RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta)

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta)

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/16/2015 6:42:01 AM

npsergio

Posts: 185
Joined: 1/23/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Probably this is not a brand new game start. IF you load the game from turn one,
you should NOT see these sorts of displays. IF you are playing a game AND IF I have
changed aircraft data, several effects occur.

First of all, ALL AIR UNITS CONTINUE to display their PREVIOUS aircraft data.
This actually can be changed, by what I call a "double upgrade" - something that
is cost prohibitive in stock and was in RHS until we revised political points. But
now you can do so IF the air unit is allowed to upgrade at all AND IF the air unit
AND its HQ BOTH have enough supplies. Sometimes a change in command is required as well.
Upgrade to ANY OTHER type, then upgrade back, and the new data will be in the air unit.

Second, reinforcement air units will appear AS PREVIOUSLY DEFINED, not as newly defined.
The same solution as above can fix them.

Third, NEWLY created AIR UNITS will NEVER appear at all - they ONLY appear in a new game.
I can never, ever add an new air unit to an old game.

Fourth, in general I can not add a new aircraft type to an old game. They appear only
in a new game. HOWEVER, IF I replace an old aircraft type with a new one, THEN the new
type DOES appear in an old game. This is something I try to avoid as it has unpleasant
effects on air units if you change the type of plane they have entirely. But rarely I
use it - particularly where it won't have such effects. Old games WILL SHOW the new types,
but there is no production and no pool in the normal case.

All of that aside, NONE of it explains what you are seeing. I don't think we know precisely
how code works except to discover it by testing. It is common for a programmer to get effects
not intended in all fields of programming - the computer does what you said - not what you meant
to say - and what you write today interacts with every other bit of code in sometimes unpredictable
ways. The only "solution" I have is to start a new game: this issue is NOT present in a fresh start.

Hi, thanks for your answers... I have some questions about them:

- What do you mean for "a brand new game start"? We installed the mod, and started this campaign some weeks ago. Probably we have only played 7 to 10 turns.
- Probably I'll upgrade planes through the game, but definitely I won�t do that only to correct this display issue... As you said, it's costly. If the weapons are there, and the only problem is that they are not displayed, I can bear with it.
- Newly created air units have appeared. During these turns I discovered a small searching/recon unit with a very long range that I didn�t remember in a stock game. And I have also 2 or 3 air transport units with Junkers! (and some other planes, land units and ships)
- Some other units do show their weapon load. At the moment I only detected this issue with some air units.

So, I'll continue playing before asking my opponent to re-start the game. I'll take a look to the units that didn�t show their weapons. If it's only a display issue, and these units work correctly, it's not a big issue for me...

Thanks four your hard work, and your answers!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 601

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/16/2015 1:05:16 PM

Amadeo

Posts: 3
Joined: 9/11/2013
Status: offline

Hello

I am the Japanese player who plays against Npsergio. Our game began in late July. It is a clean install with the latest game patch and the 7.23 version of the mod. We played the scene 105 and have not edited anything about the game.

Do you think something could be solved by upgrading to the latest version of the mod?

Thanks four your hard work, and your answers!

(in reply to npsergio)

Post #: 602

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.292 (Acft Eratta, Final... - 8/18/2015 5:23:39 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

Level I Update Link 2.51
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg-8ZqLaG9QbsVHAolg

This update is slightly different from plan. Mifune has been unable to work,
so I have not been able to get his "completely cleaned up" aircraft filmstrips.
Notwithstanding that, I was able to clean up a bit byself - fixing one side in
particular which somehow got a 'tear' in the image (during the resize process?),
and adding a top which I had made but somehow got "lost" in the process
of exchanging files back and forth between two people. I went ahead and
completed the air art review for both sides so I can turn it over completely:
if/when he feels better, we will get even better images than we have now.
But that can be a micro-update at any time.

I didn't add much. I looked hard at the He-116, and ultimately rejected it -
after learning this "airliner" with spectacular range only carried four passengers.
It was a mailplane - never mind the intent of the owner of Mansyu to "establish
an airline to Europe" - and the planes were also destroyed before the PTO
erupted into war. That also caused me to eliminate the MNKKK Long Range
Unit from strictly historical scenarios. In honor of his effort (which involved
yet another peculiar mailplane - the prototype for the Mitsubishi long range
bombers) - and also in honor of serious interest in the FW-200 Condor in
Japan - I put it in the Japan Enhanced scenarios with Condors instead. It
is only a 3 plane unit and it is tied to its base (although the aircraft can
be "impressed" - dumped into pools - by replacement or disbandment).
What I did add was the Pe-8 - only to JES scenarios 99 & 105 - the only modern
strategic bomber built by the USSR. Not many were built - only one group operated
them and two of its 3 squadrons only had it as a secondary type. Worse, it
was plagued by failed engines and political demands for more range using them:
the most successful version (built in 1943 and 1944) did not use diesels at all
had more range than the "long range diesel" versions, and was forced back out
of production again by yet another failed attempt to get more range with the same
diesels (directed by Stalin, of course). In JES scenarios, the "stronger" Japan
causes Uncle Joe to settle for the one practical version, and to divert a small
number to the Far East from the end of 1943. This version has the best range,
the best load, and a new nose with a 20 mm gun (adding to 20 mm in the turret
and tail). But it will only feed one 10 plane squadron - assuming any significant
attrition - and needs two and a half months to fill that (at a replacement rate of 4).
I separated the GAW (Guinea Airways - that is Aussie) Ju-52 from the Eurasia (Chinese) Ju-52 - in terms of art. They already had their own slots, but now they both have the "right" colors. I added Chinese markings to the Eurasia top - the
side already had them. I may have similarly "split" other Allied air art - detail memory is unclear if all of it was last time or this time? My main focus was on new French types, and insuring the air art documentation was perfect - it was not so there is revised air art eratta as well as a couple of new art slot definitions. And I integrated
the art fully with air units - even adding the Vichy Air Force for Madagascar (a future requirement that only matters if we get the mini map to work). The original RHS Madagascar mini map, rescaled for AE, is here attached - although apart from making it work in AE it also needs to be converted to the new map systems under development (one board game like, one geo map like).

