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: "Final" Update 6.80

 
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: "Final" Update 6.80 Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RHS Thread: "Final" Update 6.80 - 1/24/2015 4:50:33 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Level I Update Link 2.51
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg-8ZqLaG9QbsVHAolg





< Message edited by el cid again -- 10/23/2016 6:15:47 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 451
RE: RHS Thread: Update 6.81 (7 eratta and chrome) - 1/26/2015 4:33:51 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
See link below

This is a very slight enhancement of 6.80 made after the creation of the Japanese
turn for Test Ten - an usually comprehensive and intensive bit of work. It produced
only 7 eratta. But one of those - an air group with too many airplanes because it had damaged and undamaged planes both equal to maximum size - also was assigned to a theater HQ vice an air HQ. Looking up the air HQ I learned something about names - and changed six names to respect history and Japanese usage.

First - at the start of the war - the Hiko Shidan were instead called Hiko Shudan.
That changes in April of 1942. The editor permits using both names - and changing on the right date. [Hiko Shudan = Air Group. Hiko Shidan = Air Division.] There were five such cases.

Second - the Japan Defense Army HQ also changed names. Based (probably) on a famous US Army manual from midwar - it was out of date. At mobilization, in July 1941, Japan created a new body to run things - an integrated national joint one - called Daihoni. Since some Navy units report to this HQ it looks better if it is the national one. For English readers I call it "Imperial General Staff / Daihonei".

We had one unit planning for the wrong location in Manchukuo. We had one location with too high a fort level (to which code objects). The previously reported case of Tunhua (oil shale and the remote mountain HQ of Kwangtung Army) not having an airfield STILL existed - and so the airfield was fixed. [The Japanese in Test Ten simply decided to build it in game rather than restart.] Not much really - but it is all fixed.



< Message edited by el cid again -- 1/30/2015 10:01:10 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 452
RE: RHS Thread: Update 6.82 (eratta and chrome) - 1/30/2015 9:00:15 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		See new link above or below

This is a fairly extensive set of fairly minor changes. Most are in the location files.
Some are in device, aircraft, air group and class files. Also there are changes to one pwhexe.dat file (the most important one - the start of game one) and to a few documentation files.

One pwhexe.dat error was peculiar - Fort St John (Canada) somehow was reclassified as Russian territory - preventing a unit in that hex from ever leaving!
For some reason, it didn't stop units entering the hex either! Another error was
a blocked hexside that probably never would matter but looked bad at Whitehorse,
also in Canada. Finally - for reasons unknown - three blocked hexsides near
Adelaide returned. I suspect errors are generated randomly when one saves a file
in the editor. Regardless - they are all fixed.

Many of the errors relate to start of game supplies for (Allied) units or locations. If I found the error, it is because of setting up the Allied turn for Test Ten (which now is in the hands of Chair 3 - Chairs 1 and 2 are done). But other errors were reported by users worldwide! Regardless of who reported them, I always work on them. Usually I find other similar errors. In this case, one such error related to a US submarine class - it had a tank vice a 30 cal MG on the port side! Must be ugly to see! And I am not sure how it would work. This was in the last update for the class so probably no one ever saw it - but now it is fixed - and even an old game will update to the correct data.

I did find some errors related to Midway, Kure and Layson Island. All of them needed more airfield potential and port potential. I had the impression Kure was a tiny thing, but USCG built an airfield on it after the war. It isn't very big - but it is more than the 0,0 ratings it has always had (in terms of potential build). Midway - which is smaller now than it was in WW2 - has a runway for large jetliners (one has landed in 3 of the last 4 years due to emergencies) - so clearly the potential to build a long runway existed (it was probably greater than because the islands have been sinking and eroding away). Midway remains a level 4 airfield - but its potential build is 5 so it can go to an 8. It also now is a level 2 port - and its port build rating is 2 so it can go to a 5. Kure remains 0,0 facilities - nothing was built there until after WW2 - but it has potential builds of 1 and 1, so it can build to a level 4 port and/or level 4 airfield. Layson island was once exploited for guano, but never had an airfield. But it is a mile and a half long and a mile wide - and in spite of a 440 acre lake - it could have an airfleld built on it. It is now rated as a 1 and 5.

I found more information about the guano islands and re-rated most of them. I learned also that the Wren and Heron "Detachments" which guarded them after a German raider (and support ships) attacked the area in 1940. These small units were called "forces" - so I renamed them. They had no aircraft support squads, so I removed them. But they did have four (!) Vickeers machine guns - so I put them in place of the air support squads (which is just as well - it means old games will simply redefine the device and be approximately correct). I also learned these units were supposed to have 6 inch CD guns, but none were available. Christmas Island (Kampong, Indian Ocean) and Cocos Island (Keeling, Indian Ocean) were also redefined. Most lost industry - but one didn't and Cocos - formerly without industry - turned out to have both coconut plantations (still going) and guano mining - so it picked up some. I found Port Hedland and Corunna Downs were "overdeveloped" using information well post WW2 - Corunna Downs was (and remains to this day) a cattle station - and there was not yet significant mining operations nearby (and, in fact, farther South). Wyndham had also gone into a bust after a boom - and was smaller - although it did still have a small pastoral industry. A number of locations with incorrect starting supplies got more - the worst case being Tacloban which somehow started with zero. A number of units got more starting supplies, and several Aussie and NZ ones offshore now are assigned to an unrestricted command. Clearly if these units could get to some island, they also could load on ships to leave it!

Some Russian RR units were removed from "simplified RHS" scenarios (102, 104 and 106) which are not supposed to have them (for one thing, AI has no idea that a RR unit must stay on RR tracks - and 102 is supposed to cater to AI and might not have human players). The same thing happened to a US RR unit at Hawaii - made mobile so players could move it to some place with railroads - like Australia. But that isn't supposed to happen in simplified scenarios - so it was converted to a static CD unit. The same thing happened to a gigantic train at Vladivostok - with 3 14 inch guns - several 12 and 8 inch as well - which I made mobile not long ago. But in 102, 104 and 106 this unit is now static - like it used to be in stock. But like the one Japanese 12 inch railgun (the First Independent RR Gun Company) - this unit COULD move!
Also - Russian motorized infantry was inconsistent - some of it was like normal infantry - the rest like all non-Russian units I am aware of was classified as armor. That permits it to move faster than walking units. I made them all be that way.

There were a few other things, all minor, but after several days of working I have forgotten the details. This is a lessons learned upgrade. Some of this will apply to ongoing games - but things like starting industry, starting supply and starting command assignment will only take effect in a new game start.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:58:56 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 453
RE: RHS Thread: Update 6.83 (eratta and chrome) - 2/2/2015 9:24:20 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi



There is a collection of file changes here - mainly to scenario files - but at least one to documentation (Scenario 105 Airborne Logic) - because it was out of date.

Most of the work went into Japanese air group HQ associations. I came up with a new scheme which comprehensively included all Air Armies and Air Divisions - and corresponding naval air HQ - but while all the Sentai's were integrated into it - some independent units and training units were not. This process revealed a couple of cases with the wrong aircraft in some scenarios, and some date issues, which of course were resolved. Unfortunately, most of these changes will only apply to new games.

Two instances were found of aircraft in pools before they were made - the C-87 for example should not be used until there is such a thing. I thought all such cases were purged - but apparently I missed these two. Two other cases - related to Philippine Air Force - addressed the problem that PAF squadrons may never upgrade to anything. Now they have one option - which if taken - will lead to other options over time.

I found the rumor about Douglas MacArthur is true! He led a double life in AE. Two identical Mac's existed. When I relieved him in the Philippines, imagine my surprise that when looking at options for another command, TWO DIFFERENT IDENTICAL Gen MacArthur's were on the list. Whatever the justification for this, it seems wrong, and I got rid of the second one. Stock had him in charge of SW Pacific Area as well as USAFFE. This isn't an issue in RHS because you get the SW Pacific Area in its original form - US Army Forces in Australia - with its original commander (and a tiny fraction of its eventual size). You can relieve Mac and put him in charge of that command afterward - if you wish. But this change will not delete Mac from an ongoing game - only from a new one.

There is one new location. It is Fort Hertz in Northern Burma (see previous discussion). I is an isolated significant airfield at the very top of Burma, just
below the mountains - utterly lacking in LOC. [Today you can only drive there
in summer - mainly you fly in.] This airfield was built before WW2 and was used in support of "hump" operations. There is a local town making some supplies - but for major operations you need to fly in more. This too will only show up in a new game.

A number of land units got initial supplies, adjustments to fatigue and/or planning, and one moved a hex.

These changes are mainly due to lessons learned from Test Ten and from player feedback. They are made with a view to improving the product and getting rid of things that are irritating (e.g. not enough supplies) or not as good as they could be. None are of great importance.


< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:58:36 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 454
RE: RHS Thread: "New" (Old) Ship Art - 2/6/2015 8:16:51 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		We will be adding at least USS Patoka, the Nieuw Amsterdam, and YFD-1 class (Dewey and YFD-2) Drydock art -
from the old forms it had in WITP/RHS - in the next update.

Checking on an archive of ship are (99% of it supplied by Cobra) from WITP/RHS,
I found the curious case of USS Patoka. A class popular in AE and various mods, it appears the ship never did serve as an AO in the Pacific theater. Nor was she in the Pacific at all before 1944 - when she served as an AG. She could, of course, have easily converted to AO or AV configurations - both of which she had done. Note her armament apparently also didn't include 3 inch guns.

USS Patoka (AO-9)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
USS Shenandoah moored to the USS Patoka (AO-9)
Patoka with Shenandoah moored alongside
Career (USA)
Name: USS Patoka
Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co., Newport News, Virginia
Laid down: 17 December 1918
Launched: 26 July 1919
Acquired: 3 September 1919
Commissioned: 13 October 1919
Decommissioned: 31 August 1933
Recommissioned: 10 November 1939
Decommissioned: 1 July 1946
Struck: 31 July 1946
Fate: Scrapped, 15 March 1948
General characteristics
Class & type: Patoka-class replenishment oiler
Displacement: 16,800 long tons (17,070 t)
Length: 477 ft 10 in (145.64 m)
Beam: 60 ft (18 m)
Draft: 26 ft 2 in (7.98 m)
Speed: 11 knots (20 km/h; 13 mph)
Complement: 168
Armament: 2 × 5 in (130 mm) guns
4 × 40 mm guns

USS Patoka (AO–9/AV–6/AG–125) was a fleet oiler made famous as a tender for the airships Shenandoah (ZR-1), Los Angeles (ZR-3) and Akron (ZRS-4). It was also notable in that its height (177 feet (54 m)) figured prominently in the design of Rainbow Bridge in Texas (the bridge design required that the Patoka, then the tallest ship in the Naval fleet, could sail under it; however, it never did).

Named for the Patoka River, Patoka was laid down on 17 December 1918 by the Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company of Newport News, Virginia and launched on 26 July 1919. Acquired by the Navy from the USSB on 3 September 1919, and commissioned on 13 October 1919, Commander Ernest F. Robinson in command.


Contents
[hide]
1 1920s and 1930s
2 World War II, 1941-1943
3 1944-1945
4 Fate
5 See also
6 References
7 External links

1920s and 1930s[edit]

Patoka undergoing maintenance in Boston in 1929

Los Angeles tied up to Patoka during Fleet Problem XII in 1931 off Panama
Assigned to the Naval Overseas Transportation Service, Patoka departed Norfolk on 4 November 1919 for Port Arthur, Texas, where she loaded fuel oil and sailed for Scotland, arriving on the Clyde on 6 December. She returned to Port Arthur for more oil and got under way on 9 January 1920 for the Adriatic Sea, arriving at Split on 12 February. Returning to the United States in April Patoka went back to the Near East, arriving at Istanbul in June. After duty in the Adriatic and Mediterranean she returned to the United States, and served on both the east and west coasts until 1924 when she was selected as a tender for the rigid airship USS Shenandoah

A mooring mast some 125 feet above the water was constructed; additional accommodations both for the crew of Shenandoah and for the men who handled and supplied the airship were added; facilities for the helium, gasoline, and other supplies necessary for Shenandoah were built; as well as handling and stowage facilities for three seaplanes. This work by the Norfolk Navy Yard was completed shortly after 1 July 1924. Patoka retained her classification of AO–9.

