|
el cid again -> Human Opponents Wanted for RHS (7/23/2006 1:33:26 PM)
|
RHS has reached the point that continued testing using only AI vs AI isn't going to reveal very much. In order to examine the sorts of things that will only come out if people try things, I need to see some longer term games in which things AI won't attempt are tried.
RHS is an experimental series of scenarios designed to address several issues:
a) The RHS map allows ferry navigation between islands and other points where this was significant;
b) The RHS map allows river navigation on the Yangtze, the Pearl River (near Canton), the Ganges and the Chao Praya.
c) The RHS map restricts rail traffic on the Bengal and Assam Railroad - also the Whitehorse and Yukon RR - and the ALCAN highway is not a road - but a pioneer road.
d) The RHS map comes in three flavors - including a CHS like map - a satellite imagery based map - and a soft toned satellite imagery map. The RHS map is a lot rougher - particularly in Siberia, Manchuria and China - because the existing maps were too easy to cross - compared to reality.
e) RHS has reworked the aircraft model. Many new types of planes are introduced, and many older planes have different performance - often more range for Allied bombers for example. It has implemented the Matrix designed (but never used) drop tank devices for many planes. It has introduced air to air and air to ground rockets, a 75mm gun for bombers, Magnetic Anomoly Detectors, and other aircraft devices. And it has a "pseudo" aircraft - the hopefully functional K class blimps - which are (technically, under the hood) actually sub-chasers. [They can be said to "fly very low"!] Aircraft durability is reduced, and aircraft weapon lethality is reduced, with important effects on air combat, anti-aircraft combat and operational attrition. The Indian Air Force and the Soviet Pacific Ocean Fleet Air Flotilla were added. The Soviet Air Force also gains a medium bomber force. RHS bombs are not deceptive:
a 250 kg bomb is now bigger than a 500 pound bomb - not smaller as in CHS and stock. And many Japanese planes carry 50 kg bombs - because that was the Army standard. Aircraft weapon ranges are no longer greatly exaggerated. Planes do not go to more than 100% more altitude than service ceiling. Instead, they are rated for an "operational ceiling" - a system giving advantage to high altitude equipment on a plane - but in no case allows routine operations at marginal performance high altitude. You get 80%, 90% or 95% of service ceiling depending on the equipment - but never the erratic system in stock and CHS which sometimes gives you much less than ceiling, sometimes more than twice as much, and other things in between - often on purpose.
f) RHS has reworked many important ships. It has added entire navies, including (for the Axis) that of Thailand and (for the Allies) that of the USSR. Never mind that Soviet ships cannot refuel - in RHS they can.
To gain slots for many missing ships, RHS killed minor vessels, particularly those that didn't work (like rocket landing craft) or those that were exaggerated beyond all reason (minor fishing boats treated like proper minesweepers or sub chasers). Some RHS scenarios are experimenting with a new system of day and night ship ratings intended to show how doctrine and training evolved over the war. [Thus US ships in Dec 1941 are poor at night - but from 1943 US ships are very effective at night.] RHS ships have removed armor from ships that didn't have any, corrected ranges, and generally defined devices to a consistant standard.
g) RHS has attempted to make the economic model functional. As a by product of this, the old situation of "AKs to burn" is gone - you need to move resources, oil, supplies and fuel - and you always want more ships to move them. Secret supply at Chunking is gone - so the place might fall.
h) RHS has explicitly attempted to include every last Japanese heavy weapons formation; Similarly, it has added Free French units, Dutch units, Indian units, and missing but interesting US units like the 6th Ranger Battalion. Weapons are defined consistently - and AA weapons now all have ceilings. [Those with zero ceiling had - well - zero ceiling! In other words - no AAA value.] Instead of absolute ceilings, effective ceilings are used.
i) RHS has attempted to make the situation in the north historically ambiguous. Russia is active (although there are Russian passive RHS scenarios for anyone who doesn't like that). It is not at war with Japan - and either side has the ability to change that - when it wants to do so - just like really was the case. The reasons Russia won't do that early are the real ones - Japan might just eat Asiatic Russia if it did. Players are assumed to have the good judgement to handle these issues well. Even if they are not, one can argue the real historical powers didn't always behave very well. [See mini-wars between Japan and Russia in Manchuria/Mongolia and in Korea]. By which I mean - even aggressive player behavior is arguably historical!
The most radical of RHS scenarios is also the most balanced - the "Japan enhansed scenario" long theoried about: Empire of the Sun (EOS).
It has many unique planes, devices and ships - in addition to the standard ones. EOS is supposed to give AI an edge when played with AI running Japan (for players who do not do PBEM). I need to see this work from both points of view. So I need players willing to turn out a turn every so often on either side - but players who won't quit - since the object is to see what happens - not just "win the war." Since this is the scenario with "everything" it is the best one to test. Since this is the scenario in which Japan is likely to last a long time, that also makes it a good candidate to test.
I have almost no use for house rules. If it is on the map - it is on the map and you can go there. If you don't want me going there - stop me.
But don't do something that you think a historical commander would not do. For this, use common sense.
EDIT: I should have said - but did not - that I only play single day turns. The AI is not bright enough to be trusted for multiple day turns. Nothing compels you to change anything - you can simply say "yes" and reply to the turn - but the OPTION to be able to do something more is vital IMHO.
And I am a micromanager by attitude: I don't see how to make logistics work efficiently if I must make ships wait a day or two when they should be loading with a new assignment for example. And when your units land - why wait three days before attacking? Even waiting one isn't really correct: ever seen the Marines land? [Airborne attacks at once. So should over the beach assaults. This stuff of "land today, attack tomorrow" is more or less nonsense. You want to add to that "land today, attack three days from now?" Not for me.]
|
|
|
|
