Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations ("The Harpoon that Never Was")

That looks really nice. Do you know how well documented the editor is?

-Tom

The scenario design chapter in the manual doesn’t go into much more detail than what Baloogan does in that video. Tips like “place the unit you want to teleport in on the other side of the planet” certainly aren’t in the manual.

SamS beat me to it.

For adding units, as we currently don’t have a true scripted “Add Unit” action, we usually follow the old TOAW trick of placing them in an unreachable area (often the Caspian Sea) and teleporting them to the desired area.

On Friday we delivered to the beta group a new build with some nifty additions to scenario editing. Heavy-duty scripters will definitely be pleased.

Dimitris, how hard would it be to add a simple “probability of inclusion” option to the editor? One in which, when building a TF, you can simply add a percentage chance of this unit being in the TF each time you play the scenario? Heck, I was able to do that in 5 minutes in Applesoft Basic in Grey Seas, Grey Skies 20 years ago! ;)

You can do this indirectly, by setting the probability that any of the group members will suddenly find itself teleported to the Caspian resort. If you want to be really cruel to the player you can set higher probability of this happening for the more capable units.

I’ll get right on the scenario. Meanwhile, here is:

Modern Naval Ops Review (Steam v1.05)

Command press & awards: http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=1917

That’s a pretty damning review. I did not watch all one hour plus of it, that would put me right back to sleep but I did get that your recurring theme is “oh my friggin gods what an awful horrible terrible UI! i’d rather do the home finances than try to wrestle my carrier air group into an effective strike package!”

That’s too bad. And is it really that bad? Or were you just being critical for the sake of? This piece of software is pretty unique in its niche, so some leeway should be given imo.

It’s not damning. It simply shows how the game works. There’s been lots of false claims as to what the game can and cannot do. This review serves to clarify claims. There have been many purchasers who found out how the game ran only after they purchased the game. Now, viewers can make their purchase decision with eyes wide open. There are no more excuses of, “I didn’t know any better.”

Every process Pro and Con was painfully documented so that potential users would know exactly what they purchase. No one has yet been able to point out any errors, although many have tried. There are six good and six bad points. If the game meets your expectations and performance standards, good. If it doesn’t, that is good, too. Everything is up front and clearly explained. If further clarification is required, simply ask for it. For example:

Expanded Dipping Sonar comparison

To me, the game is a horrendous chore instead of a pleasure.

As JMS (B5 et al) is fond of saying, “context is everything”.

First, read this for a bit of background: http://www.warfaresims.com/?p=1507

Then, take a look at these two UseNet threads from 2011 (2 full years before Command’s release):
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical/I06SCFEZvj4/H7fARnVwqL8J
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical/t6TsjhStAU4/jsZE63hmXjUJ

…where these two gents are confidently predicting Command’s failure and show they’ve already made up their mind about it.

Then, read Command’s press & awards page: http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=1917 , where the rest of the web-sphere (from gaming editors to bonafide mil-related people & organizations) unequivocally state their admiration and top marks for Command.

And finally, see what happened a few days ago when Herman posted the same video on Grogheads: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4065.msg294064#msg294064 . (If you read nothing else, definitely read this.)

Then decide for yourself.

Yet another egregious violation of the forum rules:

“* Don’t drag in your baggage from another thread. This can be a tough balancing act, because how we interact is often related to what we know about each other. But dragging down a discussion with an argument you’re hashing out elsewhere or that you had six months ago isn’t welcome. If you’re going to hold grudges, learn to have a polite discussion with someone you might dislike. See the previous rule.

While posting links to hatchet-jobs masqueraded as “video reviews” is A-OK?

I’d be interested to hear what the mods have to say on this. If this kind of attack is permitted while the game’s creator is not allowed to demonstrate the “reviewer’s” bias then obviously my time here is wasted.

Neither of you look very good right now.

Well, my sympathies lie with Dimitris in this but I agree that it reflects poorly on both of them (and the scene the game is for)

This sort of bickering is what doomed flight sims for a very long time. Instead of hyperboling about what a terrible chore the only game in its niche is, perhaps you could constructively find ways to improve it, perhaps thru mods or thru suggestions to its dev.

I for one think the closed database is a good thing. especially if there’s ever going to be any sort of multiplayer, but even to keep the game ‘sane’. If there’s one thing that can spark terrible raging controversies its the interpretations of modern weapon systems’ capabilities.

I’m not ever going to buy this game at $80 (or even $60), but it is sure nice to see somebody with such a hard-on for the game. I mean, signing up to a random gaming forum just to post a negative review of a game when the dev posts there… that sure does show a lot of dedication and concern over the welfare of the other denizens of that forum. Or some weird, freaky obsession.

[center]The 29th NEW Harpoon scenario of the year![/center]

This scenario is in direct response to a request from:

And is dedicated to Tom Chick, long-time friend of the wargame community and a card-carrying Harpoon player. Get well soon, Tom.

[center]The Second War Between the States


[/center]

The Wilderness did not go well. The Confederate forces managed, though with great difficulty, to entrap the Union army in a ring of fire which closed in on the troops in an image of destruction unheard of previously in the War. The battle had an incredible impact on the population of the North. When mothers and fathers realized their sons had died under the merciless flames set by Southern hands, they no longer desired to keep “people like that” in their beloved Union. The peace treaty was shortly to follow.

But, in the end, both the USA and the CSA had the same national history, and similar desires, goals, and concerns. By 1875, a defensive pact was established between the two nations. Technology was shared and developed, the War soon became forgotten. Even the abhorred slavery issue died off with the development of technologies which led the institution of slavery into retirement. Machines could complete the tasks slaves had done in shorter times and without food and housing.

The continent of North America boomed. World War I came and went, Russia turned communist, and World War II left the world in ruins – except for the USA and the CSA.

The shared technology system worked for both nations – until the USA discovered stealth technology. This, the northern nation decided, should not be shared. In the end, they thought, even the South might be a potential enemy. And, when the CSA learned of this violation of the treaty, the South did, indeed, become an enemy. Obviously, there were issues unresolved in the last War between them. Such issues would be resolved now.

Author: Herman Hum

The Second War Between the States
HDS II NACV\2nd_War.SCN

Over 511 scenarios in a single package!
Harpoon HUE users can get the:
Complete PlayersDB Harpoon HUE Library

Harpoon ANW users can get the:
Complete PlayersDB Harpoon ANW Library

Harpoon3.6.3 users can get the:
Complete PlayersDB Harpoon 3.6.3 Library

“Harpoon for Dummies” channel

PlayersDB for Harpoon on Facebook

Frequently Asked Questions

FilesOfScenShare


[/

I’m sure your wrists will be quite relieved to learn that.

Okay, seriously. What’s going on? Did the developers spurn you or something?

Is anyone going into an ultra-niche Harpoon-style game without understanding that the U/I may be obtuse?

Whoa, did I just walk into a SimHQ forum thread?

I don’t see the problem. The UI is obtuse and the review shows just how (unnecessarily) bad it is. Of course, if someone is willing to accept it, that’s fine. The point is they see and know it as part of any decision. If they choose to ignore the review, that is certainly fine, too. The game will be just as awkward with or without a review.