Patoka engaged in a short series of mooring experiments with the Shenandoah, which had reported to the Commander, Scouting Fleet, for duty on 1 August 1924. The first successful mooring was made on 8 August 1924.

In October, Patoka, along with the cruisers Milwaukee and Detroit, were assigned stations in the mid-Atlantic to furnish the US Navy's second operational airship, Los Angeles, with the weather reports and forecasts during her flight, 12 to 15 October 1924, from Germany, where she had been built, to Lakehurst Naval Air Station, New Jersey.

During 1925 Patoka operated with both Shenandoah and Los Angeles in demonstrating the mobility of airships, and in reducing the number of ground personnel required to handle them. A projected polar flight by Shenandoah, using Patoka as her base of operations, was cancelled when the airship was lost in a storm on 3 September 1925.

Between 1925 and 1932 Patoka operated with Los Angeles and served as her base of supply and operations on her long-range flights to Puerto Rico (1925), Panama (1928), Florida (1929), and during the fleet concentration off Panama (1931). During 1932 she also operated with the newly acquired airship Akron, but the decommissioning of Los Angeles on 30 June 1932, and the loss of Akron on 4 April 1933 saw a reduced need for an airship tender, with Patoka decommissioned on 31 August 1933.

On 10 November 1939 Patoka recommissioned at the Puget Sound Navy Yard, Comdr. C.A.F. Sprague in command, and reported to Patrol Wing 5, Aircraft, Scouting Force. Her classification had been changed to AV–6, seaplane tender, on 11 October 1939.

On 18 January 1940 she departed Puget Sound and, after taking on fuel and cargo at San Pedro, arrived at San Diego on the 31st. She steamed for the east coast on 5 February and reached Norfolk on 25 March. Next Patoka was assigned to the Naval Transportation Service in June and was reclassified AO–9 on 19 June 1940.

On 13 August she departed Norfolk and sailed to Houston. Between August and December 1940, she operated out of Houston and Baytown, Texas, delivering fuel oil to Boston, Melville, Norfolk, Charleston, and Key West.

From March 1941 to September Patoka delivered fuel oil and general cargo to various units of the Fleet in the Atlantic, Gulf, and Caribbean areas. On 28 September she departed Norfolk and proceeded, via Aruba, to Recife, Brazil. Patoka made one more round trip to Recife before the United States entered World War II.

World War II, 1941-1943[edit]
On 7 December 1941, Patoka was moored at Recife, acting as tanker, cargo, store ship, and repair ship. Here she supplied the units of Task Force 3 (later 23) with fuel, diesel, lubricating oil; gasoline stores; provisions; and repairs.

Shortly after the turn of the new year 1942, she got under way for Bahia, Brazil, anchoring there on 8 January. There, she received word that ships bearing rubber and other vital war goods had left French Indochina bound for the Axis controlled ports in Europe. Patoka requested and received permission to patrol the shipping lanes off Bahia. When she had completed her patrol duties she put into port and returned to Recife on 22 January. Six days later she was bound for San Juan, Puerto Rico, but en route she was diverted to Trinidad, B.W.I. Taking on fuel and stores she returned to Recife. Standing out of the harbor on 21 February, she again set course, changed several times to avoid reported submarines, and reached San Juan, Puerto Rico, on 4 March. Her return trip to Recife was made without incident.

On 25 May 1942, while again returning to Recife from Trinidad escorted by USS Jouett (DD-396), Patoka sighted an enemy submarine on the surface. Jouett attacked, forcing the U-boat to dive and continued the attack until Patoka had escaped. Patoka remained at Recife, continuing to supply the ships of Task Force 23 with provisions, supplies and tender services until April 1943, with occasional trips to Puerto Rico and Trinidad for replenishment. Patoka then got underway for home, reaching Norfolk on 22 May for overhaul. She sailed for New York on 6 August to join a convoy bound for Aruba, N.W.I. and resumed operations along the coast of South America.

1944-1945[edit]
In April 1944, she carried 62 prisoners of war (German naval and merchant marine personnel) from Rio de Janeiro to Recife where they were turned over to the U.S. Army. Patoka departed on 24 March and arrived Norfolk on 6 April for an overhaul period, to prepare for duty in the Pacific.

On 15 June, Patoka departed from Norfolk for the Panama Canal and Pearl Harbor. There she was outfitted for duty as a minecraft tender and was reclassified AG–125 on 15 August 1945. Shortly thereafter she sailed via Guam for Okinawa, reaching Buckner Bay on 5 September. Patoka provided the minecraft with tender services until 21 September at which time she got underway for Wakayama, Japan. Anchoring there on 23 September, she continued to provide logistic support to units of the 5th Fleet, servicing mine vessels of Task Group 52.6. She remained with the occupation forces until the spring of 1946, returning to the United States on 10 March 1946.

Fate[edit]
Patoka was decommissioned on 1 July 1946, transferred to the War Shipping Administration, and was struck from the Navy List on 31 July 1946. She was sold to Dulien Steel Products Co. for scrap on 15 March 1948.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 455
RE: RHS Thread: USS Utah (added, with information) - 2/7/2015 2:59:39 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		I added the USS Utah - armed as it was at the time of loss (with 5 inch 25
short guns to port and 5 inch 38 long guns to starboard). She is, of course,
at Pearl Harbor. I also added the option to convert her back to battleship
form - if she survives and if players want to. The turrets and case mate
positions remain, with supporting equipment - they are merely plated over.
So the original primary and secondary guns can easily be returned - and they
are in storage. But the light armament is entirely different - and has entirely
modern fire control stations. I elected to make the initial form simply to
retain all the 5 inch DP mountings - but with 5 inch 25s on both sides -
and a small number of additional 40 mm and 20 mm - and basic air and surface radar.
Later she can be modernized to have a fully revised AA suite and better radar.
Something unexpected, the ship got new engines at great expense just before the 1930
London Naval Treaty forced her to be disarmed - and she can cruise at 19 knots!

USS Patoka is now revised into an AR (the nearest thing there is to what she was
in 1944) - a ship that could repair mine warfare vessels. She may convert to
AO or AV forms - and back again - at player's discretion. In all forms she carries
a lot of oil if she wants to, and as an AV she is unusually capable in terms of
aircraft support (because she was). She remains slow, but fairly well armed, in
all variations. I used official data for her capacity, range and speed.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 456
RE: RHS Thread: ASW Query and Reply - 2/7/2015 11:15:55 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		A player asked:

Question. Why do almost all vehicles with anti-submarine equipment so little depth charges?


A very good question.

RHS has a very different concept of ASW weapons than was designed into
all of the games in the series (PacWar, Uncommon Valor, War in the Pacific and Admirals Edition WITP).

Basically the concept used for everything - literally everything - is weapons on bearing times accuracy with various range modifications = hit probability. This is completely not related to how ASW works at all.

There are two variations - so rarely - late war - you sometimes see two different ASW weapons on each ship. These are

1) Depth Charges (generally set to a certain depth)

2) Ahead throwing weapons (generally set for contact detonation regardless of depth)

In both cases, however, the firing ship is relatively "blind" - that is - it is shooting at a target which has time to maneuver before the weapons arrive - and so even if its "datum point" (aim point - the calculated position of the target at the time the calculation was made) were perfect - the target probably isn't there any more!

What really matters is the AREA in which the attack weapons - virtually always fired in multiples - might have damage or lethal effects on the target. RHS therefore builds ASW weapons on the basis of

(a) the number of weapons in the pattern

(b) the area of effect of each weapon, where this defined as the radius squared times pi of the distance between the weapon at detonation and the distance at which it has a 50% chance of penetration of a 19mm steel hull. [That definition, in terms of hull penetration, is taken directly from the Hedgehog deign theory. It, in turn, was taken from the standard pressure hull thickness of German Type VII and IX submarines - which were rather thicker than most others early in the war. RHS compensates for the differences between target subs by how it defines their characteristics]

In RHS, you get a number of "shots" = DC patterns. These are defined so a player can know what they are? Thus you will see patterns as small as 2 or 3 DC - and the name of the DC in the pattern - up to 28 DC for some late war cases. It is typical for a ship to have 3 to 6 shots (early) and 10-12 shots (late).

SOME ships ALSO have a second ASW weapon - mortars, spigot mortars, and certain special cases - all but the mortars late war developments. Here mathmetical models calculate the radius the weapon can reach - and from that its area. Generally these weapons have higher accuracy values than DC patterns (although a 28 DC pattern has a high accuracy value in its own right = accuracy meaning more or less hit probability).

Related to this is RHS sub damage theory. ASW weapons usually do not kill the target but damage it. Code helps here - there is a statistical chance any hit will cause serious damage - including in effect more hits - engine damage - weapons damage. But mostly a sub must be overwhelmed by cumulative damage to matter. We simulate the "toughness" of a submarine (borrowed from another mod in fact) giving submarines "armor" - which in game terms mitigates weapon effects to some degree. Because pressure hulls are not made of armor we use a fraction of pressure hull thickness = "armor" - and we adjusted the constant used until it produced results in the statistically correct range. [Here K = 3 - pressure hull / 3 in mm = "armor"].

RHS subs are not easy to kill - a torpedo or mine usually works in one shot however - and DC rarely do. Even so - the ASW value of an escort is also a function of experience - and code lets ships get too good with experience IMHO. But one might point at USS England to say they got it right - she killed subs on the FIRST pass - consistently - rolling up an entire patrol line of six. For the last sub, she let another ship try - but it failed - so she went in - and first shot had the kill! For inexperienced escorts the RHS system produces valid results. For very experienced ones, possibly it overstates their lethality. However, these values are MUCH LESS than in stock or other mods - and deliberately so. So subs are much more likely to survive (at least if they stay out of minefields and if they go home when significantly damaged instead of risking more damage in a condition likely to make it easier to get some!).


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 457
RE: RHS Thread: 6.84 Update (Ship Art, Mines, Misc) - 2/8/2015 12:50:25 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		See link above or below

This is an unusually comprehensive update. For one thing, it includes art.

In this instance, four new pairs of ship art are included - all of them from
the WITP days RHS art created by Cobra AUS. They include the Dewey Dry Dock, USS Patoka and USS Utah. I had to generate revised ship class and ship files to deal with these changes: at least change pointers.

But the UTAH had never been in AE at all - so I had to define her. Utah is unusual - different guns to port and starboard (to train students in two different kinds of five inch DP guns. I also found that Mifune's Scenario 99 (which pointed at a sailboat for art!) had a battleship version of her. Well - why not? USS Wyoming was considered for restoration as a gunfire support ship for late war landings. This would be very similar. Except UTAH had modern fire control, and positions for twin five inch mountings (two on each side). Also I found that her turrets and secondary mountings were still present, as was the fire control systems: the tubes were removed and the openings had plates welded over them.
So I created two versions as upgrades from the initial gunnery training ship (with no big guns at all): a "war emergency basic conversion" which simply restored the primary and secondary tubes and added a few light AA guns of the same sort UTAH already had for training purposes, and radar - and a "late war" version done more like other late war conversions.

Patoka is in stock and all mods, but improperly so - insofar as she does not start the war in PTO - and does not enter it until 1944. It also existed in three different forms, all easily transitioned between - AO, AV and what stock and I call AR (officially AG).
So I used all three sub-class slots - not as upgrades - but as conversion options back and forth - as players like. I used official data - and in each form she is a considerable ship. But always a slow one! As with USS Utah I had to modify ship as well as class files.

The Dry Dock case was simple - simply repoint the class at the art - and the ship file "understood" because it is a dynamic link. Similarly, Neiuw Amsterday was a simple repointing case. I found other cases where I need to repoint art - and possibly copy in new art - but I will continue that process next time. I got diverted by a question about mines.

Never mind I "got mines to work" - I failed to do so completely. And never mind I suspected the issues may be code related, at least some of them are not. On investigating I found many technical matters - including duplicated mines showing up in reports! Here I reworked device, class and ship files in my first pass at addressing this issue. I redefined most or all US and British mines - in a comprehensive sense. One problem was numbers - field limits prevent telling the truth about inventories. [The extreme case is the US Mark 6 mine - of which 100,000 were built - and which remained in US stocks until 1974 - and likely still remains in ROC inventory!] So I designed a new system - "stocks in PTO" - and "production" means "transfer from off the map stockpiles" rather than new builds - in some cases. This works for British, Russian and US cases. It helps solve one of the technical problems confusing code and messing up reports and availability. For ship mines we use weight in tons - because weight in pounds does not work for code - but some were not defined properly by that standard. A few warhead sizes changed slightly - not so much because they were wrong but because I decided to use a single source - for a standard of accuracy reason. But I need to review some other mines (not US or UK in origin) to insure these standards are consistently applied.

I had to rework the USS Argonaut completely (five sub classes in seven scenarios).
Seems nobody - including me - ever got her quite right. She IS in PTO at the start - but NOT in the form we have seen: it is not until January 1942 she gets her new, more powerful engines. So she is slower for one thing. For another, she carried 68 mines, and nobody seemed to get that right (I used US Submarines through 1945 by Friedman as the most comprehensive source). Next, her January 1942 upgrade is NOT to an SST - as we all had: she REMAINED a SSML - but picked up both speed and radar! It was in July 1942, at Pearl Harbor, she was converted to a SST form - for a special operation. [Possibly a strategic error, the General Board wanted her to remain a minelayer - and felt her mines were exceptionally hard to sweep - in combination with the other kind of mines she herself could lay. The Makin Island Raid is what caused Japan to fortify its Pacific Islands - the story she illegally did so pre war is a myth - and we paid a high price for instigating that policy change.] She retained her new radar, but lost her mine tubes and picked up troop birthing - for 120 men (not 110 as some other materials - including RHS - said). She also was sunk in 1943, so needed to be deleted from RHS 106 (which starts in 1945).

This process revealed to me that mines change types over time - so EVERY submarine sub class needs to be checked against the date to insure it specifies the proper mine for its date. I have not done that comprehensively yet. Something similar may need to happen with some non-US subs - not sure if any of those upgrade over time or not? Surface ship mines are slightly more complicated - the WWI mines remained in use long after WWII - so ships don't so much upgrade as get assigned types. I was not aware of this and, in any case, there seems to be a problem with British WWI mines (used widely, by RNN for example) - they appear to work but not to display to players properly. A complicating issue is that I do not want to change slots - or it messes up ongoing games and test games. I have more testing and experimenting to do as well as to check every variant of every class to insure it is using the right ones. Sometimes that will lead to discoveries as with Argonaut - eratta of other kinds not related to the mines per se. I also found some other possible cases of duplicated devices in reports to players. SOME of these are valid - so a device can upgrade along different lines (or not at all) - but SOME of them may need to be 9999ed out - to reduce computer execution time and to not add lines unused to reports.

BEFORE I did any of this with art or mine devices, I had spend a LOT of time working on LCU - doing little things like adding supplies and planning - and integrating units with formations. That led to discoveries of eratta, all of them fixed.

Most of these changes will backfit into existing games, some of them will only take effect in new ones - and some are in between. [A ship will NOT reflect device order changes like an aircraft or LCU will UNTIL YOU UPGRADE THE SHIP - which may or may not be possible - depending on the case. Except it WILL change its speed - e.g. in the case of Argunaut - or picture - as with Patoka.]

There is enough here to warrant issuing an update, but it is interim - and another one with more device, ship and class changes will follow "soon" - depending on how many changes are required. Some of the changes are mere chrome, some are eratta, and some are somewhat important - hopefully the problems reloading mines will be somewhat mitigated by this work.




< Message edited by el cid again -- 3/24/2015 9:59:37 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 458
RE: RHS Thread: 6.84 Update (Ship Art, Mines, Misc) - 2/9/2015 12:38:12 AM   
archita

 

Posts: 57
Joined: 6/1/2009
Status: offline 		I readed the notes of RHS mod on Japanese strategy on Russia. I want ask if a sort of successfull operation Kantokuen in '42 in game against allied AI in 105 scenario has political effects on Russia like active part of game ? I mean that if Japan neutralize, with luck and opportunities and many risks in other theatres, Vladivostok in '42, Russia may be pushed to negotiate with Japan or Russia will continue to hold far east divisions active in theatre and eventual partisan activity for whole lenght of war ( in this way several ground forces of Japan risks to be trapped as well with great advantage of allied player in other theatres ) ?

< Message edited by archita -- 2/9/2015 1:39:42 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 459
RE: RHS Thread: Yamato Class Alternatives - 2/10/2015 10:55:44 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		The super battleship fever of IJN was strong. There were,
in fact, no less than four ordered by 1939 and laid down
by 1940, with a fifth unit (No 797) projected for a 1942
order (which never happened). In addition, two "super
battleship" variations on the same hull, with still larger guns,
were projected (No 798 and 799). These were to mount
six 50.8 cm guns in pairs. Such a gun was in fact built
and successfully tested, and full scale models of the
magazines and handling rooms were built, and intense
work done on how to improve protection still more!

This movement in IJN was politically powerful - leading
Admiral Yamamoto, an air power advocate, to despair on
his effort to not fund the Musashi (Yamato herself was too
far along to stop). He said "there are three great follies
in history: the Great Wall of China, the pyramids of Egypt,
and the battleship Musashi!"

The design intent was to create a ship larger than treaty
limits permitted with clear advantages over foreign battleships,
because Japan could not compete in terms of numbers of
due to facing several potential opponents, some of them with
larger economies.

Less well known is that no less than 23 different designs for
Yamato herself were considered (and a 24th was adopted
for later units - changing 5 inch for the superb 4 inch
DP guns for AA purposes). Only the first and last (of the
23) used pure steam propulsion. All the rest contemplated
mixed combined diesel and steam plants, due to the greater
range possible when diesel engines were used. These
engines were in fact built and tested in auxiliary ships. Only
when the demonstration showed the engines might have to
be replaced - impractical under the armored decks of a
battleship - did the final design revert to steam again. And then
they only installed 75% of the plant designed for the first version!
Along the way they had learned how to make the bow more efficient,
and how to make the propellers more efficient - and it was then
possible to achieve 27 knots with 150,000 shp. But with the
earlier plant - 200,000 - 31 knots was possible. Had this plant
been installed with the revised bow and propellers, the ship could
have exceeded 32 knots.

Also less well known is that these designs featured different
primary gun alternatives. There were 8 gun four twin turret
18 inch versions. And there were 9 gun three turret,
10 gun four turret and 12 gun four turret 16 inch gun versions!

Consider the 16 inch gun for a moment. In service on Nagato,
it would provide logistic commonality with that class - and be
able to be reloaded anywhere Nagato can reload - not restricted
to only two points as Yamato was. The gun fired 40% faster,
and 40% more rounds could be carried. That means that in the
same time (required to expend the entire magazine) 40% more
hits should be achieved.

The quest for a more powerful ship included development of
a triple turret for the 16 inch gun (all variations contemplated
would use it - never mind twins of the Tosa sort were in service).
Nagato herself no longer had her original turrets! Instead, turrets
for the later 8-8 program - with more elevation and greater range -
were fitted on Nagato, Mutsu and on three coast defense forts.
But those turrets did not permit maximum range even so - and
slightly more range could be achieved with a new turret - permitting
full elevation - as well as more protection could be worked in.
Just as the Yamato class protection for the ship was not decreased
in its 16 inch armed variations, so neither was the turret protection.
Thus you had a ship designed to take more punishment than other
16 inch gun battleships were.

A query about fast escorts for carriers in a Japan enhanced scenario
caused me to review these matters. Primarily I used Siegfried
Breyers Battleships and Battlecruisers (available in German or English)
and Naval Weapons of World War Two (in addition to articles and technical
papers not in books). I investigated the old, 1920s battle-cruisers and the
post Yamato B-64 and B-65 battle-cruisers as well. The former had
several issues - and we have no art for them (unless we remove a turret
and use Nagato art). The latter were too late and were never even ordered -
were a design begun in 1940 and could not be ordered and completed in
time for the war. So I returned to Yamato herself.

I found a reasonable compromise in the form of building the ORIGINAL
design (A-140 of March, 1935) combined with the armament of Jo of
July 1935 - essentially substituting the 16 inch triple turrets for the 18 inch -
on the ship with the original propulsion plant - but with the improved bow
and propellers actually developed and used. This results in a top speed
of 32 knots and a cruising speed of 18 knots with a range of 8,000 nm
(actually just slightly more as the guns weigh slightly less - but not enough
to bother calculating - it is within the margin of error).

This is a potentially more useful ship - more lethal, faster, with more range -
and equal protection. It will be featured in RHS 105 from the next update.
The other Japan enhanced scenario - 99 - does not have Yamato class ships
at all!


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 460
RE: RHS Thread: Update 6.85 (Mines, Ship Art, Misc) - 2/12/2015 8:32:14 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi



This is an unusually comprehensive update in terms of the wide variety of updated file types. We nave new ship art as well as documentation and scenario files.

Much of the work went into the device file because of the review of naval and air mines. These were integrated with class and ship files, and subject to testing to insure the player interface is happy with the devices. It turns out when it is unhappy,
it won't even display the device! Or it will post something in red. This required I understand field limitations - not easy in the total absence of documentation -
and rationalize data that would fit. We went over to a monthly allocation of mines to the theater - "production" means sent to theater - even if the mines were really made in 1918! [The really big case is the Type 6 Mine - 100,000 were ordered and USN used them until 1978. Probably some are still in service, at least with ROC Navy.]
I found a host of technical issues as well as duplicated devices in player lists. Now there are not. An apparent duplicate exists - Type II is NOT duplicated by Type IID - the D = Dutch - but it isn't.

A different kind of equally time consuming work occurred because of engine, cruising speed, range issues detected when working on a variant of IJN Yamato. I reviewed and revised data on hundreds of classes. Yamato herself got new art for Scenario 105 only - I didn't think the art mattered because there is little difference in appearance between 16 inch and 18 inch guns - but Mifune had done the art long ago - and submitted it. It is nice to have him contributing art again. Four other Japanese ship art pairs (sides and shills) were also added - and most of these were associated with dry docks (so now they do not all look alike - but little ones are smaller than bigger ones!). A few art pointers got re-directed at better art as well.

Still another unanticipated but time consuming review involved the addition of two different types of aircraft. New data on the Portugese garrison at Macao came in.
Among other things it had a flight of "fighter planes" - if you can call em that. The Osprey is a variant of the Hart trainer - which we already have art for in the form of its ground support option (Wapati). Investigation for the data on that plane led me to discover a different variant called the Demon - a biplane different from the Demon monoplane in use by ROCAF and NEIAF. This is an RAAF aircraft and it addresses a serious problem: RAAF has no fighter planes in Australia at the start of the game - they are all overseas. Well - it turns out that this plane was in service - and in spite of being officially relegated to "training duty" - it served with two vital groups - one at Sydney and one at Darwin. There were apparently 54 survivors - enough to matter. That led me to hope I could find Demons in IAF service - or in CAF service - but I failed to establish that happened. However, during the effort I re-learned that the gigantic TB-3 heavy bomber served with CAF - so when I created the Portugese detachment I also created the CAF TB-3 detachment. Which is to say we have revised group files. Two Aussie units also were revised to start with Demons. While we have new planes, we do not have new air art - we are simply pointing at RAF art for these two types. If you know an air artist we do want to improve our air art film strips - a one time deal - as the set is substantially frozen and won't be changing.

