy@cs.utexas.edu (8) Mac Availability eco861771@ecostat.aau.dk (9) South Atlantic War robinro@ism.isc.com (10) Silkworm Missile davisje@crdgw2.crd.ge.com (11) Pilot Experience tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 3 3 June 1991 (12) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (13) Silkworm SSM frank0@ibmpcug.co.uk (14) Mac News shaggy@cs.utexas.edu (15) SITREP #8 robinro@ism.isc.com (16) Shallow Water tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 4 26 June 1991 (17) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (18) On the Bottom sandia!ralph@unmvax.cs.unm.edu (19) Aircraft Acceleration tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (20) South Atlantic War robinro@ism.isc.com (21) Submarine Propulsors tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (22) Rocket Pod Damage robinro@ism.isc.com (23) Recent Naval Devlopments tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (24) Undocumented Features chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de 5 1 July 1991 (25) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (26) GIUK Gatekeeper Scenario chbrin5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de (27) Re: Aircraft Acceleration tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (28) Mac Cheat Keys csmsets@mvs.oac.ucla.edu (29) Re: South Atlantic War tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (30) GIUK Rapier, NACV, SITREP lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (31) Re: On the Bottom tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (32) Re: Submarine Propulsors gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (33) Re: Submarine Propulsors tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu 6 5 July 1991 (34) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (35) GEnie Harpoon robinro@ism.isc.com (36) Re: Rocket Pod Damage tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (37) Mac Editor Price gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (38) SAM Algorithm pjenny@cco.bbn.com (39) Scenario FTP Archive kxb@math.ksu.edu (40) 360 News lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (41) Mac Files gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com 7 15 July 1991 (42) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (43) Harpoon BattleSet #4 lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (44) Errata Update tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (45) GIUK: Duel Scenario lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (46) Harpoon/Air Superiority lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu 8 19 July 1991 (47) Editorial cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (48) Re: GIUK Gatekeeper guidry@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (49) New Computer Release ? fidder@druhi.att.com (50) Re: GIUK Duel lcline@agora.rain.com (51) Re: On the Bottom d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (52) Re: Shallow Water d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (53) Print Game lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (54) Re: BS4 & GIUK Duel dgil@ipsaint.ipsa.reuter.com (55) Re: Errata Update gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (56) Re: Harpoon BattleSet #4 gsnow@pro-freedom.cts.com (57) Amiga Problems charbonneau@crd.ge.com (58) Amiga Update caw@miroc.chi.il.us (59) Soviet Submarine Names lam@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (60) Volume 6 Index cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (61) CZ Guidelines cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri 19 Jul 1991 15:14:45 PDT From: cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu (CZ Administrator) Subject: (61) CZ Guidelines Guidelines for The Convergence Zone Last Update: 1 March 1991 Author: tek@penzance.cs.ucla.edu (Ted Kim - CZ Moderator) Welcome to The Convergence Zone! Goal "The Convergence Zone" (or just "CZ" for short) is an electronic mailing list for the discussion of the Harpoon naval wargame series and related topics. The Harpoon products include Harpoon, Captain's Edition Harpoon, Computer Harpoon, Harpoon SITREP, and various supplements for the print and computer versions. Naval topics are discussed in so far as they are related to the game or provide useful background. The goal of CZ is interesting discussions and material and just plain fun. Submissions Messages for submission to the mailing list should be sent to "cz@pram.cs.ucla.edu". CZ is published in digest form. All messages are subject to possible rejection or editing by the moderator. Rejection should be pretty rare and only occurs if the subject of a message is wholly inappropriate or if the message is offensive. (Please keep flames to a minimum!) Editing should be pretty rare also. Reasons for editing include (but are not necessarily limited to) extreme length, obvious errors and really bad formatting. Any editing will be noted. Please double check your submissions for errors and try to stay within 80 characters per line. Administration Administrative requests should be sent to "cz-request@pram.cs.ucla.edu". Once in a while, the moderator has to do real work, so please be patient. If several people on the same machine receive the CZ, please try to organize a local redistribution. When you signup, I will send you back issues from the current volume. Previous volumes are available from the archives. Archives After each volume is complete, it along with an index is placed on "sunbane.engrg.uwo.ca" (129.100.100.12) for access by anonymous FTP. Please be polite and don't FTP from 08:00 to 18:00 US Eastern time during a workday. The CZ archive volumes appear under the "pub/cz" directory in compressed format. The volumes are named v1.Z, v2.Z, etc. The index files are named i1.Z, i2.Z, etc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********** * CZ End * **********