RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end)

RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design

Message

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (9/10/2006 3:11:44 PM)
I am running a 4.42 AI vs AI validation test.

m10bob -> RE: RHS File Set 4.41 (9/10/2006 4:30:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again quote: ORIGINAL: Bliztk I think that 25 replacements per month for the Marines is a bit too low. REPLY: Tell me about this. It is not my number. What should it be - and why? This is strait up CHS. When I don't know something is wrong - I leave it alone. One thing, all of the triangular divisions that start the game continued to maintain their organization or were upgraded to the square organization ? Because as it`s now coded, they remain triangular They start, and remain, triangular. This is correct. The Hawaii Division was square - and changed only in November 1941 - combining with two regiments of the Hawaii National Guard to form two triangular divisions. [Later the two HNG regiments combined - after being stripped of Japanese Americans - who were sent to the 100th Battalion - and the two regiments were not at full strength to begin with - which is in RHS - and in a sense also in CHS - because they "disabled" a % of these divisions. But RHS makes the missing men be missing - and it takes longer to build up than to "repair" disabled - I think. Anyway, a regiment of the Washington NG replaced the missing regiment - keeping these units triangular. The most famous was the 25th Division.] A number of other divisions began the war square (I think) - but reformed before they became operational. I have a giant book on the US Army Order of Battle - and it gives details for each - including a quite complex liniage. The problem is not so much data as the time to look it up case by case - and I was told the US units had been done "more than once" for CHS. And I do see some attempt at accuracy: a US Army RCT was given 24 mortars - which is right - only they were all 81mm - because no 60mm device was available. IRL 18 were not 81s. The US Army was in transition over to triangular from its historical square form. Square divisions were a creature of an era when divisions actually walked - I mean onto the battlefield - and so they were organized into two brigades each with two regiments. This formation permitted going from road march formation to tactical battlefield formation in one day. It was not germane to WWII era operations which were either semi-motorized (mainly not PTO) or were amphibious (mainly PTO). Triangular organization permitted a single staff handle operations - and permitted a very efficient "two operational teams plus one reserve team" organization for that single staff. The nearest thing to a square division was the USMC division which was doctrinally and philosophically triangular - and remains so to this day. Nevertheless, there are so many "extra" battalions it is entirely feasible to organize four regimental combat teams - each stronger than a US Army RCT - from an all up USMC Division. If my references are accurate, your references (and understanding) of American army rgts and RCT's are correct. The units going to the Pacific theatre were less involved in being deployed as "RCT's, than in the European theatre. Certain armoured divisions never surrendered their "square" formation, (like the 3rd Armoured for instance).

witpqs -> RE: RHS File Set 4.41 (9/10/2006 10:41:35 PM)
Guys, if you could straighten me out, I got a bit lost on one point. Triangle = 3, fine. When you are talking about square are you meaning 2 or 4?

Monter_Trismegistos -> RE: RHS File Set 4.41 (9/10/2006 10:45:25 PM)
binary division = 2 regiments triangular division = 3 regiments square division = 4 regiments

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.41 (9/11/2006 8:38:47 AM)
MT is correct. Binary divisions were used in general by Italy - and in PTO by Thailand. Square also generally was "binary binary" - meaning two brigades of two regiments each. EACH brigade had a real staff. When divisions become "triangular" ONE brigade staff was retained (called "infantry group" in IJA) and the other became independent. In IJA there is a wierd case of an "independent" brigade staff ending up controlling "three" regiments! In RHS you will see a "brigade" division (meaning it has three regiments and can divide into 3 parts) and two "division" brigades (meaning they have two regiments and can divide into 2 parts) - in addition to the normal divisions and brigades that are called by names that do not decieve about the number of regiments.

witpqs -> RE: RHS File Set 4.41 (9/11/2006 9:50:49 AM)
Thank y'all kindly!

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 Uploading (9/11/2006 3:44:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again This revision mainly revises support units in general, and supply sinks in particular, to have less combat value. It also involves some eratta and art pointers - including a NEW set of pointers for RHSEOS - which has its OWN plane art from this version. There are two new squadrons in RNZAF - 40 and 41 - transports. The formations for US Army and USMC divisions are changed - and all starting units as well. Same for US Army Regiments. Reinforcements are not updated - but will tend to update automatically. This is on my list for later work. Many supply depots created or expanded to help AI - now that I understand what it wants where - on both sides. Some minor unit work on Allied side - base forces and special units are more correct. Vast numbers of pointers repointed. Sid

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 Uploading Now (9/11/2006 3:57:52 PM)
This has turned into at least a medium release - but it properly is a subset of 4.40 because it is what 4.4 was intended to be: a) Completion of revision of Chinese land units b) Completion of revision of US divisions and army regiments c) Modification of the combat power of support units in general and supply sinks in particular d) Correction of eratta in several senses, including getting rid of a duplicated ship reinforcement correcting the guns of an airplane correcting the effects of engines on F7F correcting the range of Coronado increasing the normal bomb load of Coronado, B-17, B-24 and B-29 correcting pointers for a number of units - regretfully a vast number of units revising the device file so smaller guns can move (even if they are fixed - something we deal with by adding static devices - so units that are not fixed can move) revising the device file so all guns use identical standards - and AP is less dangerous to soft targets than HE of the same size a fair range of other errors reported or encountered incidentally to the above There are changes to about 20,000 fields - but most of them are not going to be noticed - and most of the rest should only make things more consistent - make the AI work logistics better - or make firepower generally less catastrophic when large numbers are involved of any sort. Tests of the AI vs AI sort indicate many points of success - and not as much impact as I would like on large support units. However, I did find the existing units defending points like Wake Island and Hong Kong were vastly overstated. There is not enough ROOM on Wake for the thousands of troops present - and there was no base force at all (unless you count the ground crew for a single Pan Am Clipper - or the detachment of Marine fighters - so poorly equipped they had to refuel from drums). I reviewed Hong Kong in detail, and reduced the number of Walrus (putting the rest on ships - some were missing entirely and some were wrongly placed in 700 squadron), and adding 3 Vildebeste. I changed some of the CW troops to chinese - because of the "Chinese regiment" and also the Hong Kong Volunteer Force. Basically there is now only one unit at both Wake and Hong Kong to reduce - including such assets of the missing unit as are appropriate. The extra base force was put in as a reinforcement - and the missing unit from Hong Kong is not an empty slot. [I also freed up some device slots by finding duplications] I was able to create a 1941 US Army Division as well as a 1943 US Army Division. I used the recommended 1943 organization - which is in many references - including the US Army Order of Battle (a book). I need some testing to see how these changes are working out over a longer time. I will issue a standard turn to my playtesters - and anyone else who wants it - it taking less time to turn out a single starting turn than many. I will issue a simple start turn with a published password if anyone wants to jump start. I have tried to program in many things normally put in a first turn for both sides - to speed up the first turn.

CobraAus -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (9/12/2006 7:16:27 AM)
V4.42 all scanarios posted on download link page and avail on RHS web site Cobra Aus

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 Uploading Now (9/12/2006 10:45:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: el cid again This has turned into at least a medium release - but it properly is a subset of 4.40 because it is what 4.4 was intended to be: a) Completion of revision of Chinese land units b) Completion of revision of US divisions and army regiments c) Adding 4.2 inch chemical mortar battalions d) Modification of the combat power of support units in general and supply sinks in particular e) Correction of eratta in several senses, including getting rid of a duplicated ship reinforcement correcting the guns of an airplane correcting the effects of engines on F7F correcting the range of Coronado increasing the normal bomb load of Coronado, B-17, B-24 and B-29 correcting pointers for a number of units - regretfully a vast number of units revising the device file so smaller guns can move (even if they are fixed - something we deal with by adding static devices - so units that are not fixed can move) revising the device file so all guns use identical standards - and AP is less dangerous to soft targets than HE of the same size a fair range of other errors reported or encountered incidentally to the above There are changes to about 20,000 fields - but most of them are not going to be noticed - and most of the rest should only make things more consistent - make the AI work logistics better - or make firepower generally less catastrophic when large numbers are involved of any sort. Tests of the AI vs AI sort indicate many points of success - and not as much impact as I would like on large support units. However, I did find the existing units defending points like Wake Island and Hong Kong were vastly overstated. There is not enough ROOM on Wake for the thousands of troops present - and there was no base force at all (unless you count the ground crew for a single Pan Am Clipper - or the detachment of Marine fighters - so poorly equipped they had to refuel from drums). I reviewed Hong Kong in detail, and reduced the number of Walrus (putting the rest on ships - some were missing entirely and some were wrongly placed in 700 squadron), and adding 3 Vildebeste. I changed some of the CW troops to chinese - because of the "Chinese regiment" and also the Hong Kong Volunteer Force. Basically there is now only one unit at both Wake and Hong Kong to reduce - including such assets of the missing unit as are appropriate. The extra base force was put in as a reinforcement - and the missing unit from Hong Kong is now an empty slot. [I also freed up some device slots by finding duplications] I was able to create a 1941 US Army Division as well as a 1943 US Army Division. I used the recommended 1943 organization - which is in many references - including the US Army Order of Battle (a book). I need some testing to see how these changes are working out over a longer time. I will issue a standard turn to my playtesters - and anyone else who wants it - it taking less time to turn out a single starting turn than many. I will issue a simple start turn with a published password if anyone wants to jump start. I have tried to program in many things normally put in a first turn for both sides - to speed up the first turn.

drw61 -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 Uploading Now (9/12/2006 6:57:09 PM)
el cid again, First off, thanks for all the hard work on RHS I have really enjoyed the EOS scenario! How units upgrade is still a problem. It looks like most of the IJA independent const units upgrade to formation 2009 (USA Eng Unit) instead of 919 The HHA Reg units upgrade to formation 2033 (USA 1943 infantry) instead of 2082 The LAA Reg units upgrade to formation 2017 (USAAF Aviation reg) instead of 2083 KNIL Batavia Coastal Gun Units upgrade to formation 2009 (USA Eng Unit) instead of 2096 The AA 1st Motorized upgrades to formation 2005 (USA light tank) instead of ? (2040?) There are more, I can list as many as I find if it helps.

Bliztk -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 Uploading Now (9/12/2006 7:45:44 PM)
I have sent a complete list of the bad pointers to El Cid, hoping that he finally solves that problem. The list is very extensive, so I guess he will take a day or two before releasing all the corrections

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.43 Uploading Now (9/13/2006 1:04:32 AM)
I have decided to release 4.43 micro update with pointer corrections, and corrections to British LAA units (thanks to Kerguelin - however it is spelled) Also some eratta I detected (a duplicate sink) revisions of locations of HQ to help Japanese home economics (HQ suck supplies) and revision of the Japanese CD unit composition to include land devices rather than naval ones. I must work now - but I will continue to update any reported errors. My initial test turn must be redone in light of these changes. My AI vs AI test - into mid-1942 - is showing better behaviors. Cleaning things up may help.

CobraAus -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (9/13/2006 4:01:42 AM)
RHS v4.43 micro posted on download link page and aslo avail at RHS Web Site Cobra Aus

GaryChildress -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (9/13/2006 1:17:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CobraAus RHS v4.43 micro posted on download link page and aslo avail at RHS Web Site Cobra Aus I apologize, I haven't been following closely lately, what is the link to the RHS web site where I can get the latest files?