I revised the Portugese garrison and added more Portugese officers - affecting the leader and location files. As always, there was work on LCU related to adding supplies, planning, correcting fields, etc. The land unit file set is full of such issues, it will take years to find them all.

Working on Test Ten Alpha, I discovered the Russel Islands got moved two hexes and we had a duplicate location - so I fixed that. Some other eratta were reported - and these were corrected generally (but a few are on a to do list).

This file set may be the one we will use for Test Ten Bravo, if more issues are not forthcoming needing to be addressed.



< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:58:12 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 461
RE: RHS Thread: 6.84 Update (Ship Art, Mines, Misc) - 2/12/2015 8:47:39 AM   
el cid again

 

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

ORIGINAL: archita

I readed the notes of RHS mod on Japanese strategy on Russia. I want ask if a sort of successfull operation Kantokuen in '42 in game against allied AI in 105 scenario has political effects on Russia like active part of game ? I mean that if Japan neutralize, with luck and opportunities and many risks in other theatres, Vladivostok in '42, Russia may be pushed to negotiate with Japan or Russia will continue to hold far east divisions active in theatre and eventual partisan activity for whole lenght of war ( in this way several ground forces of Japan risks to be trapped as well with great advantage of allied player in other theatres ) ?


Russia is a special case. RHS in fact has two very different variations - Russians Passive like stock in Simplified RHS and Russians Active - a very different kettle of fish - in Full RHS.

This gives power to the players - you decide which you prefer? But note that AI does not grasp Russians who are Allies but are NOT at war with Japan -
so Russian active scenarios are only practical with humans on the Allied side. Otherwise, AI will start a war on its own!

The REASON we have active Russians is NOT to start a war early per se. It is, instead, to avoid some problems the ALLIES have with
a passive Russia:

1) You cannot build fortifications where you want;

2) You cannot move units where you want;

3) You cannot upgrade air units where and when you want;

4) You are forced to passively watch if Japan decides to invade - you may not
pre-empt and you may not move reserves in a prudent way. This is unfair.

5) You cannot start a war no matter what the situation is. So Japan can
"cheat" and send Kwangtung Army out of Manchukuo with no risk. The garrison
requirement is inadequate. For one thing, there is no rule about airplanes -
they can put all junk in Manchukuo - or even no planes at all - but it won't
trigger any penalty in VP terms - or tempt Russia into invading.

If an invasion by Russia in 1942 is virtually impossible - waiting until 1945 might not really
happen in all circumstances either. The design intent of active Russians (note it IS in AE
as an option to begin with) is to address all these issues. The Allies should not abuse
the benefits of active Russians by attacking Japan in circumstances Stalin would not have
allowed it.

Frankly I don't think Japan can cope with Russia - alone - never mind with Allies. Togo -
when Minister of War (he was a general in the IJA) - said

"Every night I go to sleep worried about Russia. Every morning I wake up without an answer."

Just so. Because there isn't one. Unless the Russians are badly managed. In particular, Russia
has strong defensive terrain where it matters (near Vladivostok) - and it has armor which is
superb compared to the Japanese - both in technical terms and in terms of troops trained to use it.
Nor can Japan afford another source of attrition on its air forces - it would just lose faster.

There IS intense interest in Russia - in particular by players who live in Russia (go figure).
I hope to work in some kind of Russian campaign during demonstration game RHS Test Ten Bravo.


< Message edited by el cid again -- 2/12/2015 9:47:59 AM >

(in reply to archita)
Post #: 462
RE: RHS Thread: Wallis & Futuna Islands - 2/15/2015 7:48:01 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		A query came in - why are Wallis and Futuna Islands (there are three
of them, all traditional Polynesian kingdoms until annexed by France -
and they are still French territory) shown as Japanese? Because they
were pro Vichy in December 1941. They have no forces whatever - but
unless the computer randomly elects to make them "occupied by the Allies"
the Allies must send something to them - as historically happened, before
they become a legitimate Allied "base" and "production center" - in both
cases so small the terms barely apply. The RHS map tries to show the
reality on the ground when the war began. Note, for example, Sinkiang
is under Soviet command - with tiny numbers of Soviet units and Soviet
allied warlord units.

During World War II the island's administration was pro-Vichy until a Free French corvette from New Caledonia deposed the regime on 26 May 1942. Units of the US Marine Corps landed on Wallis on 29 May 1942.[5]

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 463
RE: RHS Thread: 6.86 Update (Ship Art, eratta, enduanc... - 2/16/2015 1:54:33 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		see link above or below

This is a moderately important update, due to a couple of significant eratta
which should be distributed. Otherwise, it is mainly related to updating
ship range/cruising speed data and a product of ship art new to RHS.

Our nearly full time eratta hunter in Poland found a ship which had been
accidentally transformed from AO to AG in the last update. This was
because USS Patoka had three "sisters" in stock and, when she converted
to AG form, so did they. As always, when I get a report of eratta, I do a
comprehensive search to find all similar issues. It turns out that Patoka
really needs to be its own class. In particular because of what it looks like.
Also because it did not share the conversion or armament upgrade of the
later tankers considered to be part of her class. This is resolved here -
but only with respect to new game starts. It was important to get out so
there are few games starting with three unintended AGs.

The other significant eratta is that I found the Philippine Division had
a flawed formation record. The two pages of the record were swapped,
resulting in every device being misdefined. This might not show up -
if the division never assembles and forms up as such. But if it forms,
having the correct formation matters. And this will backfit into ongoing games.

Before I got the additional art, I was reviewing ship range and fuel matters,
and ran out of reference books - so I thought I was done. Then I realized
I have managed to get 30,000 pages of files restored to useful access, now
in filing cabinets. I realized these probably had more such information. Sure
enough - they did. So a significant number of ships - mainly Allied destroyers
and some cruisers - have been updated data wise. Naturally that also affected
some ships, as looking at records always detects eratta or at least things that
could be better.

Another little thing is that I added the Portugese Macau - and for the first time
figured out to add the same ship to both sides without duplicating the ship!
So Maiko - the Japanese form of Macau - is also present. She also got
a captain, affecting the leader and ship as well as class files.

That process caused me to realize that we could do things with the small vessels
in China not previously done. In Scenario 105 (which assumes a Japanese
regime that leans more heavily on its allies - in real vice more theoretical senses)
we changed the Chinese river vessels - including the river cruisers - to RGC
vessels. This is not purely chrome. Besides getting Chinese names (actually
historical names although not from the same vessel in many instances) they
also were reclassified as a different "nation" (IJA vice IJN) - because of the different
command language and presumably different doctrine. To whatever extent nation
matters in code terms, these vessels remain Axis but will suffer a slight degrading in coordination with IJN units (just as, say, Dutch do when combined with British).
I also continued the process of removing things from simplified RHS (even numbered)
scenarios - making them more simple still (removing some river booms AI does not
understand that should not have been present and some river junks).

Most of the changes are related to ship art. Ship art needs to be copied into the working folders. The new class files point at it. This process affected the ship files when changes were made. Apart from eratta, I deliberately changed certain
ship data - in particular in Scenario 105. The biggest of these is Yamato related:
105 is a scenario with only the first two ships of the class. We had already decided
to go with a 16 inch gun version using the original design powerplant. But new art permitted us to use the four turret variation of that. Twelve tubes firing 40% faster
is a decisive change, at a cost of 2 knots of top speed and a bit of range. But the logic of this probably should have there effects. Here we decide to retain 6 inch
triples instead of converting Mogami class to twin 8 inch turrets. The same for
Tone - designed as a CL with 6 inch triples. This is a nominal 3 for 2 swap - both guns have the same rate of fire - but the inch are probably really slightly slower (up to 15 seconds firing cycle, vice 12 seconds). So new games will see these "CA" in their "CL" form - which is at least historical - but I think also more powerful in practical terms.

In particular, much of the new art is for Scenario 99 - which has unique ships from the Alt Navies group -
which apparently is popular in other mods. Mifune is a fan. Scenario 99 is now being updated for "official
release" - when all the ships are fully defined and able to be displayed. Aircraft are similar - 99 has
some unique options - and while all are defined - we need to point at better art for some of them.

I have a good deal more art - and some more range data - to fold in. Both will happen before we start Test Ten Bravo - and issue 6.70 comprehensive update




< Message edited by el cid again -- 3/24/2015 9:58:52 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 464
RE: RHS Thread: 6.86 Update (Ship Art, eratta, enduanc... - 2/18/2015 9:16:28 PM   
US87891

 

Posts: 422
Joined: 1/2/2011
Status: offline 		At the risk of sounding brief, there is a simple way to calculate max speed, cruise speed, endurance, fuel, maneuver, from the measurement specs of a ship.

John (JWE) has done this for the Babes Japanese auxiliary ships and verified it against corresponding Allied ship specs. He uses formulas from his marine engineering textbooks.

He made it easy. There are two graphs, a set of coefficients, and a set of equations. You can get anything you want by going backwards, forwards, or sideways. HP/L, or HP/ton, or Fuel consumption in Ton/Hr as a function of speed, length, displacement, for diesel, expansion, and turbine engines.

I know you don’t like him, and he doesn’t like you, but if you were to ask him honestly, he would give you his best answer and give you his algorithms. His PM is always open for questions. If he doesn’t, I will. My PM is available. You are running on empty, and using trash for data, and your results reflect that. At least ask assistance from people who know more than you about this particular subject.

Matt

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 465
RE: RHS Thread: Test Ten BRAVO (not started) Call for... - 2/19/2015 2:03:28 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		I have formed a Japanese team (so I can see the Japanese player interface
in a user context) for a new campaign game which may go on for a very long time.
Test Ten ALPHA indicates the economy and other technical features are generally
working (although there remain eratta to resolve and some technical matters need
calibration).

What I need is an Allied opposition to make moves unexpected by the Japanese side.

This particular game will attempt to measure if, in RHS, it is possible for Japan to win
a "short war" - that is - to achieve auto victory by the end of 1942 (wether or not the auto victory code works or not, and regardless of the date: on any date where 4:1 victory point ratio is achieved Japan wins auto victory, prior to 2 January 1943; 3:1 prior to 2 January 1944 or 2:1 prior to 2 January 1945). This in the context of a significant expansion in the economic and military assets for the Allies - large and small - globally.

It will also consider demonstrating (and testing) Arctic theater operations in the Fall of 1942 (because fall is the time when Arctic navigation is possible, and because by then it will be clear if there are sufficient Japanese assets to attempt one?). These could in theory be directed either at North America or at Siberia - but in practice -
Siberia probably offers more prospects to gain and retain control of victory points.


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 466
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive Update 7.00 (for Test 10... - 2/19/2015 5:48:20 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi


This is an unusually comprehensive and extensive update - substantially
unplanned as such.

The issuing of "All the World's Fighting Ships" by Gary Childress and the connection
to ALTNAVIES art by Mifune gave me a lot to work with - and that part of the plan happened. My focus was on vessels needing art forced until now to use the
"nearest art" workaround. That meant a major focus on Scenario 99 - with its non-historical classes - and on minor navies (e.g. France and Thailand) - to begin with.
But I also found cases where all scenarios could benefit from revised art: the only built to purpose IJN repair ship (Akashi - a fine vessel) was presented in a form with the stack in the right place as well as the cranes - so all scenarios got it.

Another project I was wrapping up was revising ship range/cruising speed data using newly available old data from my files - about 25,000 pages (of 30,000 pages) of which just got returned to usable form (instead of being boxed up). That led to the discovery that every single French ship was modified before she reached PTO - and not one was in the reference book, as built form. [Most lost deck guns and/or torpedoes in favor of more anti-aircraft armament; one destroyer remounted a gun
later, shedding its heavy AA in favor of broadside and smaller AA]. I hoped to find Taksin art - and kind of did - Gary has a version of her as rebuilt for Italy (as Etna) -
so it is the right ship at least (but with different main battery mountings). Le Fantastique - almost unique in that she is in the Pacific in 1941 - turns out to be pretty fantastic in one way too: as rebuilt she (and one of her sisters) managed to achieve
40 knots in spite of a gain in 500 tons in displacement! So IF you upgrade her, she actually gets faster - never mind she was almost the fastest destroyer in the world (and the fastest in the game) to start with! The range project has now divided ships into categories more correctly - which matters in game terms. SOME fine ships
can now cruise at speed 5 (vice 4 for line warships) - but others only 3 - while 4 remains the norm for modern ships. [And the record is the Queen Mary still - able to sustain 6! So can Queen Elisabeth.]

A more important last minute update - which was very time consuming - began when
Mifune reported that the US Army seized - and used - Universal Carriers at Manila. Sure enough, 57 were taken into service and initially 40 issued to the Provisional Tank Group which would be 20 per battalion. These were destined for Canadian battalions in Hong Kong. Wait - there are no carriers in Canadian battalions - right?
Wrong - there should be. Apparently by 1941 the idea came up to add 13 to a battalion - and three times that many to a brigade - and this became the norm in 1942. But I didn't even have a Canadian carrier - so I added one as a device. And then I looked at the Canadian Army. I never noticed before - but all the way back to stock there was inconsistency between formations, battalions and brigades that form from the battalions. This was most unpleasant - particularly because of effects on ongoing games when they get changed. I had to rebuild every single unit - and did so about three times - in every scenario - until it was in the least impacting and most correct form - adding the carriers in the process (although many units start without them and get them later).

And then an even more important last, last minute update - which was even more time consuming. Review of economics led me to conclude I should end an RHS experiment with specialized vehicle production. The idea was borrowed from a stock concept for building certain late war Japanese missiles - and I have long since got rid of that version of this concept. But what I kept adding was specialized production of vehicles like Bren Carrier, Pattern No 1 in Australia, and similar, in New Zealand and India, and on Java. This did address well a problem of units not building up specialist vehicles and added the "flavor" that it informed players where they were built. But it also did not report to players in game and CONTINUED to produce (unless turned off) the wrong vehicle for the wrong side if captured. Actually - the Allies never really produce vehicles anyway. Unlike the Axis, vehicle factories exist as chrome - because they were there - unless captured by the Axis - which then uses them (if fed HI points) entirely on an automated basis (unless turned off) to produce what is needed on a statistical basis. What the Allies get vehicles and squads from is replacement rates. Now I don't really like that - even a factory captured CONTINUES to produce - which seems wrong. Which is another reason I experimented with local production. But, like the Russians, now the Allies simply move the factory I guess! I had to rework the device file for all these little vehicles - about ten types - to insure they are "produced" - and I "converted" the "specialized factories" into generic vehicle factories (so device fields will work in ongoing games). Along the way I discovered a factory producing Beaverette Armored Cars in a valley in the Wellington hex previously not included - and so added it to both Wellington and to the production rate for the vehicle. It is so easy to say - but it takes a lot of time to change all these vehicles and locations in all scenarios.

And then an even more important, last, last, last minute update! I decided to rework China with respect to manpower centers and HI. I applied the code rules for both.
Now we have correct population data, and based victory points, garrison requirements, and permissible industry on it - it is OK to divide by ten in terms of
production FOR JAPAN. There is always too much manpower (I have a center make only 1 point to help get it to the level it might slow down production of units) - but this should help. [Remember, only Japan actually uses manpower centers for production.]
This revision changed the Axis manpower at start from 693 to only 471 (of which 680 and 457 did not need 'repair' - due to population growth - mainly in Manchukuo). It also led to a 7% decline in initial production of HI points for Japan. This required review of about 1700 locations (to insure none were missed) and discovery of 3 or 4 cases of miscalculated starting economics. Also, hundreds of locations were re-calculated to give correct starting values for 1945 for 105 - where possibly there
had been construction or where isolated centers cause different "rules" to be used to calculate stockpiles.

As usual, disproportionate work went into not yet playable 99 and 106 - it will take nearly forever to make a 1945 scenario but at least it will be a full map scenario.



< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:57:54 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 467
RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.01 (for Test 10 BRAVO) - 2/22/2015 12:43:24 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		The new player for Test Ten B has persuaded me to adjust the production
model slightly. Apart from trivial eratta, the significant change here is
in the rate of production of HI points at an HI Center. Also the demand
by an HI Center has been revised - to 26 Resource Points and 4 Fuel Points.
The Stock and RHS Economic Essay was also revised to explain these
changes. Otherwise, about 8 locations got revised fortifications - all but
one downward.

see link above or below

< Message edited by el cid again -- 3/24/2015 9:58:17 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 468
RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.02 (ship art and minor ... - 2/28/2015 6:52:28 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi



This update contains a collection of very minor eratta. Most of it came from
test games revealing units with device issues - and about five units have new
device order and/or lost or gained pointers to formations. There is one new
formation. One location (a dot North of Lae New Guinea) was correctly classified
as a secondary airfield - but had a port build value anyway; this was removed.
A number of classes have been repointed at more appropriate ship art.

As well, I began going through scenario 99 ship classes, and found ways to address many classes missing ship art. I added some Allied ship art as well - but it isn't important for players at this time since 99 is not issued. That ship art is in the Allied Ship Sides and Allied Ship Transp sub folders of the AE Art folder for eventual use when we get all the ships done.

A couple of air groups were modified. Three or four aircraft had production dates updated. I got an inspiration yesterday and reworked missile devices. These were for SSMs and SAMs - which are present only very late in the war. [Loon - a US mass produced V-1 copy - was intended for use in Operations Olympic and Coronet in massive numbers. It is launched from CVEs, LSTs, and possibly USS Alaska if you convert it to BCG form. Lark was a remarkable US SAM project that would have appeared on the same USS Alaska - but it was cut when budgets were reduced after the war in favor of other projects which became Taylos and Terrior. It was sub-sonic, radio commanded, so a human could control the flight - and taught us a lot about missile control. I didn't work on Japanese ASMs - but did work on their SAMs - which were more advanced then Allied efforts at the time. One was similar to the German Wasserfall - in fact it used the same radar tracking systems (two of them) - while the other was more like a Japanese LARK - and like several US projects - involved use of JATO units combined with a standard weapon - in this case a 50 kg HE bomb.] Unlike the Germans, who used an almost unique barrier of SAMs (the Russians built one around Moscow but otherwise it has not been used) the Japanese considered SAMs more the way post war users have done - associated with site or city defense.
I finally figured out how to rate "accuracy" in the peculiar AE sense to SAMs.
While reviewing the literature on ancient projects I found a USAF general who claims the Baka piloted ASM was based on the V-1 - which I didn't realize. [The V-1 also had suicide versions, which in the event were never used] And I think a few ships were updated because their classes were.

So this is a fairly comprehensive set of updates, if all fairly minor and technical.
They mostly make things look better - either via art - or a more pleasing list of devices which won't change because of wrong pointers etc. SAMs - if anybody ever converts a ship to use them - may work better. So far the only potential Allied SAM ship is USS Alaska class battlecruisers. But most first line Japanese warships were considered for either large or small SAM batteries - generally replacing primary gun mountings - or in the case of Yamato class battleships - big ones replaced secondary guns while the heavy AA was completely reworked - with 16 4 inch guns (the best in the world) instead of 5 inch DP. These were remarkably primitive SAMs (I served on more modern SAM ships) and possibly not worth the cost and effort in this early form. But I always let players have options - including options to invest in things that are less effective than other options. Sort of like IRL - technical traps into which you may fall!









< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:57:35 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 469
RE: RHS Thread: Japanese Carrier & Capital Ship Logic - 3/5/2015 6:50:32 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		This essay is completely rewritten, and edited for spelling, grammar and typos.
It was rewritten with a new title - but retains its old file name so it overwrites it.
It now is Japanese Carrier (and Capital Ship) Logic.

It was rewritten as part of the process of integrating Scenario 99 into RHS.
Scenario 99 uses Alt Navies ship designs and art - in particular for carriers,
cruisers and ships using their hulls. As Mifune explains it, Alt Navies never tried to create a historical rationale for these designs. But I did. One interesting premise
was that for about a decade before the Pacific War, Japan adopted standard engine sets with only one boiler and only one turbine design. [Japan did that sort of design work, eventually producing a series of standardized merchant ships. They also designed and built prototypes for other types of ship - but did not in fact mass produce them - see for example the Ro-33 and 34 submarine case.] Another premise was that the air oriented officers took over, and acted as if Admiral Yamamoto's position on battleships was correct. [He called the Battleship Musashi "one of the four great follies of history"]. They build no battleships at all. So, apart from explaining the logic of historical scenarios (101-104 & 106), and the slightly modified 105 (planning only changes from mobilization in July 1941), the essay explains the theory behind Scenario 99. My main task is to add ship art and complete ship designs which lack data in some way: when I get done, I will review the location and air group files for technical problems, and issue 99 as playable. It is presently included for comments. 106 is presently included only as a 1945 test bed - it needs probably a year or two of work to make everything correct for 1945 (being built on a 1941 foundation). Generally most updates include more work on 106 than on other scenarios - when I do any record I adjust its 1945 form so it is done for 106. Eventually there will be no more records to update!

Here is the text of the essay, which is also attached.

RHS Japanese Carrier (& Capital Ship) Logic

This is a presentation of the Japanese carrier program to REINFORCE the ships that start the war on active duty: the "big six" CVs, the CVLs Ryujo and Zuiho, the Hosho (always listed as a CVL but treated as a CVE by AE, and properly so), and the CVE Taiho. This list is about the date of appearance, the form the ship appears as, and any variations between Scenarios 101 to 104 vs Scenario or 105. Scenario 99 uses an entirely different logic stream, starting long before the war (See Notes 17, 17A-D & 18).

Historical Name RHS Name RHS Date Stock Date Notes

CV Junyo Junyo 420503 420503 411206 in 99 Note 17A

CV Hiyo Hiyo 420731 420731 411206 in 99 Note 17A

CV Taiho Taiho 440307 440307 430607 in 99 Note 17A

CV Shinano Shinano 440704 441119 421205 in 99 Note 17A

CV Shinano Iwami 430219 Not in Stock Only in 105 Note 2, 17A

BB 111 (Kii??) Iwari 430607 in 99 430822 Not in Stock Only in 105 Note 2, 17A

CV Unryu Unryu 450401 in 99 441219 440806 430806 in 105 N 1, 17A

CV Amagi Amagi 450601 in 99 450724 440811 430906 in 105 N 1, 17A

CV Katsurigi Katsurigi 450808 in 99 441015 441015 440806 in 105 Note17A

CV Kasagi Kasagi 451213 in 99 450515 450515 440810 in 105 Note17A

CV Aso Aso 460208 in 99 450615 450615 450106 in 105 Note17A

CV Ikoma Ikoma 460306 in 99 450615 Not in Stock 450110 in 105 Note17A

CV Kurama Kurama 460615 in 99 450915 Not in Stock 450613 in 105 Note17A

CV Azuma Azuma 460315 in 99 450617 Not in Stock Only in 99&105 N5, 17A

CVL Shoho Shoho 420126 420126 411206 in 99 Note 17B

CVL Ryuho Ryuho 421128 421128 421128 in 99 Note 17B

CVL Ibuki (as AO) Ibuki 440315 450515 Note 4 in 99Note 17D

CVL Isama (as AO) Isama 430422 Not in Stock Note 4 in 99 Note 17D

CVL Shinyo Shinyo 430615 in 99 431215 430615 420815 in 105 N 6, 17B

CVE Kaiyo Kaiyo 430823 in 99 450724 431123 420215 in 105 N 7, 17B



Historical Name RHS Name RHS Date Stock Date Notes

CVL Kaijo Kaijo 440415 in 99 420815 Not in Stock Only in 99&105 N 7 17B

CVL Mizuho Mizuho 430823 in 99 411206 Not in Stock Notes 10, 17B

CVL Nisshin Nisshin 440815 in 99 420427 Not in Stock Notes 11, 17B

CVL Chitose Chitose 430503 CVS in Stock 411206 in 99 N 12, 17B

CVL Chiyoda Chiyoda 430431 CVS in Stock 411206 in 99 N 12, 17B

CVE Unyo Unyo 420531 420531 420215 in 105 Note 19

CVE Chuyo Chuyo 421125 421125 420215 in 105 Note 19

CVE Shinyo Shinyo 431215 431215 430615 in 105 99=N17B

CVE Kamakura Maru Kamakura Maru from 4306 AP in Stock 420815 in 105 Note 13

CVE Shimane Maru Shimane Maru N 18 450215 450215 440317 in 105 as 1TL

CVE Otakisan Maru Otakisan Maru N 18 450515 450515 450214 in 105 as 1TL

CVE Yamashiro Maru Yamashiro Maru N 18 450127 450127 450119 in 105 as 2TL

CVE Chugasa Maru Chugasa Maru N 18 450615 450615 450215 in 105 as 2TL

CVE Ominisan Maru Ominisan Maru 430929 Not in Stock 430929 in 105 as 2TL

CVE Nippo Maru Nippo Maru 450615 Not in Stock 441215 in 105 as 1TL

CV Kongo Type Kongo etc. Note 16 Not in Stock From 8/42 (1/42 in 105)