At the end of the day, I have produced the "final" air art for RHS/AE. In particular
the filmstrips and aircraft data files, and the associated cross reference documentation describing them, is completed. No software is ever truly final,
of course. But I have no plan to add more types, or more art. There is room to do so
if needed. But we have gone down to the level of defining aircraft when only tiny numbers are in PTO (if significant in some sense - e.g. the French flying boats
in Tahiti, the Portugese float fighters at Macao - this latter only in Full RHS odd numbered scenarios). We will update the filmstrips if Mifune produces cleaner versions, or if anyone anywhere makes 'better' images for anything we use - but
that is not a 'change' in the sense we have been producing - which is adding new
types.

This process did, unexpectedly, lead me to discover an aircraft data problem.
It amounts to nearly universal eratta - much of it already corrected here. It appears that there were three different versions of the (WITP era) RHS aircraft durability formula used for various planes: one by Mifune before I began to work on AE at all,
one by me (until yesterday), and one by me (since last night) because I learned I had misread the (ancient, worn) notes describing the formula (mistaking a badly written and faded + for a * or multiply symbol). The net effect is that one of the great benefits of the RHS system (which involved about two years of work with forum members to evolve) was partially lost. RHS deliberately redefined durability on a lower scale and also deliberately set out to use a formal, published, defined formula so it would be consistent and not be dependent on "seat of the pants estimates" (which are inconsistent even if done by the same person). A lower durability mitigates a code problem: attrition of all types is too low, but lower durability increases it. Consistent data also helps the (remarkably outstanding) code for air combat to produce better results. The impact of recalculation is to reduce durability - typically by 2 points for small aircraft - but that amounts to 25% in the case of a lightweight Zero, Oscar or Claude. [This applies to lightweights on both sides of course.] The number of points is greater (up to around 33%), but it is less important as any large number tends to insure survival against most attacks. Overall, this data change will hurt the Japanese somewhat more, as they have more smaller planes. But the intent it to use an absolutely consistent, case by case application. That means many thousands of recalculations. [I must look up structure type and empty equipped weight for every type - the number of engines and pilots is already in the database - and recalculate. Then I must enter that data for seven different scenarios - about 1700 types times 7 = 11,900 entries! It expect it to take at least a day or so on top of what I did between 8 pm and 4 am last night! I claim to be an Olympic contender for data entry.] So there will be at least one more aircraft file eratta update - to insure consistency. I already did the important early war Japanese fighters and all the types added lately - for which data was still at hand - especially the French planes, and many of the small biplanes on both sides, and all variations of the Hudson - of which there are many. Fortunately, aircraft data updates into ongoing games. Unfortunately, it does not update into air units until the air units are upgraded: so the effect of this better data will tend to be felt over time in existing games. But I do update air units to include it so new games will always have current data in them for any new game starts.

Once this data revision completes - probably the next update in a day or two -
we will be at 7.300. I will start Test Ten Charlie. And I will move on to map development. Although the aircraft art revision process took a few weeks instead of a few days, I am very pleased with the result. We have the largest collection of aircraft for AE of any mod, and most of the data has been reviewed for consistency already.
The impacts of what I learned have resulted in a better order of battle and a better
plane count/production foundation/date of appearance or date of upgrade data set.
The air art looks much better than it once did, with virtually no cases remaining where the art is in the 'wrong colors' - never mind is the wrong type of plane entirely. "Nearest art" is only a secondary standard now - almost unused.

None of this "completion" and "final" wording implies we won't address any errors reported by anyone. Or that we won't use any art submitted. The rule remains "if it is wrong, we will fix it; if it is better than what we have, we will use it." I spoke to Mifune on this last week: in spite of his often outrageous numbers of hours spend on individual images, he does NOT mind replacing it with something better. He wants a better product - period. So do I. So micro-updates will from time to time revise the art and the data: it just isn't the plan to work on those files per se.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 10/23/2016 6:17:35 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 603

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/18/2015 5:30:45 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Buntke

Hello

I am the Japanese player who plays against Npsergio. Our game began in late July. It is a clean install with the latest game patch and the 7.23 version of the mod. We played the scene 105 and have not edited anything about the game.

Do you think something could be solved by upgrading to the latest version of the mod?

Thanks four your hard work, and your answers!

Good question!

Yes. AE code folds in a good deal of benefits to updating to the latest version of mod data.
I also make some effort to minimize the technical problems for games already in progress. But there
are some. In this case, you will see new airplane types in the game - in the database - but with
very rare exceptions not be able to get any of them. [The exception is if I redefine an existing
type so it is gone, replaced by a new name and data - something I almost never do - but did do with
respect to some trainers which have been phased out.]

The main thing you will gain is revised air art filmstrips and pointers in the data files so you can
see the new art. This is very much better than what it once was. As well, aircraft data becomes better -
if it was flawed in any way - although generally not instantly - but slowly - as air units upgrade. Some
fields, however, update instantly - e.g. maneuverability or durability.

The main things you will not see is any added locations, air units or ground units. These updates mainly do
not involved new locations or ground units, but did add a few air units - all relatively minor anyway.

(in reply to Amadeo)

Post #: 604

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/18/2015 5:39:21 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

A new game start is a game started on Dec 7, 1941 using the latest file update.

If anyone is considering a new game, I recommend using 7.300 - which will be out in
a day or two - and which will include "final" aircraft data eratta. the 7.272 update
issued today includes the "final" aircraft art and the "final" total number of types
of aircraft planned. The air art will update if/when we get better - but I am done
with the review of it. Having learned how to build air art filmstrips, I built new
ones (about 300 times) - searching both the internet and my (strategic studies) library
for art or photographs. I went through every slot (aircraft type) and every bitmap
top to bottom about four times each.

quote:

ORIGINAL: npsergio

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Probably this is not a brand new game start. IF you load the game from turn one,
you should NOT see these sorts of displays. IF you are playing a game AND IF I have
changed aircraft data, several effects occur.

First of all, ALL AIR UNITS CONTINUE to display their PREVIOUS aircraft data.
This actually can be changed, by what I call a "double upgrade" - something that
is cost prohibitive in stock and was in RHS until we revised political points. But
now you can do so IF the air unit is allowed to upgrade at all AND IF the air unit
AND its HQ BOTH have enough supplies. Sometimes a change in command is required as well.
Upgrade to ANY OTHER type, then upgrade back, and the new data will be in the air unit.

Second, reinforcement air units will appear AS PREVIOUSLY DEFINED, not as newly defined.
The same solution as above can fix them.

Third, NEWLY created AIR UNITS will NEVER appear at all - they ONLY appear in a new game.
I can never, ever add an new air unit to an old game.