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.44 Comprehensive Plan (9/13/2006 2:21:24 PM)
I have been able to get a medium term AI vs AI run of RHS 4.43 (and also 4.42) - so I have some sense of what happens when AI runs the economy. AI is really stupid: it will produce engines for which there is no aircraft in production - in vast numbers - never suspending the plant or converting it! It will not increase production of a plant either. So I must help it by planning properly. I just realized this is my job: I created engines that matter - that are rated by size - and no less than four types are not in use when the game begins. I must figure out what they should be late in the war and arrange for it to happen - or Japan will only make a handful of late war planes. Alvermartin provided an analysis of possible issues by an Excel comparison - and while many of the things which didn't make sense to his software are deliberate - nevertheless I found some issues. Notably Japanese fortresses may tend to disappear - to turn into immoblie but ultra light airborne units! Also they need better initial supply depots - many had out of depots from a different device list. And I decided to reclassify some aviation units as HQ or as EABs - to help the AI understand their functions. And I have changed some names so that, instead of abbreviations no one is likely to understand, I am spelling the Japanese names out. I have a technical problem with units with light infantry support weapons - notably 81mm mortars and light ATG units. The technical solution of defining them as infantry didn't work - and so I need a different package for these units. Presumably you benefit from their presence if you get attacked, but they are of zero offensive value. I discovered a problem with Alor Setar going all the way back to stock - it is a port! - and when AI is boss it BUILDS this land locked port! From version 4.44 RHS will not do that. I notified Matrix and Andrew. Wake, Guam and Hong Kong garrisons now fall approximately on time. AI is able to take Singapore, Manila and Bataan as well - but not very fast. 40 units seem hard coded to move to Bataan. I also have a pesky naval station that refuses to stay put - even if you give it a static device. It won't even stay near the sea - but heads for Inner Mongolia all the time if AI is boss. It is a stock unit too - so I am mystified. Short of not using the slot I see no solution - so I may adopt that one. But ideas are welcome. Once 4.44 is issued I will once again attempt to create a standard opening turn so we can get some human testing going. This should be in just over 12 hours.

Jo van der Pluym -> RE: RHS File Set 4.44 Comprehensive Plan (9/13/2006 4:03:59 PM)
Hi El Cid In the following link goes it about the Australian 1st Parachute Battalion who is raised in 1943. Mayby can you add it as a what if unit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_1st_Parachute_Battalion

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.44 Comprehensive Plan (9/14/2006 12:51:41 AM)
I can add the unit - but it will be in a future release. Takes research. If it was raised it isn't "what if" even if it wasn't used.

CobraAus -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (9/14/2006 1:53:07 AM)
quote: I apologize, I haven't been following closely lately, what is the link to the RHS web site where I can get the latest files? RHS Web Site http://www.rhs.akdreemer.com/rhs_home.html Cobra Aus

CobraAus -> RE: RHS File Set 4.42 (4.4 series; Update at end) (9/14/2006 4:15:58 AM)
RHS v4.44 download avail on download link page and RHS Web Site Cobra Aus