CV Nagato Type Nagato etc. Note 16 Not in Stock From 8/42

CV Ise Type Ise etc. Note 16 Not in Stock From 8/42

CV Fuso Type Fuso etc. Note 16 Not in Stock From 8/42

Note 1: In Scenario 105, Unryu and Amagi are repeat Soryus rather than Unryu class design, so they may lay down sooner.

Note 2: In Scenario 105, Yamato Class hulls Shinano and No 111 are not suspended on mobilization - but keep building while a conversion design is drawn up - and then completed to a full hanger deck CV rather than as a support carrier as IRL: air group = 96. In addition, after 7/44 in all scenarios it is possible to convert any Yamato class Battleship to a Shinano CV. 105 features a full air group.

Note 3: In Scenarios 101 to 104, support aircraft carrier: air group = 43. May convert to a Yamato class battleship. This represents a decision to build the ship as a gunship vice as a carrier in the first place.

Note 4: Ibuki appears in AO form. Isama was laid down ten days after Ibuki, but was cancelled a month later. In RHS, the player decides if it is to build or not? In 105 only, these ships lay down as repeat Suzuya class and may complete to a CVL form identical with Ibuki. The AO form takes less time to build. If you want the CVL or CA form, convert it when permitted.

Note 5: Historically eight Unryu's were authorized (the original plus 7 follow ons) not counting eight slightly larger follow on designs. Azuma is the seventh hull of the series.

Note 6: In Scenario 105, Scharnhorst is converted after capture (with delay to assemble materials).

Note 7: In Scenarios 101 to 104, APs Argentina Maru and Brazil Maru may convert to CVLs Kaiyo and Kaijo. Stock has Argentina Maru represented by two hulls (! both AP & CVL), and does not allow Brazil Maru to convert at all. In 105, they convert to CVL form early. In 106, both ships start already sunk.

Note 8: In Scenario 105 Nippo Maru, Shimane Maru and Otakasan Maru appear as Type 1TL Tankers.

Note 9: In Scenario 105 Yamashiro Maru, Chugasa Maru & Ominisan Maru appear as Type 2TL Tankers.

Note 10: Mizuho starts the game as a CVS in stock and Scenarios 101 to 104. In 101 to 104 she may convert to this CVL form. In 105, it appears in CVL form. Plans existed for this conversion. She is almost identical in hull form with Chitose and the CVL form is identical.

Note 11: Nisshin starts the game as a CVS in stock and Scenarios 101 to 104. In 101 to 104 she may convert to this CVL form. In 105, it appears in CVL form. It did not require deconstructing as much as Mizuho when the decision was made to convert her in July, 1941, so it completes sooner.

Note 12: Chitose and Chiyoda start the game in CVS form in stock and Scenarios 101 to 104. In stock and in 101 to 104 they may convert to this CVL form.

Note 13: Chichibu Maru, an AP, was renamed Kamakura Maru in 1939. She was planned for conversion to a CVE starting from 1943, but was sunk before work began. In 105 she is not used as an AP at all, but instead converted starting in the fall of 1941. Half Sisters Asama Maru and Tatuta Maru may convert to this class.

Note 14: In Scenario 104, Scharnhorst starts conversion into CVE Shinyo sooner.

Note 15: Type 1 TL may convert to Shimane Maru CVE and Type 2 TL tankers may convert to Yamashiro Maru CVEs in all scenarios. These are similar to Allied "merchant aircraft carriers" used in the Atlantic but in this case are actually Army aircraft carriers for Army fighters or ASW aircraft.



Note 16: After the Battle of Midway, plans were drawn up to convert every capital ship to carrier or to semi-carrier form. There were three options for each class: a 1/3 conversion as was ultimately done for the Ise class; a 2/3 conversion which is similar but provided about twice as much aircraft capacity; and a full conversion suitable for use with carrier aircraft. RHS provides for 1/3 conversions for Ise and Fuso classes and for full conversion of all classes from 8/42. In 105 there are contingency plans for the fast Kongo class drawn up in the fall of 1941 so conversion is an option from 1/42. Except for Ise and Hyuga, there is no provision for dedicated air groups for these ships. The partial conversions actually got half seaplane air groups, and half carrier planes which could not be recovered by the ship - but there is no way to model this case in AE - so semi-carriers get seaplanes and only full conversions get carrier planes.

Note 17: Scenario 99 carrier logic is based on the former AltWar site. AltWar logic assumed that no Yamato class ships were ever laid down, and that large carriers were built in their place. This provided a lot of steel and yard capacity, and carriers build much faster than battleships do. They also wanted to use a standardized engine set for CAs, CVLs and CVs. That turned out to be possible from 1931 using the 152,000 shp 8 boiler/4 geared turbine set for CV; 114,000 shp 6 boiler/2 geared turbine set for cruisers and 78,000 shp 3 boiler/2 geared turbines for CVLs.

Note 17A: The Scenario 99 "Kairyu" class carriers is our "Shokaku mod" class. The ships tonnage is expressed in full load terms (an RHS standard). This affects (improves) durability of the Kairyu. The somewhat lesser protection scheme is retained. So is the basic weapons fit - although sensors were corrected for RHS device dates, and late war 40 mm guns substituted for an obsolescent copy of a pre war French Hotchkiss gun on ships late enough to get them. In scenario 99, the four pre-war big carriers Hiryu, Soryu, Shokaku and Zuikaku retain their historical names (a change from AltWar, which used fictional names except for Soryu). Two more, named Hiyo and Junyo, are built in place of Yamato and Musashi, also start the game in December, 1941. Shinano and No 111 lay down as more of the class in 1940. So they can complete in carrier form in December, 1942 and June 1943. Taiho, laying down in 1941, so she can complete inn June, 1943. Unryu class ships also lay down as "Shokaku mod" class, on the dates of the historical Unryu's, and also reverting to their historical names (except Unryu herself, which already had her historical name). Three lay down in 1942 and three more in 1943. They complete in 1945 and 1946. The problem is the design is so large - impacting build time - so dates for completion in AltWar are mosly unrealistic. Still, the concept starts the war with more large carriers and produces more replacements than in history. The standardized engine plant selected yields 34 knots full and 18 knots cruising speed - slightly better than the Kairyu of AltWar. [All designs have realistic engineering principles applied. Both shipyard and engine plant capacity integrated to yield completion dates.]



Note 17B: The Scenario 99 "Junho" class is essentially a slightly enlarged Zuiho (or possibly Chitose) class. This is sensible, as these were the most efficient CVL designs in the world. The 13,250 tons standard would render the class about 15,000 tons full load. Using half the cruiser set, or 78,000 shp, 3 boilers and 2 turbines, yields 32 knots full and 18 knots cruising speed, rather better than the 28/15 of the Junho, but endurance drops to 7800 vice 9000. Since it is more likely historical names would win approval, I call the ships by historical CVL names: Zuiho, Shoho, Mizuho, Chitose and Chiyoda could all have completed in time to start the war. Replacements include Ryuho & Kaiyo in 1942, Shinyo & Kaiyo in 1943 and Kaijo & Nisshin in 1944. Ryujo is too early to get the standard engine set, so is built to her historical design. The main limit on numbers is engine plant production capacity.

Note 17C: The Scenario 99 counterparts to many CVLs and CVEs, which historically were converted from other ship types, are generally NOT converted, but serve in other roles. It may be that aircraft production could not realistically support these ships in carrier form as well as the mass produced CVs and CVLs. Note that in 99, Akagi, Kaga, both standardized CV (Shokaku Mod) and standardized CVL (Zuiho mod), and Ryujo class carriers may convert to (and back from) AKV forms. This is an RHS feature of all scenarios in which carriers great utility as fast troop, cargo or aircraft transports is modeled: the conversions take only 10 days (either to AKV or back to carrier form), modeling stripping aircraft support equipment and modifications to permit more passengers for AKVs, or restoration of these (to revert).

Note 17D: In Scenario 99, for cruisers, it was also found to be possible to adopt a six boiler set of the same boilers to drive four turbines on CLs – yielding 114,000 shp. Curiously both Agano and Oyodo used this boiler to turbine arrangement – but not with a standardized boiler set (resulting in 100,000 and 110,000 shp power plants). The modern (1931) IJN cruiser turbines were based on the design of the cancelled Amagi class battlecruisers (actually built for the converted Akagi – although it required no less than 19 1920 vintage boilers to generate her 131,000 shp).

Note 18: In Scenario 99, Shimani Maru, Otakisan Maru, Yamashiro Maru and Chigusa Maru appear as repeat Taiyo class CVEs.

Note 19: Unyo and Chuyo conversions ordered upon mobilization in mid-July 1941. 30 days allowed to assemble materials. Six months (historical) for the work. Original Taiyo design (with 12cm guns) used. All three may upgrade to the Unyo and Chuyo armament (with 127 mm guns) form.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 470
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive Update 7.10 (Economics, ... - 3/6/2015 9:27:12 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		see link above or below

This update has a significant change related to economics - hence the change to version 7.10 in the designation. After testing, analysis, and feedback, we have changed the productivity of resource centers as well as of HI and LI centers. These changes also changed the RHS and Stock Economic Theory essay which explains them. Resource centers produce slightly fewer resources. HI and LI canters are also somewhat less efficient, with an increased ratio of resources to supplies generated, as well as somewhat less productive in supply terms. After several cycles of increasing productivity, calibration testing indicates we went a bit too far - and these values should work slightly better in terms of design intent. That is, players will need to move more resources and supplies using shipping because fewer are going to be available at points of production.

For more than a few days, I have been working on ship art. Numbers of new - or changed - ship art images are present - for both sides. A couple of cases where there were no corresponding shils for the sides (which created problems in display) have also been corrected. Most of the changes relate only to the (unissued) Scenario 99. However, a few relate to all scenarios. We have a rather broader foundation for ship art than before - being aided by a Mifune who has returned to active working as well as by Gary Childress and also access to files from sites no longer online. As well, I have become organized in ship art terms, and am systematically working through the class records to insure they have pointers, that the pointers are correct, and that the art pointed at is the best available for the class.

Otherwise I have collected a bit of eratta - mainly from test games. As usual, some of it will update into existing games, other cases will only improve future game starts. These affect location files in particular, but also classes, ships, aircraft, groups, leaders and devices. Again, Scenario 99 has got more of these changes, because reviewing classes I found numbers of cases where data was missing or not reflective of the best available records (which keep turning up - we know significantly more than we did just a couple of years ago when whoever last worked on a record). Nevertheless, some of these matters affect all scenarios - generally minor but irritating things - otherwise ways to make it easier or add chrome.

