Article Type: Survey
Article Date: August 05, 2002
Files & Links: Click Here
* * *
Larry Bond started it all. In the early 1980’s, he developed a wildly popular modern naval board wargame called Harpoon. As such things tend to happen, the board wargame was ported over to the PC in 1988. However, the computer version of Harpoon was more than just a hex-based port. The designers at Three Sixty accomplished three things unusual for DOS-based games. They created a real time context scaleable from one-minute-to-one-minute to one-minute-to-thirty minutes, used windows to display different levels of action and devised a seamless transition for going from battle group to individual ship or aircraft level. Harpoon became a legitimate “instant classic,” spawning a number of battlesets.
However, technology and demands from naval enthusiasts marched on. In 1994, Harpoon II appeared. This game was complete re-work of the original. Three Sixty included much better graphics, a better interface and more detailed gameplay. Harpoon II, however, never took off like its predecessor. Some say that it was now too detailed. Conversely, others say that the changes in the world situation made the scenarios not so engrossing. The Evil Empire was dead and the various splinters of the former Soviet Navy were doing well if they could unmoor. Beating up Libya didn’t have the zing of taking on the Red Banner Fleet while the hypothetical scenarios revolving around a rejuvenated Russia seemed too contrived. The game was good but not great.
The craving for the Real Bear was still there. Alliance Interactive produced Harpoon Classic that combined all the battle sets and offered a Windows as well as a DOS version of the original Harpoon. Interactive Magic got into the act in 1996 with Harpoon ’97, another Windows conversion of the original plus 49 new scenarios, yielding a total of over 200 scenarios. The basic Harpoon system still enchanted gamers.
The graphics and interface of the old version, however, were becoming less satisfying and Harpoon II still didn’t fill the void of playability versus up-to-date detail. Jane’s Combat Simulation tried to fill this void in 1999 with Fleet Command. Rarely has there been a greater and more immediate disappointment. Jane’s earlier games were models of detail, accuracy and documentation. Fleet Command had a short forty-page pamphlet as a manual and skimmed over many details. Worse, many scenarios opened with incoming missiles already in the air. In short, Fleet Command was a RTS twitcher instead of an advance along the lines of a Harpoon-like simulation. To their credit, the developers gave the code quickly to naval game devotees who formed Naval Warfare Simulations.
Now the fate of modern naval combat simulations rests in the hands of modders until Harpoon 4 arrives (Harpoon III was a Mac version.) Three products have either appeared or will soon be out that revamp Harpoon, Harpoon II and Fleet Command. The rest of this series will be a description of these products. Any criticism will be slight as these are labors of love built on parameters not established by the authors. Anything would improve these already fine (or, at least, acceptable) products. Independent modders deserve our thanks and encouragement.
(The author wishes to acknowledge M. Evans Brooks’ excellent site, for refreshing his memory in the chronology above. Any serious gamer should bookmark this site.)
 |
| Harpoon 4 |
Scenarios for Harpoon ’97 have continued to be created by fans. An exact count could reach the 350 mark, if not more. However, the system has been accused of a NATO bias. “Red” units, especially Soviet/Russian craft, seem underrated to some and act “shy” as opposed to the all-conquering USN. Scenarios can be balanced, of course, by increasing or decreasing the number of units in any given Order of Battle. This method begs the question: Is Western technology all that superior?
A group of devoted, experienced and talented Harpooners have undertaken to explore this issue by updating Harpoon ’97 with Harpoon 2002. Still in beta, this product has two major changes: a “smarter”—and more vicious—AI and a new database. In addition, display windows now are similar to actual USN displays. To be sure, the graphics still have “look-down” sketches of vessels and the main action takes place on the eight-level tactical screen. The player uses the same point, click, drag and radio button interface to handle sensors, navigate, ready and launch aircraft, allocate weapons and order attacks. Nonetheless, these changes create a whole new atmosphere.
The AI uses its weaponry in a more cohesive manner instead of a piece-meal approach. Therefore, scenario OOBs do not have to be loaded in favor of the AI to be playable. Also changed in the .exe file is the tendency of the program to crawl when many units are active while a partial muzzle is placed on the Staff Assistant that kept popping up to repeat what he said five seconds earlier and was obvious anyway. With such features, Harpoon 2002 is much more enjoyable to play.
 |
Harpoon 97, at the same stage of Kola II, is a tad more sparse.  |
 |
| In the opening stages of Kola III, Harpoon 2002 automatically shows the unit as well as the other windows. |
The database changes, however, are what should fire the imagination of gamers. The modders have re-made the whole database into an MS Access-readable and modifiable format. Not only have new units been added but users with Access can easily tweak unit capabilities and keep the inventory evolving.
The litmus test is playing the new Kola III scenario on both Harpoon ’97 and the Harpoon 2002 beta. This scenario was written specifically to test NATO/Pact play balance. The scenario reflects a NATO counter attack along the Norwegian coast with a carrier force composed of the USS Eisenhower and USS Nimitz along with accompanying subs and surface craft. This force must destroy Soviet-occupied airbases while fending off a Red carrier forced based around the CV Admiral Kusnetsov. In Harpoon 97, the NATO force swamps the Soviet naval assets with comparative ease and then, using the superiority of the F-14s, deals leisurely with the bases. A victory is possible without using all assets and Soviet subs appear to sail with neon “Sink Me” signs.
Harpoon 2002 presents a very different picture, indeed. The Soviet airbases quickly send waves of hungry Backfires, Foxbats, Fencers and Foxhounds escorted by Flankers at the NATO force. The NATO player should consider putting most of one carrier’s F-14s on CAP while assigning the rest to escorting the now-imperative early strikes on some over the airfields. Red subs are now stealthy, launching torpedoes early but remaining undetected if NATO doesn’t send out patrols. The Kusnetsov group takes advantage of its role as a secondary target by distracting NATO from its primary mission. The NATO player now must work and sweat to survive, not to mention winning the scenario.
 |
| The Russian air elements swarm out toward the NATA taskforce in Harpoon 2002. Nothing like this happens in the older version. |
 |
| NATO defends. |
 |
| The result. |
 |
| NATO gears up for a counterstrike. |
 |
| The USS Ticonderoga is shown with all its details |
Harpoon 2002 appears to be a great advance in accuracy and game play. This game will be moderately priced and should be available soon. Monitor Dr. Who's Harpoon Page, Harpoon HQ and the HULL mailing list for news of its release.
Resources
Articles:
Official Sites:
Fan Sites:
