"Learning Harpoon? Start with older editions?" Topic

Have had the Harpoon 4.1 rules setting around for years now, but have yet to dig into them deeply. For learning the game, should I just stick with 4.1, or might it be easier to pick up an earlier edition (say the GDW Captain's Edition or another) and start there before moving onto 4.1?

Were the earlier editions less complex?

Definitely want to learn the rules, but am on my own in terms of getting the game system down before running a game with others.

Thanks,

CW

The Captain's edition is a completely different game. As far as complexity goes, Harpoon has never been simple. My recommendation is to start with the most current version, and play really simple scenarios to begin with. Two Airplanes bombing a ground installation, then, maybe add a ground based radar and a SAM site. Etc.

I'd just go with the latest edition, which admittedly is quite complex, and then just use some of the rules, layering on more as you get comfortable with them.

Start off with small, simple scenarios too, which should help.

Perhaps even use older kit, as well, so less in the way of radar and missiles to concern oneself with.

Yes, start with the current rules and do a small scenario such as a Taiwanese missile boat against a Chinese frigate. Learn to fill out the ship forms and what all the sensors as well as weapons are, then try playing a few turns. Start both combatants at the radar horizon and learn how search radars operate. Proceed to launch weapons and defend against them with anti-missile defenses followed by damage/critical hits. This will give you a strong foundation to proceed on.

From there I would add on some aircraft and then save submarines for the very last. Sub and ASW operations ratchet up the complexity plus they take a long time to game out.

I'd suggest using the current rules and use the "jump start" booklet provided with the rules.

I concur with aegiscg47 about starting out with balsic surface actions, and avoid submarines until much later, or not at all. I once played a Russian Victor II vs a French destroyer once. Scenario looked simple but took hours. The new sonar rules in 4th edition are more realistic, but are much more labor intensive to use.

I had the same experience with it taking ages to do anything simple. If you want complex, use the computer version. For naval action in any playable timeframe, I'd use Shipwreck.

Timotheous, what's the change in v4 with the sonar rules? The old rules had clearly not been playtested or the maths/game logic thought through.

Thanks gents, been giving the jump start a read through, concepts are easy enough to understand, but once you start putting everything together….

Will do a test run in a few weeks (using the example aegis provided) and see how it goes.

Badgers, the rules the third edition (GDW) had fixed ranges for detection, with a base % chance for detection; modifiers like detecting ship speed, target speed, quieting techniques, etc added or subtracted from the percentage chance to detect.

In fourth edition, there is a base detection range, much shorter than before, at which there is a 50% chance of detection. At half this range, the chance to detect is 75%, and at 1.1 times the base range, the chance of detection drops to 25%. Sounds easy, but then factors like target speed, being on the other side of the thermocline, etc, modifies the detection range. So you are constantly adjusting the detection range as these factors change. Keep a calculator handy!

From there I would add on some aircraft and then save submarines for the very last. Sub and ASW operations ratchet up the complexity plus they take a long time to game out.

I'm still not convinced that you can do a good job of modeling sub v surface warfare in less than real time (long stalk, short engagement) with anything other than a computer game.

How fast is real time? 2-3 hours to set up for one weapons shot.

Sounds like they finally got detection realistic in Harpoon 4.