Two ROC ships have been added. One was a frigate transferred from RIN historically - which is in time for the full length scenarios (all but 106). The other only appears in the Japan enhanced scenarios. It is the light cruiser Aurora - which actually did transfer to China - but after the war had ended. In the Japan enhanced scenarios, it is assumed the Allies give higher priority to China - and provide some manpower (as for example was done with South Viet Nam in the 1960s). These changes caused officers to be added to the leader files. A few other minor changes occurred to ships - mainly because of the review of ships for 99 which resulted in discovery of some things not previously appreciated. There are other cases for a technical nature: the RNN 12 cm No 5 gun was improperly defined as an SP gun (since stock) - it was an AA gun - and it did not use the same shell as the 12 cm No 4 (which stock data indicates it did). Such technical revisions are always folded in as they become clear.



< Message edited by el cid again -- 3/24/2015 9:57:40 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 471
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive Update 7.11 (pwhexe, Shi... - 3/12/2015 9:41:54 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi


This comprehensive update includes two revised pwhexe.dat files.
Setting a new standard, apart from getting rid of half a dozen eratta,
they add the Ididarod Winter Trail (permitting access to Galena and McGrath
in Winter, when river access is impossible) and what I call the Alden River
Ice Trail (which name I made up - although it is an important historical
route) permitting Winter access between Yakutsk and the Sea of Othosk -
similar to the Ididarod Trail. Both cases involve routes accessible in Monsoon
and Fall by water - although until now I didn't include all the Alden River -
Andrew's map art correctly shows it as wide almost to the end - and it will
be navigable in future editions of those files. No Northern river is passible
by ice or water in Spring. And the Ididerod is peculiar in that it is an ice
trail NOT along a river (there are a few other instances).

There are more pwhexe changes contemplated. One - adopted - is the
Haines Cutoff (or Haines Highway). This is a special case - it is a secondary
road in spring and fall (from Fall 1943 on) - and a trail in Monsoon - but does
not exist in Winter! Avalanches blocked it in winter (until 1963). Mudslides delayed
users in summer (until the 1970s).

I have identified and mapped out the Southern Silk Road (aka the Tea and Horse Caravan Road) from Northern India via Lhasa, Tibet to China. This "road" is difficult to model at all - but it was actually significant after the closure of the Burma Road during World War II - moving significant amounts of aid to China. Probably it should be a trail - except in Monsoon - when (like all trails in Monsoon areas - it disappears - except in this case - it is partially not in Monsoon zones - but still disappears!)

There is an unexpected bit of ship and class eratta - in re minor Japanese carriers in historical scenarios. There is also probably a little new ship art. I am generally reviewing and adding better ship art - but I am not certain this edition has any not in the 7.10.

And there is quite a bit of Allied land unit eratta - related to command assignments of units. As well, about eight locations have been redefined - and two moved slightly. All are minor, in Alaska or Siberia, but they represent slight improvements in the database.

There is a small amount of aircraft and air group eratta - mainly associated with dates - also with what planes are assigned to Japanese seaplane carriers?

There is some documentation changes - mainly the RHS Seasonal Construction File - and the Japanese Carrier Logic File [which is really Japanese Carrier (and Capital Ship) Logic now.]

I am also looking into producing a perfect start of game set of map panels. I am evaluating software to use for minor changes (adding missing road or rail art,
or getting rid of some of the same mainly for the first round). If it turns out to be easy, I may include revised panes in the next few updates. Mainly they will include more updated pwhexe.dat files. And any eratta reported or detected in test games.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:57:16 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 472
RE: RHS Thread: The Ancient Tea & Horse Caravan Road - 3/13/2015 1:12:30 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
The files described here will be part of release 7.12 - in a couple of days. They went to the RHS email
distribution list and will be sent on request to anyone. Other things will be folded into 7.12 as well.

I decided - if I am going to reissue all the pwhexe files - I should include all the things that might eventually be determined to be appropriate. Two research projects remained - the ancient Tea and Horse Road - and the RR in NW Australia - which did not exist for decades after the war. I decided to leave it - because Corunna Downs (a gigantic cattle ranch then and now) was turned into a major airfield - and a secondary road cannot feed it properly. A secondary rail line can. This may be why it was put in the game in the first place. But the Tea Road - which I have been very skeptical about - turns out to actually be a peculiar form of paved road - as you will see!

By tag team partner in Test Ten Bravo requested this feature. I have taken too
much time to figure it out - because it is located in a very obscure part of the world.
However, I was able to find the correct route, and to determine it should always have
been part of WITP and AE.

The Tea and Horse Caravan Road is about 1,000 years old. It originates in the village where domesticated tea was first grown - and the first seven plants survive to this day! The town is called Ya An. It is SW of Chendgu on our map (if one assumes the map has compass directions correct - which it doesn't due to projection issues).

The road is complex: like the Ididarod trail, it splits - with Northern and Southern branches. It crosses the very Northern tip of Burma, without any functional connection to Burma at all - as well as the Eastern tip of Assam (India) - where
a really steep trail was taken by a few merchants to the Bhramaputra valley. But
the road itself continues on, technically entering China again briefly (and as in Burma, connected to nothing), and then crosses Tibet - at last giving Lhasa a road
connection - both to China and to India (just west of Bhutan), ending at Kathmandu (which is on the RHS map already.

I moved an obscure village one hex to become Ya-an. And I added the village at the point the road forks - a point about halfway between Lhasa and China - which facilitates supply and resource movement.

I determined that modeling this road as a trail will not work. So I resolved to make it a minor road (except at Lhasa itself, where it is briefly primary). I reasoned that the Northern Silk Road - crossing Inner Mongolia, Sinkiang and another province - was shown as a primary road for technical reasons - in spite of the fact no such road existed in WW2. However, it turns out there is more to the story: the Southern Silk Road - actually generally known as the Tea and Horse Caravan Road - was not only the first road from China across Asia - it also was paved! The old way - with cobblestones. It is, however, only four feet wide. Such roads still exist: the road to my wife's village is only one lane - which is four feet (a traditional road when I was young was eight feet wide). But it isn't really suitable for vehicle traffic - mainly due to suspension bridges - although technically the smallest of vehicles could use it - it was right up to the end a road for pack mules and porters.

WW2 was its swan song. Not only did it see its heaviest use (with 8000 horses and 14,000 mules - and tens of thousands of bearers) - it was abandoned shortly after the war. The many merchants who went out of business with consigned goods they coult not sell killed interest in the route, as did the Burma Road - which by then was well developed.

Another dimension of the subject is that ROC China wanted to turn this route into a primary road in 1942. They allocated the manpower and materials, but were repulsed at the border by officials. [Why this was possible is curious: atlases and ROC China both claimed Tibet was part of China. On the other hand, it had its own army - and actually fought with ROC China at times - including just before the Pacific War began - and nearly fought during the war. It did not take much of an army to block the steep mountain passes!] I have decided to put this into Japan enhanced scenarios - which have their own pwhexe files. Although they will start the same way as other scenarios (ALL scenarios have the same start pwhexe file) - from late 1942 this road will be primary (maybe not all of it at first) - in JES pwhexe.dat files. Those files already show several construction projects not completed but which were seriously considered.

Here we have the two versions of the start of game pwhexe file

pwhexe.dat
41WINTERpwhexe.dat

The former must be in the top level AE folder.
The latter should be in the PWHEXERHS folder - for use if you ever need to get it back.

Somewhat related to this, I think I have identified how to modify map panels. If so we will soon have start of game map panels showing RHS roads and RR. Eventually some more will be added - for construction projects in places that have them. At that point I really will have to write a switcher program to manage both pwhexe and map art files.

Also here are the important location files (for playable scenarios). This so you can see the new village of Mankang (East of Ledo - but not connected to it) - where the road branches. Also you can see Ya An where the road begins. That town has the note in brackets [Tea/Tea Road] to indicate (a) tea is the product it is famous for and (b) it is the start of the ancient Tea Road. Mankang has the note [Tea Road] to make it clear this is the route of the Tea Road itself.

The result is very pleasing to see - and wholly transforms Lhasa from its "island" status impractical to reach except by air - into what it has been for a thousand years - a place you can go if you have the time to use the primitive road to get there! It is truly "the high road to China" - or at least it was then. Today China has built still higher altitude roads farther West. It is clear why Chiang regarded it as a viable alternative to the Burma Road - and why it moved tens of thousands of tons of arms and other supplies during the war.


(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 473
RE: RHS Thread: The Ancient Tea Road in Monsoon - 3/13/2015 5:55:26 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		The Tea & Horse Road was traditionally not used during Monsoon - when it
was virtually impassable due to mud slides and inundated valley sections.
However, WW2 was the one exceptional case. Some merchants used it anyway.
Bearers (who carried 90 kg - more then their weight typically) could not do it,
but mules could. Inflation in wartime China made the payoff worth the effort -
so some made the effort. However, it was painfully slow.

I decided to downgrade the secondary road during monsoon (or summer)
to a trail (except at Lhasa, where there is a primary road in that hex only).
This renders the trail pretty impractical in terms of AE code - supplies never
deliver after the first few hexes. But units can move better than through mountains
or other rough terrain - and units near one of the three ends will get enough supplies not to suffer attrition (provided of course they are not huge units, and are alone - this road cannot feed an army!)

So in strictly historical (standard) RHS - this road is a trail in Monsoon. In Japan enhanced scenarios, it is also in Monsoon 1942. Partially. Road construction began in the Winter - so the Eastern portion has become primary road by Monsoon. This isn't too much of a challenge because the road needs no survey to find a route, and because it exists with a sound footing (even if narrow). The challenge lies at the bridges and at the points steep mountains must be climbed in a way suitable for trucks. Nevertheless - at most points - it is mainly a case of rebuilding a foundation 8 feet wide where a four foot one exists to start with - and then paving over the new foundation.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 474
RE: RHS Thread: The Ancient Tea Road Picture (Bridge) - 3/15/2015 9:24:59 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		A company named Red Rock Trek is offering tours along the ancient
caravan routes of the Tea & Horse Road. This is one of the bridges.
As you can see, at this point the road is a full 16 feet across, and
properly bridges a significant river (right and left background).
It is conditions at other points that prevent classification of it as
a primary road.

sheer natural beauty of these unique pathways...

Except the image isn't posting! The bridge and road are entirely of stone
and are of classic ancient Chinese architectural style - with a gentle arch.






< Message edited by el cid again -- 3/15/2015 10:25:44 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 475
RE: RHS Thread: RHS Seasonal Construction (Updated) - 3/15/2015 11:48:44 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Spring 1942

Partial Deconstruction of the BAM: 114/27 E, 115/27 W/NE, 116/26 SW/E; 117/26 W/NW/SE (Tynda); Also 101/10 E, 102 to 104/10 E/W; 105/10 W/SE; 105/11 NW/SE; 106/12 NW/E; 107/12 W (Ust Kut).

Monsoon 1942

Reactivation of minor RR on New Caledonia (1 hex NW from Noumea) by the US Army. 114/159 SE; 115/160 NW.

Fall 1942

Winter 1942

Completion of ALCAN highway as pioneer road (trail): 200/31 E, 201/31 W/SE; 202/32 NW/SE; 194/31 SW/E, 195/31 E/W, 196/31 E/W, 197/31 E/W; 198/31 W; 182/31 E, 185/32 E, 186/32 E/W, 187/32 E/W, 188/32 E/W, 189/32 W; 192/33 E/W, 193/33 W/NE & 194/32 SW/NE. Secondary Road 191/33 E/W, 189/32 SE, 198/31 E, 200/31 W, 202/33 NW, 181/30 E, 182/31 W. Primary Road: 202/33 SE.