Fourth, in general I can not add a new aircraft type to an old game. They appear only
in a new game. HOWEVER, IF I replace an old aircraft type with a new one, THEN the new
type DOES appear in an old game. This is something I try to avoid as it has unpleasant
effects on air units if you change the type of plane they have entirely. But rarely I
use it - particularly where it won't have such effects. Old games WILL SHOW the new types,
but there is no production and no pool in the normal case.

All of that aside, NONE of it explains what you are seeing. I don't think we know precisely
how code works except to discover it by testing. It is common for a programmer to get effects
not intended in all fields of programming - the computer does what you said - not what you meant
to say - and what you write today interacts with every other bit of code in sometimes unpredictable
ways. The only "solution" I have is to start a new game: this issue is NOT present in a fresh start.

Hi, thanks for your answers... I have some questions about them:

- What do you mean for "a brand new game start"? We installed the mod, and started this campaign some weeks ago. Probably we have only played 7 to 10 turns.
- Probably I'll upgrade planes through the game, but definitely I won�t do that only to correct this display issue... As you said, it's costly. If the weapons are there, and the only problem is that they are not displayed, I can bear with it.
- Newly created air units have appeared. During these turns I discovered a small searching/recon unit with a very long range that I didn�t remember in a stock game. And I have also 2 or 3 air transport units with Junkers! (and some other planes, land units and ships)
- Some other units do show their weapon load. At the moment I only detected this issue with some air units.

So, I'll continue playing before asking my opponent to re-start the game. I'll take a look to the units that didn�t show their weapons. If it's only a display issue, and these units work correctly, it's not a big issue for me...

Thanks four your hard work, and your answers!

(in reply to npsergio)

Post #: 605

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/18/2015 8:44:52 PM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Great to see the air art nearing its completion. I think the next step should be the complete review of the RHS economy, especially the supply generation.

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 606

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/20/2015 5:36:16 PM

Amadeo

Posts: 3
Joined: 9/11/2013
Status: offline

Thanks for the answer and for his work on the mod.

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 607

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.293 (Acft Eratta) - 8/20/2015 8:51:27 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

7.32 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

Although I have not managed to do calculation and data entry for all 11,900
records in the seven RHS scenarios (five issued, two in construction), I did
get the vast majority done. This work is related to recalculating the durability
values. Along the way, a small amount of eratta, usually related to weapons,
was also found and corrected. For example, some planes did not yet have
the RHS "ground support packages" added. Some planes had "front" instead
of "internal" or "external" for bombs and similar weapons: that does not work.
Apparently code will not "drop" a "bomb" with a facing. A test this morning
shows that the durability data is instantly available in all air units even in
old games. There is so much done it is well worth issuing the update - which
will in particular have two effects:

1) Air combat should produce better results relative to planes data;

2) Attrition (general and AA) will generally be higher (that is, closer to
reality).

There is still more to do and it will take a couple of days to get every type
looked up (for structure and empty equipped weight) and then calculated.

It also appears Mifune may be able to generate at least one alpha which isn't
good (because I made it - the Stintson Model A) - and some other filmstrip cleanup.
If so, that will also appear in the next update. If I complete the durability work,
it will be update 7.300

Durability is a function of the square root of the empty equipped weight of an aircraft.
[Divide empty equipped weight in pounds by 2000 to get tons. Take the square root of that. Multiply times the structure value plus armor value. Add to that the sum of the number of pilots and the number of engines. Multiply the total by the constant which at this time is two.]

Structure value is 0.5 for non-metal, 0.75 for composite (ANY combination of
metal and non-metal, or 1.00 for all metal.

Armor value = the armor field for the type - either 0, 1 or rarely 2.

This works for gliders - which have 0 pilots.

This works for blimps assuming that lift = weight (which must be the case in order
to fly). Blimps are classified as non-metal regardless of details (even if there is a metal skin - rare - to reflect the problems with damage to the bag).

< Message edited by el cid again -- 9/3/2015 7:17:41 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 608

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/20/2015 9:15:46 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Great to see the air art nearing its completion. I think the next step should be the complete review of the RHS economy, especially the supply generation.

Except for polish (which Mifune is working on - replacing existing art with better art in a technical sense)
the air art is done.

Economics is always under evaluation. This is somewhat on hold because of data collection problems:

the current test still generating data is Ten Alpha. Ten Bravo was abandoned by its Japanese player WITHHOUT
disclosing the password - so it not only does not generate any new data - it is also impossible to learn the lessons
it contained which might have been gleaned had it been honorably ended. It might even have been continued.
A major issue was the economy - and I suspect the player was afraid he was going to lose the arguments if I got
to see the data for Japan.

Regardless, BOTH tests are NOT current for economics anyway: there have been a few added locations and a few
changes to industry; there also have been changes to the fundamentals of production for important industries:
Manpower Centers, Resource Centers, LI Centers and HI Centers. So until we get a new test running we won't be
able to show if the new values work as intended, or to what degree they do not?

There is also a need to change starting stockpiles for some locations. This process is underway so the next test
can start with better values. This is based on two different considerations: (a) when something specific is
learned about a locations stocks and (b) based on the current production rate for industry, and special considerations
(e.g. is the location an export center connected by road or railroad to other locations which use it to export?),
there is a calculation of the stocks of each type. This process never entirely ends - as we constantly learn
about locations or get feedback about them. But it is getting better all the time.

Players of previous editions of RHS will find it is less easy to have supplies or resources where needed. This
is a function of two entirely different things:

1) Production as such (and movement of things automatically by road, railroad or adjacent ports);

2) Consumption of units. This is actually increasing over time because units pick up more "squads"
for various reasons. One of those reasons is simply to increase consumption in proportion to the unit type:
a draft unit "eats" more than a motorized unit does (never mind it has less firepower). Similarly,
a pack unit "eats" even more than a draft unit does (never mind it has less firepower). So far as I am
aware, RHS is the first AE form to model this phenomena. Our mechanism is to add "vehicles" - trucks, carts
with horses or mules, or strings of pack animals or even bearers. These "squads" are poorly armed (typically
one rifle per 3 men) - but 'eat' just like other squads do. They also require "support" - and the added
support squads also 'eat" just like other squads do.

Somewhat related to consumption of units is consumption of aircraft support units when the planes they fly
use drop tanks. As we add drop tanks, this will sometimes increase consumption (if long range missions are
flown) at a given point.

It takes a while to generate statistically significant data about supply and consumption (which here I use
to include resources, oil, fuel and supply). So "tweeking" is an ongoing process more or less always going on
to one degree or another.

The RHS approach is a micro-economic one: get the data right for every point. Analysis, however, occurs on
an "economic province" basis. An economic province is all the places connected to each other by roads, railroads,
or adjacent ports such that they "feed" each other. Totals on the map are much less meaningful than totals in
a given area are. Players generally may move things from one province to another by ship (unless there are no
ports). But is the right amount of stuff in every area? To the degree the answer is "no" we constantly try to
make it better.

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 609

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/22/2015 12:16:55 AM

Vipersp

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline

Greetings Cid,

A quick doubt:
New patch applied and running scen 103 as japan;
I noticed only at this scenario the Akagi 4-Shotai is using the K3M3-L pine, which is a transport plane?? why it doesn't have Kates RC as in other scens??
Or maybe just my end again is facing problems when updating directly to game folder??

Cheers
Viper

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 610

RE: RHS Thread: COMPREHENSIVE Update 7.294 (Aircraft R... - 8/23/2015 6:40:47 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

7.32 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

This is a comprehensive update. That is, instead of just being a narrow update
of one or a few scenario files, it includes more than a few scenario files and it
includes some art: in this case, new Allied aircraft filmstrips.

This is essentially an integration of aircraft data files, air group files, leader files, and pilot files with the aircraft filmstrips. This because I learned how to better integrate the files, and to help the program do a better job of simulating air operations. Because of this, some of the work went back to existing records to make them work better. In particular, new records I have added but which could have been done in a way more in sync with other files.

There are, however, two new "air forces" - the Malaya Volunteer Air Force and the Burma Volunteer Air Force. These are small auxiliary organizations which I discovered in the database of Scenario 99, representing Mifune's research. However, I modified them with current information - a remarkable amount of new material on old subjects is being web published. The latter is essentially a single squadron, but one what was very effective: it successfully evacuated to India and returned to Burma with the Allied invasion, upgraded to better aircraft. The former was effective during the campaign and most of its pilots escaped to join the RAF,
but some were killed and some elected to stay behind. It probably suffered the first casualty of the war - a pilot shot down before the attack on Pearl Harbor! To add them meant adding a new aircraft type - a variant of the very popular Hawker Hart.
I almost didn't do it - there is a nominal rule against "trainers" for the Allies - but we have similar planes in the Philippines (from stock) - so clearly front line aircraft used for operations count.

There is a tiny bit of replacement art. I use a new, color photo for the Boeing 314 Clipper - instead of the one in black and white we were using - mainly because this one is flying and most of the art is shown in flying form. I also found a lovely photo of the very rare transport version of the PBY - more on that below.

There are reclassified aircraft. The PBY case is from the art itself: the photograph shows wheels - the transport PBY was an Amphibian! Every article on it focuses on the record it set and still holds - the longest airline flights in terms of duration in history. But it also could land on a runway, which isn't obvious except from looking at the aircraft itself. This type is intended to fly at night when near enemy locations (e.g. Sumatra) - so it is essentially black (or maybe very dark blue). It is used by QANTAS and also by USN. It is the longest range transport in the game, I think: even more than the weird "super transports" like the converted B-36 - although it carries very little.

Another case is the PW 22 Falcon in Dutch service. I learned it is a variant of the PW 21 Demon fighter! It is a trainer for fighter pilots, it has more maneuverability than many types at the start of the game, and better durability than many as well. It isn't a great fighter, but it is mis-classified as a light bomber IMHO. That caused me to review another trainer in service - the variants of the AT-6 - used as a recon aircraft in AE (since stock). I decided to reclassify it as a "recon fighter." The same thing happened to the Boomerang recon aircraft - the Boomerang is itself a fighter - adding cameras does not make it less so - so now it is a recon fighter as well.

Much progress was made recalculating durability values as well. [I am now quite tired of this process - it involves a great deal of data entry.] This is also the main reason for issuing the update - there are so many improved cases - and some eratta discovered in the process - that it is worthwhile updating all games to include these values. As well, the redefined "recon fighters" and "fighters" described above get normal and extended range based on their new classifications - not on their former types.

Kwangchowwan - a peculiar polity - was reworked - as was its French "political section" (whose main job is to prevent it changing sides automatically - it must be invaded). This is French territory - and although nominally Vichy - it was allowed to pretend it was Free French by the ROC regime. It was also tolerated for a long time by Japan - and it was a famous point to catch - or debark - an airplane. So it picked up a tiny amount of aviation support. Apparently it was also an alternate "water base" for the Clipper as well. As is my custom, when I rework anything about a location - I rework the start of game stocks.

I don't often say so, but my work always includes further integration of scenario 99 and scenario 106 - both of which are incomplete. Scenario 106 requires I define things as they were near the start of 1945 (just before the battle of Iwo Jima) - getting rid of units lost - putting units in the right location at the right strength - and defining
locations with 1945 rather than 1941 base and economic infrastructures as well as with 1945 stocks vice those of 1941. Scenario 99 is generally similar to 105 in terms of stocks, but has numbers of problems due to its radically different order of battle. So if I work on something it uses, I insure its peculiar requirements are met. This job is nearing completion - and will probably be done by Christmas. I estimate 106 -
the RHS Downfall Scenario - and the only RHS mini-scenario (in time - it is full map) -
needs another year. However, it may be quite interesting with all the late war aircraft, missiles, ship types, etc. At least for the Allies - the historical situation by 1945 is quite hopeless for Japan - even by ordinary PTO standards.

There will be one more update to complete the aircraft durability values - at which point development will shift focus to map development.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 9/3/2015 7:17:20 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 611

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/23/2015 6:45:36 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

Will check and report.

FOLLOW UP: You are correct. You may upgrade the unit to use the recon Kate (but only 2 are in the pool).
This is part of a "reform" being implemented in "strictly historical" scenarios. It should be the case in
ALL such scenarios (101-104 at this time) - and will be now I am aware of it. These detachments with
recon Kates are for Japan Enhanced Scenarios - 105 now and 99 eventually. However, instead of deleting them,
I left the two detachments in the game for two reasons:

a) The K3M3 is a historical COD (Carrier Onboard Delivery) aircraft and

b) Players may either put the recon Kate into production, or wait for the Recon Val, and create recon detachments
for these ships using them. [There is a 2 plane unit on Soryu - which really did have recon planes at Midway]

I think we need to create the units at start - dating is apparently ignored if an air group is assigned to a ship.
LATER carriers were intended to have dedicated recon elements. Japan built numbers of specialized recon aircraft
for carrier use - and would have built more had it not lost its carriers. It seems somewhat wrong to say
the KB cannot have such detachments (if it survives). So this is a compromise - two ships may have them
eventually. Land one or both detachments if you don't want them. Or take the two Kate recon planes and upgrade
to them for one detachment - and build more such planes - if you do want them.

