Not knowing much of naval strategy I've decided to try some Harpoon as of late. I find it pretty fun. But I also see the new COMMAND sim out. I realize this has been somewhat controversial. However, I am not intending to startup anything negative. But the price point certainly concerns me for what I'm getting. I've watched a couple of Baloogan's COMMAND episodes. He's pretty detailed. I've also watched a couple of the tutorials from the folks at Warfaresims. It gives a very good indication of the game/sim. But it isn't the same as playing it.

However, I don't see much of a fundamental difference between COMMAND and HARPOON. Now Relief layers and the expanded database look cool. But I am not seeing anything all that "different" from how HARPOON is played that would make it a sure purchase for me.

I did like the Windows interface style. Being legally blind the Windows interface seems easier to read to me. But other than the visual background and relief layer I am unsure of the differences between the sims. I guess there is more under the hood that is different. Its probably just my lack of experience with such things. No I've not actually played COMMAND. But it doesn't have a demo. So I have to rely on the written word and videos.

I don't know what controversy you think exists. I deal only with the facts. Some fundamental differences between the two are:

1. H3 has multiple maps to help you track action at different places without the constant need to zoom-out/re-position/zoom-in cycle
2. H3 has Multi-player
3. The formation editor.
   
4. Air groups in H3 are actually at the same point on the map. Air "groups" in MNO can be scattered across a large area.
5. MNO allows you to control individual sensors on your units instead of "turning on all radar/sonar" in H3
6. MNO has many map features that clutter the screen and cannot be turned off (i.e. the Big Black Box of Death). Nearly everything can be turned off in 3
7. H3 has a database editor. MNO does not.
8. MNO has a physics package to prevent things like firing missiles 'over the shoulder' at someone behind you or ships/planes "turning on a dime"
9. MNO has mobile land units. H3 does not.
10. MNO often requires many more clicks to accomplish the same function in H3. i.e. Instead of just landing an air group in MNO, you may need to select each and every plane and order it to land.
11. MNO has colour-coded messages along with a more varied assortment of message pop-up windows than H3
12. MNO has right-click mouse button to issue orders. (This is both a blessing and curse when you try to centre the map with the right+click button.) ;-)

There are certainly some features such as map overlays that exist in MNO but not in H3, but I've never really cared about cosmetic stuff immaterial to game play. The short of it is, I find MNO a real chore to play instead of a pleasure. I wish I fought the AI more than I fought the UI in this game.

There is no MNO demo and I doubt that there ever will be. Otherwise, anyone who gets a chance to try it might arrive at the same conclusion. If a demo trial is of vital importance to you, I can set up my laptop for remote access and you can try it to your heart's content. You can also check out a complete AAR with the game.

Or you could read through this thread about the patching nightmare of Harpoon ANW:

http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95217

and compare that mess to the Matrix thread about CMANO:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3254618

Note that the developers on the CMANO team update and reply daily and are listening to their paying customers, something you'll not get from Harpoon and it's development team.

Also, in case there's confusion in the posted video, it's not as cluttered as one makes you believe. For some reason, the poster doesn't like to merge range symbols under map settings. I have disabled none of my weapons or sensor rings, only merged them.

Saint, whether you like it or not, you will indeed have opened a controversial mess that you are seeking to avoid. I would recommend just reading through the various threads already posted in the AAR section. Read both version 1.0 and the updated 1.01 in order to get a better rounded picture. One of them has a negative slant, the other swings back to the other side of the pendulum. It would be far better to just ask mods to delete the thread and make your owned informed decision. There are compromises no matter which title you choose. However, the fact that CMANO's development team is actively listening to their customers means it will continue to evolve and improve as it's own standalone product. CMANO's not Harpoon and Harpoon isn't CMANO. Both have similarities and both have their own loyal fan bases.

Also note that Sunburn aka Dimitris posts on here regularly and is most helpful in answering your questions regarding CMANO. There's also quite a few players on here that will also listen and try to answer where possible but admittedly, many stay away because of the volatility of the subject.

herman's review version 1.0:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3843524/Review_Command_Modern_Air_Nava#Post3843524

Erich's review version 1.01:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3848884/Command_Modern_Air_Naval_Opera#Post3848884

Here is some stuff Ballogan's been working on:

His experimenting with multiplayer and it seems to be running pretty well:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3464981

His video's in lieu of a demo:

Command Videos: http://youtube.com/baloogan

Of late, he's been pretty active on the weekends with streaming live video for those interested. they are also archived on his site:

Site: http://baloogancampaign.com

Thanx for the responses gents. I'll keep reading and will no longer respond to this topic.

Also, "Command" supporters are more anxious to speak about the qualities of the game.

One key thing to keep in mind is development. Harpoon development for PC has been abandoned. There is a group still doing database stuff, but no one will be making changes to code. Even if someone wanted to, I suspect Larry Bond will hold the license pretty tight this time. There is a guy tracking all the bugs in H3 and I think its up over 200. Those will not be fixed.