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set Plan for Human Testing (9/14/2006 1:26:27 PM)
I have run a AI vs AI "calibration" test into Spring 1942 - to get a measure on how the AI is handling the new aircraft and aircraft engine system I introduced - and to look for other things. The most odd "other thing" is I have ONE maverik supply sink! To beat me - the AI (which may be intelligent after all) DIVIDED the sink - leaving the static device behind - with 10 labor squads - and sent the rest to attack a city in Malaya! All the way from Guam! This is a Japanese supply sink - the first to appear in the game. I had to change slots to beat the beaste. Same for a maverick base station - present since stock - that won't stay anywhere near the sea! Must be some wierd hard code in that slot. My revised aircraft production figures are slightly lower than before: Japan produced only 65 zeros in Dec 1942 - and for some reason the number was set higher than that - as the most glaring example. I also reduced the size of a few engine plants to half capacity (40 vice 80). I have evolved some economic theory which I will write an essay about - to help players plan their economy intelligently - for their particular planned strategy. I find it amazing AI cannot stop producing engines not needed - or convert engine or plane plants that are needed - but it cannot. So this effort is to help AI players - mostly - as humans presumably can do such things. Finally I had to tackel the problem of small weapons. I reverted to the old RHS system - modeled on aircraft machine guns - increasing the soft effect to the minimum value of 5 and decreasing other factors to compensate. WITP uses a product system - so how you get the product does not change the outcome. Under this revision all units should be able to attack and bombard when appropriate. To incorporate these changes - and to input the revised numbers to get the economy somewhat better in later years for aircraft production under AI control - I have decided to issue what I hope to be the "final" version of RHS 4.4x Someone is running a special analysis by spreadsheet seeking eratta - so I will wait for those results - in case there is anything to fold in. But I already did that for 4.4 - and it may not be he can find any more using the same analysis system. Using this "final" version - 4.45 - I shall create a "standard opening turn" for Japan at once - and issue the identical turn to all the human testers. If anyone wants to go the other way - I can create a simple 'generic' opening turn for both sides - with the base economic stuff done - and published passwords - and then a tester can enter Allied operational orders. [The basic Japanese operational orders are in the scenario as such]. This should permit a number of simultaneous tests - and the first day's battles will in many cases be virtually identical in force composition - which may make for good comparisons to get a sense of "does this situation always turn out the same way or not?" In the RHS world - you participate when you decide to - in the way you decide to. Just say "this is what I want to do." It is not a closed team - but an open one - and just as volunteers look at and correct specific sorts of data - or do special projects like Cobra did for art or Mifune did for the manual - so testers are self selected. The other thing forum members have done is propose additions - which reminds me - there is that Aussie airborne battalion I should add to 4.45...

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set Plan for Human Testing (9/14/2006 3:22:29 PM)
Reviewing Malaya and Sumatra for hex and hexside status (because of the routing issue and because of the Alor Star issue) I decided to add Great Natuna Island as an undeveloped base. It might be operationally significant being located between Singapore and Borneo.

Nicholas Bell -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set Plan for Human Testing (9/14/2006 4:39:29 PM)
Regarding Japanese aircraft engines and the "AI" - this may sound like blasphemy but hear me out... Why not say "an engine is an engine is an engine" - get rid of all the different types and have a single engine type for all planes - for the AI at least. This way one could easily "manage" the production by only having to increase production, rather than stopping or reducing production which the AI cannot do. I suppose one could get "fancy" and have different engines designated by year of entry, eg "1944" for all planes entering at that time frame. Just another way of being able to "program" and control engine production better - in many cases to limit aircraft production to more historical levels. Just food for thought...

Sardaukar -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set Plan for Human Testing (9/14/2006 5:19:35 PM)
Would it make sense to do like in CHS and rename Aden for example to Aden/Middle East/Europe and add small shipyard there? It'd help with upgrades of ships that arrive in there. Otherwise one has to send them to Bombay etc. to upgrade.

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set Plan for Human Testing (9/15/2006 12:06:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell Regarding Japanese aircraft engines and the "AI" - this may sound like blasphemy but hear me out... Why not say "an engine is an engine is an engine" - get rid of all the different types and have a single engine type for all planes - for the AI at least. This way one could easily "manage" the production by only having to increase production, rather than stopping or reducing production which the AI cannot do. I suppose one could get "fancy" and have different engines designated by year of entry, eg "1944" for all planes entering at that time frame. Just another way of being able to "program" and control engine production better - in many cases to limit aircraft production to more historical levels. Just food for thought... Seems to defeat the design intent of different engine production - and the impact of hitting one or two critical high power engine factories on a critical type of plane. Anyway - I love this stuff - and so I mess with it. I want much more detail - twice as many types - rather than less. Engine investment matters - and mainly I design for human players - I just am helping out AI for those who use it as much as possible. AI is never going to be very great.