IF you want to start the game with both detachments, you must play scenario 105 (at least after the next update -
right now 101,102 and 104 still have them!)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vipersp

Greetings Cid,

A quick doubt:
New patch applied and running scen 103 as japan;
I noticed only at this scenario the Akagi 4-Shotai is using the K3M3-L pine, which is a transport plane?? why it doesn't have Kates RC as in other scens??
Or maybe just my end again is facing problems when updating directly to game folder??

Cheers
Viper

< Message edited by el cid again -- 8/23/2015 8:05:34 PM >

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 612

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/24/2015 6:09:01 AM

Vipersp

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline

Thanks for the clarification Cid!
In fact I updated for the Kate but it shows an 8 days delay to finish it..too late to be at hand around PH;
But since Soryu have them at hand I can wait for sure;
Yes, I really believe that the combined fleet should have dedicated rec aircrafts on board of its carries;
By the way if u still need any Beta tests for japan I will be glad to help;

Cheers

Viper

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 613

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/24/2015 3:21:09 PM

Vipersp

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline

Cid,

After new patch I noticed that both KI84III and KI117 have the side art from the Zero and the A6M5K zero depicts the later version of the KI51 Sonia; scen 103 for ref

< Message edited by Vipersp -- 8/25/2015 10:31:34 PM >

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 614

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/25/2015 4:53:17 PM

Adolf Galland

Posts: 43
Joined: 12/30/2012
Status: offline

Hallo cid

- Ca Kurama class need picture and Upgrade path
- The modern CLAA cruiser in scn. 99
have a tonngae from over 11.000 tons too much for this light ships... poor range, light armor, light AA main battery 100 mm. i think 5000 - 6000 tons is ok...

- CL Furutaka and Aoba class conversion in ClAA have no Heavy AA guns, they change 14 cm naval gun in a 15 cm naval gun that is all... and they have 25 mm in (5 mount) ?

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 615

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/27/2015 4:41:57 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

Japan led the world with recon aircraft development during WW2. Which says a lot because
there was serious development in Germany, the USA and Britain. [Possibly the best recon plane
in the world was the ultimate Mosquito development.] But Japan was way ahead and stayed ahead
in most respects for land recon planes and got ahead in carrier recon planes. Yet in late 1941
it had SUSPENDED the recon carrier plane program - the recon Kate was NOT put into production -
and it was not until 1942 when problems using the D4Y for combat missions led to its use in
recon. Ultimately - dedicated recon carrier types were developed (C6 series) - and had there
been carriers - it would have mattered.

But the irony is that in late 1941 Japan has NO dedicated carrier recon plane - other than the
not used prototype Kate type. I let you put it into production in "strictly historical" scenarios
- but it IS in production in "Japan enhanced" scenarios because I agree - it is a good idea.
The US has a number of early carrier recon planes - mainly fighters - and so do the Brit - but
these do not come with dedicated recon detachments until later in the war. So they do not
operate from carriers early on. The US doctrine is use carrier bombers for search. Japan
believed in NON carrier seaplane search. Both sides eventually created dedicated carrier recon/search
detachments.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vipersp

Thanks for the clarification Cid!
In fact I updated for the Kate but it shows an 8 days delay to finish it..too late to be at hand around PH;
But since Soryu have them at hand I can wait for sure;
Yes, I really believe that the combined fleet should have dedicated rec aircrafts on board of its carries;
By the way if u still need any Beta tests for japan I will be glad to help;

Cheers

Viper

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 616

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/27/2015 4:47:25 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

Scenario 99 has some problems and is not yet playable. It is the next scenario I will release - but I must
go through and correct records with problems. It is issued for comments - as feedback is one way I learn
where the records need to be fixed - so thank you.

Part of the problem is that 99 is OLDER than the rest of AE/RHS is - but it uses the class files
common to all. When a 99 class needs to be different, I have to add it to the standard class file
package. Mostly this is done - but not completely. Also - sometimes the ships are not updated
- but the class is - I have resync the ship file with the class file. Another issue is the device
file - 99 now uses RHS standard devices - but used to use its own standard. Integrating the scenario
means I must identify and repoint at the correct devices. It is tedious - but 99 has never been
issued - and has some interesting ideas (from the Alt Wars site and from Mifune) - and so I will
be integrating its files. This is next - apart from map developments. Air art is now done.

Part of the review process is to review ship size. However, note that 99 uses "standard hulls" -
and all of these are real hulls. It is a more consistent application of concepts really used -
a lot more standardization as policy. That means we do not pick numbers out of the sky. We use
actual hulls - and calculate the effects of changes in the weapons on the hull.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Adolf Galland

Hallo cid

- Ca Kurama class need picture and Upgrade path
- The modern CLAA cruiser in scn. 99
have a tonngae from over 11.000 tons too much for this light ships... poor range, light armor, light AA main battery 100 mm. i think 5000 - 6000 tons is ok...

- CL Furutaka and Aoba class conversion in ClAA have no Heavy AA guns, they change 14 cm naval gun in a 15 cm naval gun that is all... and they have 25 mm in (5 mount) ?

< Message edited by el cid again -- 8/27/2015 5:49:47 PM >

(in reply to Adolf Galland)

Post #: 617

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/27/2015 4:54:46 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vipersp

Cid,

After new patch I noticed that both KI84III and KI117 have the side art from the Zero and the A6M5K zero depicts the later version of the KI51 Sonia; scen 103 for ref

Confirm the Ki-117 issue. Will fold into the "final" air update which issues this morning. Have to find the Ki-84 III.
Confirm all issues reported - Good eye. See next.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 8/27/2015 7:05:34 PM >

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 618

RE: RHS Thread: COMPREHENSIVE Update 7.30 (Aircraft FI... - 8/27/2015 7:33:43 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

7.32 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

This update completes the addition of new art and the review and integration
of aircraft data files with air group files, location files, pilot files, leader files
and device files. Also we have a greatly revised and nearly eratta free set of
air art documentation files. [These are not so much for players as for the
people who work on aircraft art. There is too much not to be organized.]
The process, of necessity, involved correcting of a certain amount of eratta
as well.