Command is only two months old and appears to be on a fast track for development. There a few bugs, but at a baseline, it functions very similar to H3. It is more detailed in some ways, but the main thing is the more modern interface capabilities. It does not allow complete database editing, but does have some very cool tools to get around that.

btw, I don't know what the issue is with some people claiming Command is too cluttered. I can make a Command screen look just like an H3 screen. I think it is someone who hasn't learned the Command system yet.

I know I said I wouldn't reply to this topic anymore. I am thankful for some very informative replies though. Thanx again gents. Your information and opinions are valued since you seem to be experts in this area. I may take a closer look at COMMAND as well. Me birthday is coming up.

I BLOODY WISH THERE WAS SOMEWHERE TO GO AND DISCUSS THESE GAMES WITHOUT GETTING INTO A SLANGING MATCH. GROW UP. AAAAAAGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

The Matrix site seems the most productive.

SimHQ was a perfectly civil site for discussion before the new arrival. Just remember, at SimHQ, no one is required to bow five times daily to anyone before expressing their opinion.

I think the term might not be "grow up". : ) The politest people on these forums are the younger generation; some of us know our internet reputation will play an important part of our real life in the decades to come.

Matrix is a good forum for discussing the game, Wargamer is good too, subsim is slow but good. The liveliest discussion of Command I've seen has been occurring at Grogheads http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4065.960

I also run a site at http://baloogancampaign.com please also email me at baloogan@baloogan.com if would like to ask questions, or discuss anything.

Any real discussion will have its' up and downs, "Real boats rock" ; )

The big reason for all the theater is that we are watching a revolution in slow motion. Of course this generates some very passive-aggressive feelings. Its the dawn of a new day; forget the nightmares and rub the sleep from your eyes. Breakfast with us, feast upon Command. Time to play naval warfare simulations!

Check out these Google Earth files and videos I've created from a turn based mutliplayer plugin for Command:

http://baloogancampaign.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/BalooganKushanB456.db_.North-Force.kmz (see if you can spot where Kushan was able to sink one of my diesel subs)
(This video was created right before the turn where Kushan sunk my sub)




http://baloogancampaign.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/ArmyVet_1v1.db_.South-Force.kmz


The purpose of the Google Earth files is so you can see your units and contacts on your opponent's turn.



Also, Herman, you are permanently banned from my multiplayer plugin for Command, plus any future plugin. Stick with what you know: H3 multiplayer and Arctic Circle. I forgive you and god bless. Goodbye.


Cheers,
Baloogan

What typical childishness to be banned from something I never cared to join in the first place.

The original PBEM for Harpoon idea was born in 1996 and there does not seem to be a single recorded instance of anyone actually playing it. Automating the process will make little difference.
http://www.harpoonpages.com/ftp/util/h2hhrule.txt

The very concept is an utter failure from the start. It reminds me of that Bugs Bunny cartoon when he tries to share a bowl of soup with Christopher Columbus. It is easily seen how silly the whole notion is at the 3min 40sec mark.

http://www.ulozto.net/live/xE2USHX/bugs-bunny-hare-we-go-1951-avi



It failed in 1996 and it is doubtful to have much more success in 2013 when real MP games like NWAC, Fleet Command, Global Conflict Blue 2, and Harpoon are readily available.

Thanks for the link. Heh, I was 9 years old when that was posted.

I wonder if I could find the guy who posted that, Corey Rogers. I'd love to compare notes.


I wonder who the first line of the email was addressed to ....




I wonder why he made this house rule...

Never would have guessed that wasn't your current age from the way you issued your pre-emptive ban.


Probably the entire Harpoon II community. Notice how everyone was immediately able to recognize an abject failure of the concept from the start. A turd is a turd no matter how much it is polished (or automated).

Just wanted to start off our relationship on the right note. And to get you to post.

Let me understand this one: to you the "right note" is to ban someone for something he did in an activity that has not yet begun??

Its not like you guys have a monopoly on trolling. I don't like Herman's attitude.


In any case we are straying from the subject of the thread.

Differences between Command and Harpoon include:
- Command is in active development. Commercial Harpoon has ended.
- Command allows custom overlays
- Command comes with a database of 'pre-built' airbases, sam sites, electronic warfare sites, naval bases. Players are submitting prebuilt carrier strike groups and additional sites. There is a tool for importing placemarks from Google Earth to Command.
- Command now has a mod that reads out the game's log to you with configurable sound effects.
- Harpoon doesn't have MIRVs. Command does. ... I like MIRVs


Harpoon has a special place in my heart; but shes 24 years old. Time to look to the future.

We are about 2 months after release at this point. The first patch has been released. I've felt ecstatic about Command so far, as most of you can tell.