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set Plan for Human Testing (9/15/2006 12:08:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar Would it make sense to do like in CHS and rename Aden for example to Aden/Middle East/Europe and add small shipyard there?� It'd help with upgrades of ships that arrive in there. Otherwise one has to send them to Bombay etc. to upgrade. Well - there IS a shipyard at Panama! YOu can send ships to the USA, to Panama, to Australia, or India. Aden and ME have no shipyards able to do such work - so I am inclined to think not. But I AM inclined to add UK and GULF COAST USA and EAST COAST USA - if I can figure it out. Cobra and I work on such things - and Madagascar and the Strait of Magellan.

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set update (9/15/2006 2:55:24 PM)
Some issues have arisen - but calibration testing is proceeding well. 1) I carefully corrected pointers for all IJA and JAAF construction battalions - to the wrong formation! 2) The way to code Alor Star is slightly up in the air. 3) A new way to define squads has been proposed - putting the year in the name - to help us identify if errors are present? It takes time to update all the devices for all the scenarios. 4) Looking at LCUs has caused me to spot some technical issues: supply depots are often not big enough - weapons are sometimes drawn from ships instead of land devices - which I am not certain is the best way - and sometimes other things. In particular I am carefully making the Dutch units be what I think they were intended to be - but not always are. We have oddities like "battalions" with more squads than brigades or regiments - and stuff like that. This may all be sorted out tomorrow. When it is, I will issue 4.45 and proceed to medium term testing. I did add the First Australian Para Battalion in 1944. If we get the planes rated, we will go to 5.00. We seem to have found a function that works better - and are working out possible exceptions to it now. But there are 249 types to calculate before we can use ANY!

witpqs -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set update (9/15/2006 9:53:04 PM)
Sid, You were looking for data on the size of explosive charges in armor piercing shells. In my reading I have found a little data on Japanese naval shells. Note, that although the bursting charges seem small, a real target would also receive considerable damage via penetration itself and the transfer of kinetic energy (in the form of heat, shock waves, and momentum imparted to debris further causing damage). This would be true even if the shell passed completely through the target � it leaves a hole, can start fires, sends shrapnel flying, etc. Japanese Shell / Length / Weight / Bursting charge 8 inch AP 3 feet long 277 pounds 6.9 pounds 14 inch HE 5 feet long 1,425 pounds 63 pounds 18.1 inch AP 6.5 feet long 3,219 pounds 75 pounds This is from James D. Hornfischer, �The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors�, 206. The chapter notes cite the source as �Japanese Naval Guns�, www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_main.htm, updated Sept. 10, 2002. I realize this is very little data � and you might not like the source, but it's 'I got what I got', so I'm passing it along in case it is helpful. I also realize that you might already have other data, but this might be useful for comparison. A note about the website � I am unable to connect to it. I've tried www.warships.com, and although I get a connection it is a blank page. Can't vouch for any of this - but now you got what I got.

Monter_Trismegistos -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set update (9/15/2006 11:56:45 PM)
witpqs: Naval Weapons part is moved to: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/index_weapons.htm

el cid again -> RE: RHS File Set 4.4x File Set update (9/16/2006 12:07:41 AM)
I need to do a new pwhex file for RHS 4.45 because I have moved Alor Star. The rail line goes from Singora to Alor Star to Georgetown - and in the new file set it won't look like that until Cobra changes the map panel. Alor Star moves one hex NW - to the sea - and the hex it used to be in is now empty. Until the new pwhex file is issues, things won't want to move to Alor Star by land very well. So that I will do - tomorrow probably. 4.45 itself is now dependent on data entry : how soon can I get all the fields corrected? The comprehensive spreadsheet listing helps understand everthing fast. Soon. There are always some cosmetic things too - like changing air group names so the service designator is in front - an RHS convention. Tons of that to do - and I always do a little.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.03125