Apart from integrating existing records, research was done to confirm details of what is in the records. Sometimes this led to new ways to model the aircraft. A few types were reclassified. For example, the OS2U-2 was redefined from a recon plane to a level bomber. This is the land-plane version of the floatplane used on most wartime US cruisers and battleships, and both versions can drop bombs or depth charges. Classification as a recon plane prevented that. This type also has a special game function - the float and land versions cross upgrade - so a player may elect to change a unit from the bomber line to the recon line of upgrades - by converting to an OS2U version - then converting to the other kind of OS2U - and then using the alternate upgrade path. This was actually done - and the land planes were present at Oahu on the 7th of December, 1941. Another case is the JAAF Ki-71 Edna. Never mind it is an upgraded Ki-51, it has a different primary function: it is a "tactical command recon plane" which happens to have a bombing capability. The Ki-51 itself was a tactical recon plane - but its primary function was tactical air support. I classified the Ki-71 as a RCDB (recon dive bomber). What that means is it retains its normal bomb load, but loses its extended range bomb load - it wasn't much anyway - in favor of more range for recon missions.

There is some new air art in the filmstrips. I found a photograph of a Ki-49 transport variant - cleaned it up - and present it as a side. From it I learned that the transport was unarmed, and from that I made different assumptions about load (there is no need for the bomber ammo load for example, nor is there space used for defensive weapons). Another photograph is of a peculiar PBY transport - it still holds the record for duration of flight in commercial airline service - and in particular operated the "flight of the two sunrises" between Perth and Columbo. [Unfortunately, map distortion prevents that route. But you get all the range!] This photograph shows the type was amphibious - which isn't in any of the written materials - which focus mainly on its great range - and dark color scheme (to prevent detection near enemy islands, Sumatra in particular). So the plane is reclassified as amphibious. A few light planes able to take off and land almost anywhere also were classified as amphibious, float capable, etc. In addition, I made some new art. The B7 carrier "torpedo bombers" also are dive bombers. I offer them in both torpedo bomber and dive bomber versions - permitting players to control the primary weapon as well as the flight/flak profile. But it always seemed wrong to show a torpedo in art for a plane not using a torpedo - but rather bombs (it carried two internally - although the torpedo was carried externally). This use of different versions also permits correct range (with external or with internal loads - drag from external weapons reduces range). I also cleaned up a few minor items in the filmstrips - stray groups of pixels large enough I dared to try to deal with them. I found better options in the library of images. And both feedback and my own work found cases where we were not pointing at the correct art - but we could display it by repointing at the better art. There were a couple of cases where newly added art "stepped on" art we were using for another purpose: for a while we "lost" the E11 night recon flying boat (similar to Walrus, it is shipborne in spite of being a flying boat). I returned the art - with a slightly improved side. [This is a special case - a photograph of a model on something like blue cloth which has 'ripples' that seem to be waves - modified by removal of the base holding the model up and by adding insignia which was missing. The top is actually a Walrus top with Japanese insignia - and it looks very good.] We also have changed the Ki-17 for the Ki-9 - I got mixed up - which is easy to do (the Ki-9 actually can take two different engines and serve in primary or in intermediate trainer roles; it also looks like a Ki-17). [These aircraft are missing from simplified RHS - i.e. even numbered - scenarios. They serve in training units which also do not exist in simplified RHS,
and they could serve as emergency search or recon planes.] We also added a variant of the Moth for use by the newly added Malaya Volunteer Air Force and by the Burma Volunteer Air Force. The former earned great praise from Lord Mountbattan and the latter retreated into India, upgraded to the Wapati and returned to Burma when the allies invaded. It turned out to be used by some other obscure units - notably RAAF - so this is classified as a Commonwealth aircraft.]

Particular attention was paid to upgrade paths and to production issues. Also to providing leaders for air units. This update in particular completes the integration of the French air forces (which are on both sides) - and in full RHS scenarios (i.e. those with odd numbers) the Portugese air detachments (land and sea). That is a lot easier to say than to do - there are a host of technical considerations. We also no longer "share art" - the "nearest art" standard is almost entirely gone - exchanged for correct art. But there are more aircraft slots than air art bitmaps, so some sharing is necessary.

Many of the changes are relatively minor tweeks rather than total reworks. Thus there is a good deal more improved art than there is brand new art. The same applies to aircraft data and air group data: there is a more sophisticated use of data to better simulate the capabilities of a type in its particular service at a particular time. There is also a great deal more consistency between types than ever before - tens of thousands of recalculations were made to insure consistent data - often on top of looking up the base values (e.g. the empty equipped weight of the aircraft is a base value used to determine its durability, modified by things like number of engines, number of pilots, and the protection scheme, if any.) Ways were found to make gliders and blimps work with the standard formulas. Preliminary testing indicates superior relative combat outcomes, and higher operational attrition rates (which was a goal - they were too low by more than an order of magnitude).

Development focus now shifts to the map system (and to related matters - pwhex, pwlink and pwzone files in particular). I will also complete the conversion of Scenario 99 to standard RHS format so it can be played. Scenario 106 is always being worked on - but it requires a great deal more and it at least a year from being usable for more than 1945 test bed purposes.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 9/3/2015 7:16:56 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 619

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 8/30/2015 4:18:55 AM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

7.32 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

Prior to starting a long term test, I check notes and look for things that could
be cleaned up better. While engaged in this process, Mifune sent me a partially
cleaned up Allied aircraft side file. This represents a good deal of work over weeks
of time. Most of it is technical. But he also did some complete reworks: he didn't like he Hawk III art (which is used by both sides) - so this was reworked. For the Axis,
at my request, he also did a "real" E11 night recon plane. He took my modified photograph of a model and made "real" art out of it. For the Allies, also at my request because the art I found was garish, he redid the US P-66.

To this art from Mifune I added a little myself. I created a version of Zero trainer art without a large centerline bomb (For the A6M2-K). I also created new tops for the Fairchild 24 on both sides. It was not previously an Allied aircraft, but now is - as reported below.

A good deal of my rework concerned Zeros. I noticed we had proper Zero night fighter art (with upward firing guns) as well as proper Zero trainer art (with an extended canopy over a second seat for the instructor). But were not always pointing at the right art. So the A6M2-K, the A6M5-K, and two A6M night fighter versions, as well as the A6M4 (in scenarios that have it) have all got new pointers so we use the art we have properly - or in one case the art I added.

The other "major" thing I did was rework the RTAF Fairchild 24, and its associated air unit. For RTAF this aircraft now exists in two forms - reflecting how it was used - so it can fly recon/search/light bomber missions - or transport missions. This means the operational training detachment can actually change which kind of aircraft upgrade path it may use? This is pure chrome - the unit is tiny - and this aircraft is also tiny - as indeed are many Thai military assets. I also added this newly defined transport version to RAAF. While these really were pressed into service during WW2, the real reason I did it was to properly model the No 1 Line of Communications Unit - which I also added to simplified RHS scenarios which previously did not have it. Again, this is pure chrome - this "air unit" has a single aircraft - and is not going to matter in terms of game outcomes. But it is also unique - ending up with a C-87 (modified B-24) heavy transport - the only one in Australia. Purists may now have that plane if they want it - and have the right unit of the right size to "upgrade" it with. Basically, this was used as a VIP transport most of the time.

The "minor" art thing I did was to cleanup a few things - cleaning up "dirt" which creeps into the art using the programs which manipulate it. Blemishes on aircraft,
or in the backgrounds, etc. This isn't significant compared with what Mifune did - putting planes on proper cloud backgrounds - getting rid of some of the worst of the backgrounds I had collected in a wide range of source art. But every little bit helps present clearer and more accurate art.

There is also a significant rework of the device file with respect to (mainly Allied) land unit squads. The Allies depend on the device file for most replacements. So I used data from previous tests to measure when there are to many, or when there are too few squads of a given type? This is a process requiring estimates. From time to time, it is important to see how close these were - so we can make the values better in game terms.

There is probably some location file rework.

There is some aircraft data eratta rework. In particular, Scenario 106 (which is not yet playable) was reworked to get rid of numbers of aircraft no longer used by 1945,
or for which there was no realistic chance of development in a strictly historical campaign (even if there might have been in a campaign starting in 1941). Some air units were also deleted (as they are no longer in the war by 1945). Work on scenarios 99 and 106 is ongoing - so they can be completed sometime in our lifetime!
Scenario 99 is a completely different form of Japan Enhanced Scenario - one in which Japan did not sign the London Naval Treaty and engaged in planned construction of naval units since 1931 - using standardized hulls and engines (actual ones) - rationalizing the work on the Alt Wars site by integrating it with the shipyards and engine factories in Japan (which I have data about). It is set in 1941 so is somewhat similar to Scenario 105, and it will be completed relatively "soon" - maybe about the time we have our new maps. Scenario 106 is a 1945 full map Downfall Scenario - only seven months long - which starts with the battle for Iwo Jima and ends at the end of Monsoon 1945. It needs total rework to get units in the right place, in the right form, for 1945 - or deleted (as they didn't exist by then). It is not unusual for much of the work in an update to be on these scenarios - even though they do not result in something useful for playing games. These scenarios are issued to use as test beds and to generate comments.

This micro-update is related to test Ten Charlie - which needs to done to validate the many change to locations and units since Ten Alpha began. This test will be open and published. Anyone interested in playing either side let me know. It will begin in two or three weeks (as the Japanese must set up their economy).

< Message edited by el cid again -- 9/3/2015 7:16:41 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 620

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 8/31/2015 4:50:10 AM

Vipersp

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline

Hi Cid,

A quick question, in all tests I performed setting PORT attack at Manila at dec 7th, Historical First turn OFF, Dec 7th surprise ON, NOT a single bomber ever flew the attack mission..I tried everything at hand but only when setting to attack Manila airfield the bombers hit the mark;
Any clue about such behavior? Scen 103 for reference;

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 621

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 8/31/2015 5:10:04 AM

Yaab

Posts: 4552
Joined: 11/8/2011
From: Poland
Status: offline

Did you try adding Zeroes on escort? They have to use drop tanks to reach Manila. Also, check leaders Air skill, both in bomber units and their respective HQs. And thirdly, see if escorts and bombers are assigned to the same air HQs. I have had similar problems with the Manila strike in DaBabesLite.

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 622

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 8/31/2015 12:57:12 PM

Vipersp

Posts: 144
Joined: 12/6/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yaab

Did you try adding Zeroes on escort? They have to use drop tanks to reach Manila. Also, check leaders Air skill, both in bomber units and their respective HQs. And thirdly, see if escorts and bombers are assigned to the same air HQs. I have had similar problems with the Manila strike in DaBabesLite.

Hi Yaab,

I tried ALL less the HQ's chain for fighters and bombers..even zeros at naval attack straffed the port but no bomber ever..the strange thing is if I just switch to airfield attack the bombers fly the mission without problem even without check the HQ's

(in reply to Yaab)

Post #: 623

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 8/31/2015 8:19:36 PM

npsergio

Posts: 185
Joined: 1/23/2010
Status: offline

Hi Cid,

I'm playing scen105. Is this Japanese submarine class correct?

This submarine loads 53cm Type 95 torpedoes (device 1808):

As you can seen, it has a dud rate of 99.

I wonder whether it is right or not...

Is this as designed?

Thanks in advance.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to npsergio)

Post #: 624

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.32 (locations) - 9/3/2015 6:11:30 AM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

I set out to review locations as such prior to starting the next test - which will
be called 11A vice 10C because enough has changed to warrant a new series.

This process is necessary in order to reduce inventories of (mainly) supplies and resources to match the current production rates. These are 33% lower for HI and LI Centers than they were at the start of test series 10 - which we quickly determined was set too high. Tests 10A and B indicate - after resetting - that production (mainly Japanese production is the issue - as it needs industry to function fully) is adequate at the new levels. But most locations continue to have stocks amounting to 15 days of production - when 10 is somewhat more realistic. [Both are about two weeks, and both are reasonable assumptions, but I wanted to get more of them in line with current production at 10 days].

As always, I found some eratta. And unexpectedly I found new information - in particular on the site of a order of battle scholar - who constantly updates with more detail. In particular, I found corrected data re various NEI locations defenses - so I began to rework these. Along the way, I got to East Timor, and wondered about the situation with its (new, fixed wing) airfield - but no kind of air support in the entire territory! I found some diplomatic materials on the subject which caused me to rework things a bit. The Portugese garrison was reworked slightly - it is a shockingly tiny thing - because there was a ground support element to support a (new) Dutch air service - out of Dutch Timor - which also needed to have added a air transport unit (at least in Full RHS scenarios).

Similarly, I wondered about the base force at Hollandia, New Guinea. Capital of the territory, it has an airfield - but there isn't any KNIL (air force) or MLD unit there. Allegedly the KNILM (the NEI state airline) ended service at a point in Western New Guinea. It didn't make sense. In the book on the MLD (The Dutch Naval Air Force Against Japan) I found a section on the KNILM - which was inducted into the MLD just before the war in the Pacific started. Wholesale, aircraft, aircrew, ground crew, bases. That permitted me to rework the entire KNILM - which is substantially done here. I am still working on some minor details - not everyone is worth doing - and we have few location slots or aircraft slots available for truly minor things anyway. Re Hollandia, I learned that it was serviced by flying boats or by land planes on a case specific basis - not on a regular schedule - operating out of Babo - which was the end of scheduled service. It was the airline that had aircraft support based at Hollandia - and (in spite of controversy) I was correct to include it in the base force there. Part of this investigation involved a Sikorski S.43 flying boat. I added it because I learned it mattered elsewhere - and was actually somewhat important just after Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. A newly renamed Hawiian Airlines (former the Inter Island Airways) had its S-43s pressed into ASW patrol - operated by its aircrew - and then they were pressed to operate the first USAAF air cargo service (again with aircrew). So the S-43 got in - with the tiny bit of chrome that Reeve Air Aleutian - operating but one plane piloted by Reeve personally - gets in the Full RHS scenarios - a big deal for Alaskan aviation history (even if few "outsiders" know about him or his unique airline - which serviced the Aleutians until the Cold War ended).

Part of this process also involved "pruning" minor air units - airline elements in particular - from Simplified RHS scenarios (even numbered ones). To reduce player management - which is a goal for simplified - as well as to aid AI (in 102 - the only case designed for AI play). Another aspect was radical pruning of (future) scenario 106 (included for comments) - of obsolete types. 106 - set in 1945 - has many new types - and many other types are either no longer in service or not important enough to put into operations by then. To offset the many new types in use - I got rid of large numbers of older types.

In China I discovered "the Mother Road." As presented here, it begins at the end of the Northern Silk Road (Baoji, Hex 82/39) and extends to Shanghai. This route is almost all primary road (half a hex is secondary) by 1941. [Technically the Mother Road INCLUDES the Northern Silk Road - but that is already marked on the map and is of interest in its own right.] In the process I discovered something I forgot - major controlled cities NOT in Japan have LESS manpower than their population warrants.
[See the Urban Hex List for details of what the manpower was before Japan captured the cities] This list was redone to correct a bit of eratta.

Another thing I added was a flight of Fokker XII biplane airliners. They are tri-motors, and look enough like the Stintson art to use it. Now we have four different airlines - in the US, India, Australia and NEI - using this rather nice art. None of them matter, the plane isn't in production, and it is essentially chrome - and it is now not present in Simplified scenarios. The "aircraft" in Dutch Timor are also biplane airliners - which seems almost an inflation of the term - using the Comonwealth Rapide found in a few other places (and again, not in Simplified scenarios).

Reworking the Dutch defenses I learned that the mountain guns are 70 mm - not 76 mm as often reported. So the device file got the device renamed. I learned where Ho Chi Minh is - the "unit" is in the game already - so he was added as a leader. And a few pilot/leader combinations were added/modified for minor Allied units.

Most of the work was on the location file - on locations per se or on land units also in that file. I need to do a bit more of this - re NEI defenses and location stockpiles - so there will be one more minor update at least before the start of test 11. Also - this is part of the process of reworking the map - locations need to be checked as part of the process of updating the pwhexe.dat file. Most near term updates will feature pwhexe updates.

Mifune and I are working on extended map concepts. It may be we will be able to offer a "real" extended map - where units of both sides function in the extended area - in a very limited area. Also we may be able to add some off map locations.

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 625

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 9/3/2015 6:14:56 AM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

Yep - found only in Scenario 105 and the future Scenario 99 (Japan Enhanced Scenarios),
this class is presenting a design concept not implemented in history. It was felt that
the longer range torpedo (with more punch) might be useful in some situations - but not
many could be carried. The class chosen is probably the most practical of Japanese attack
boats - a medium sized vessel with good maneuverability and less cost and construction
time than the bigger fleet boats.

(in reply to npsergio)

Post #: 626

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 9/3/2015 6:16:16 AM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vipersp

Hi Cid,

A quick question, in all tests I performed setting PORT attack at Manila at dec 7th, Historical First turn OFF, Dec 7th surprise ON, NOT a single bomber ever flew the attack mission..I tried everything at hand but only when setting to attack Manila airfield the bombers hit the mark;
Any clue about such behavior? Scen 103 for reference;

This is not generally the case in tests. Attacks on Manila are SOP - although in the event they didn't happen on the first
day of the war.

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 627

RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta) - 9/3/2015 2:07:32 PM

npsergio

Posts: 185
Joined: 1/23/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!23975&authkey=!AIGkDEZJOsrONWk&ithint=file%2cmsi

Yep - found only in Scenario 105 and the future Scenario 99 (Japan Enhanced Scenarios),
this class is presenting a design concept not implemented in history. It was felt that
the longer range torpedo (with more punch) might be useful in some situations - but not
many could be carried. The class chosen is probably the most practical of Japanese attack
boats - a medium sized vessel with good maneuverability and less cost and construction
time than the bigger fleet boats.

Ok. But, it carries 100 torpedoes? And the dud rate is correct?

Thanks in advance.

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 628

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 9/7/2015 6:48:59 AM

Sayarf22

Posts: 13
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vipersp

Hi Cid,

A quick question, in all tests I performed setting PORT attack at Manila at dec 7th, Historical First turn OFF, Dec 7th surprise ON, NOT a single bomber ever flew the attack mission..I tried everything at hand but only when setting to attack Manila airfield the bombers hit the mark;
Any clue about such behavior? Scen 103 for reference;

i met the same issue.
Those Betties from taiwan (both Takao and taichu? - i'n not sure the base name) do not attack manila port, not in 7th dec, not in 8th, 9th and 10th. Not only manila but also hong kong. Thay seems to be unable to perform any port strike missions at all. This also applies to nells based at takao. And Betties from saigon - do attack Singapore port if ordered.
scen 105

< Message edited by Sayarf22 -- 9/7/2015 8:26:04 AM >

(in reply to Vipersp)

Post #: 629

RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.30 (Eratta: air and de... - 9/7/2015 6:52:00 AM

Sayarf22

Posts: 13
Joined: 6/14/2015
Status: offline

and Betties from saigon - do attack Singapore port if ordered.

(in reply to Sayarf22)

Post #: 630

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: RHS Thread: Critical Update 7.271 (eratta)