Deconstruction of the Eastern Malaya RR 51/76 SW; 50/77 NE/SW; 50/78 NE/SE; 50/79 NW/SW; 50/80 NE/SW & 49/81 NE.

Spring 1943

Upgrading of Whitehorse & Yukon RR to main line completed: 191/35 NW; 191/34 NW,/SE; 190/33 SE.

Upgrading of ALCAN to Secondary Road: 198/31 W; 199/31 E; 200/31 E/W; 201/31 SE/W; 202/32 NW/SE; 192/33 E/W; 190/32 W; 185/32 E/NW; 184/31 NW/SE; 184/30 SE/W; 183/30 E/W; 186/32 E/W; 187/32 E/W (Trail SW); 188/32 E/W; 189/32 E/W; 193/33 W/NE; 194/32 SW/NE; 194/31 SW/E; 195/31 E/W; 196/31 E/W; 197/31 E/W. Primary Road: 198/31 E; 202/33 NW/SE; 181/30 E; 182/30 W; 190/32 SE; 190/33 E/NW; 191/33 W, 184/31 SE, 185/32 E/NW, 199/31 E/W, 200/31 W.

Monsoon 1943

Secondary Road along Burma-Siam RR line completed: 55/57 NW/SW; 55/59 NW/SW; 55/56 SE; 55/58 NE/SE; 55/60 NE.

Hunan-Guanzi RR: Major Railroad: 73/55 E/W Monsoon 1943.

Fall 1943

The Haines "Highway" or "Haines Cutoff" is hardly worth having! The highway was built by the U.S. Army in 1943 as an alternate route from the Pacific Ocean to the Alaska Highway, in case the White Pass and Yukon Route railway from Skagway should be blocked. The total cost of the construction was US $13 million. From Fall 1943 in RHS Scenarios 101-104 it is a secondary road in Spring and Fall, and a trail (due to frequent mudslides) during Monsoon. It does not exist in Winter (due to avalanche closure).

Winter 1943

Completion of Burma-Siam RR: 55/57 NW/SW; 55/59 NW/SW; 55/61 NW; 55/56 SE; 55/58 NE/SE; 55/60 NE/SE; 55/61 NW.

Spring 1944

Monsoon 1944

Upgrading of Bengal & Assam RR to main line completed (15 hexes from existing line near Gaibandha to Ledo including major river bridging; 8 hex spur to Chittagong) [Takeover 1 March 1944; 59/34 & 59/35 washout in Monsoon in 1942 & 1943; Entire line upgrades during Spring 1944! Before this year, 59/34 SE & 59/34 are destroyed every Monsoon season by flooding from the Himalayas!] Major RR: 55/36 E, 56/36 W/NE, 60/36 NW/SE, 56/35 SW/NE, 59/35 NW/SE, 57/34 SW/E, 58/34 W/E, 59/34 W/SE, 60/37 NW/SE, 55/41 NE, 56/40 SW/NE, 56/39 SW/E, 57/39 W/E, 58/39 W/E, 59/39 W/NE, 60/38 SW/E, 61/38 W/NW/E, 60/37 NW/SE, 62/38 W/E, 63/28 W/E, 64/38 W/E, 65/38 W.

Ledo Road completed to Myitkyina [Upgrading 4 trail hexes to minor road): Hex 64/39 NE/SW Winter 1943; 64/40 NE/SW Spring 1944; 63/41 NE/SE & 64/42 NW Monsoon 1944.

Winter 1944

Completion of the Yellowhead Highway to Prince Rupert (as a Minor Road): 199/43 NE; 200/42 SW/NE; 200/41 SW.

Ledo Road completed to existing Burma Road near Lashio (upgrading 3 more trail hexes between Myitkyina and Lashio): 63/43 NE/SW & 63/44 NE/SW Fall 1944; 62/45 NE/SE & 63/46 NW Winter 1944.

Spring 1945

Completion of the CANOL road from Camp Canol, Northwest Territory to Whitehorse, Yukon: 188/23 NE/SE; trail Fall 42, SRD Winter 42; 189/24 NW/SE trail Winter 42, SRD Spring 43; 189/25 NW/SE trail Spring 43, SRD Monsoon 43; 190/26 NW/SE trail Spring 43, SRD Fall 43; 190/27 NW/W trail Monsoon 43, SRD Winter 43; 189/27 SW/E trail Winter 43, SRD Monsoon 44; 189/28 SE/NE trail Monsoon 44, SRD Spring 45; 189/29 NW/SE trail Monsoon 43, SRD Spring 44; 190/30 NW/SE trail Monsoon 43, SRD Fall 43; 190/31 NW/SE trail Winter/42, SRD Spring 43; 191/32 SW/NW trail Fall 42; SRD Spring 43; 190/33 NE SRD Winter 1942.

Completion of the Longhai Railway to Tanshui: 82/38 SE Fall 1943; 82/38 W Winter 1944; 81/38 E Spring 1945. Trail 82/38 W, 81/38 E Winter 1944.

Fall 1945

Completion of Paken Baroe RR (aka 'the second death railway'): Trail: 46/83 W & 45/84 NE Monsoon 1944; 45/83 E/SW Fall 1944. SRD 46/83 W & 45/84 NE Winter 1944; 45/83 E/SW Spring 1945. Minor RR: 46/83 W & 45/84 NE Spring 1945; 45/83 E/SW Monsoon 1945.  

Partial Completion of the BAM: The Baikal Amur Mainline was not completed until 1991. The first two segments are on the map (from Taishet to Bratsk and then to Ust Kut). The Eastern segment is added in 1944-45 (from Komsomolsk to Sovietskaya-Gavan). But MOST of the work on the rest was done in 1944-1946 - just not rendered usable in that era. This was a classic "death railway" - about 90% of the 150,000 German and Japanese POWs working on it (until 1954) died. This option shows the historical impact in terms of useful infrastructure during the war: Trail:

Ust Kut Crew: Trail: 107/12 SE Winter 41 (Ust Kut); 107/13 NW Spring 42; 107/13 SE Monsoon 42; 108/14 NW Fall 42; 108/14 SW Winter 42; 107/15 NE Spring 43; 107/15 SE Monsoon 43; 108/16 NW (Sverobaikalsk) Winter 43; 108/16 SE Monsoon 44; 108/17 NW Spring 45; 108/17 SE Monsoon 45; 109/18 NW (Novyy Ulun) Spring 46.

Tynda North Crew: 117/26 NW Winter 41 (Tynda); 116/25 SE Spring 42; 116/25 NW Monsoon 42; 116/24 SE Fall 42; 116/24 NW Winter 42; 115/23 SE Spring 43 (Olekma); 115/23 NW Monsoon 43; 115/22 SE Fall 43; 115/22 W Winter 43; 114/22 E (Chara) Spring 44; 114/22 NW Monsoon 44; 113/21 SE Winter 44; 113/21 W Monsoon 45; 112/22 E* Winter 45; 112/22 W Monsoon 46.

Tynda South Crew: 117/26 SE Winter 41 (Tynda); 117/27 NW Spring 42; 117/27 SE* Monsoon 42; 118/28 NW* Fall 42; 118/28 SE Winter 42; 118/29 NW/SE Spring 43; 119/30 NW Monsoon 43; 119/30 SE* Fall 43; 119/31 NW* Winter 43; 119/31 SE Spring 44; 120/32 NW Monsoon 44; 120/32 SE Fall 44; 120/33 NW Winter 44 (Tokui); 120/33 SE* Spring 45, 121/34 NW* Monsoon 45, 121/34 SW* Winter 45; 120/35 NE* Spring 46; 120/35 SE* Monsoon 46 (Meeting Komsomolsk Crew Trail).

Komsomolsk Crew: 121/39 NE Winter 41 (Komsomolsk); 122/38 SW Spring 42; 122/38 NE Monsoon 42; 122/37 SW Fall 42; 122/37 NW Winter 42; 122/36 SE Spring 43 (Sofijsk); 122/36 W* Monsoon 43; 121/36 E* Fall 43; 121/36 NW* Winter 43. Major RR: 121/39 SE* Spring 1944; 122/40 NW*/E* Monsoon 1944; 123/40 W/SE* Fall 1944; 123/41 NW*/SE* Winter 1944; 124/42 NW* Spring 1945.

* This is already a road hex but crew builds foundation for RR in this hex in this month.

House Rules and Special Cases 118/29 NW/SW; 118/28 SE;

House Rule: In Scenarios 101 to 104 & 106 do not repair the oil wells and refinery at Whitehorse, Yukon until May, 1945. These model the CANOL pipeline and a refinery moved from Texas and it took until June, 1945 to get them fully operational. In JES Scenarios 9 & 105, players have options to repair the oilfields and oil refinery at Kenai, Alaska and/or at Norman Wells, Northwest Territories. This is probably not feasible in Winter (how could you move enough supplies to even begin?) - but these are known options not taken IRL. Both are more practical than the CANOL project, which barely worked at all - thick NWT oil in a small pipe in a cold climate was not easy to keep moving. Historical scenarios (101-104 & 106) have the suffix CANOL after Whitehorse and Whitehorse has a base victory point value of 3 (= important minor location for any reason). In these scenarios Norman Wells may not expand oil or refinery production (forcing the historical choices). JES scenarios (99 & 105) have the suffix AKOIL after Kenai and Kenai has a base victory point value of 3. In these scenarios Norman Wells MAY expand oil and/or refinery production (reflecting greater Allied priority in the greater threat context present) but hauling in the supplies required will be very difficult. Kenai is much easier to supply but also much more at risk to capture or damage by the enemy (which is why it was not developed during the war).

Special Case: The Copper River RR is present in ALL versions of the pwhex files. It runs from Cordova, Alaska to Kennicot, a wholly undeveloped dot location. This RR was abandoned in 1938 when the copper mines were closed due to low copper prices. Other copper mines were reopened in WWII (for example in Michigan and in Montana). This copper mine can be reopened IF an Allied player moves engineer to the dot location along with lots of supplies – in which case the RR will function. The Million Dollar Bridge remained in-tact until the 1964 earthquake. This location and RR may be ignored by any player who does not want to use them – and NOTHING will happen in that case – since there will be no production unless the damaged resources are repaired.

Special Case: The RR tunnel to Whittier Alaska is considered completed if you repair the port (it starts at zero). Because there is no way to have the rail line incomplete and still run its route (from Anchorage to Seward) we simply have the Whittier hex not function as a port unless you fix it. Fixing it completes the almost completed tunnel to it. There is an engineer unit in the hex to do that.
 
Japan Enhanced Scenario [From Winter 1942] Optional Files for Scenarios 99 & 105

CANOL Road and Haines Highway are CANCELLED.

Eastern Malaya RR: Not deconstructed from Winter 1942. Instead, the Burma Siam RR is built with new rails.

North Borneo Railway & Road Extensions: Trail: 69/90 NW, 67/91 NW/SE, 68/92 NW Winter 1942; 67/90 SE, 68/89 SE Spring 1943; 68/90 NE, 67/90 E, 68/89 SW Monsoon 1943; 68/90 W Fall 1943. Upgrading of trail to secondary road: 66/87 W/E; 65/87 E/W; 64/87 E Winter 1942; 67/87 W/NE, 69/90 NW, 67/90 SE, 67/91 NW/SE, 68/92 NW Spring 1943; 68/89 SE, 69/86 SE, 70/88 NW/SW Monsoon 1943; 69/90 NE, 69/87 NW/SE Fall 1943; 68/90 NE; 67/90 E, 68/89 SW Winter 1943; 68/90 W, 69/89 NE/SW Spring 1944. Minor RR: 66/87 W, 65/87 E /W, 64/87 E, 68/86 E Spring 1943; 69/86 W/SE; 70/88 NW/SW Monsoon 1943; 69/87 NW/SE Fall 1943; 69/90 NW/NE; 67/91 NW/SE, 68/92 NW Winter 1943; 68/89 SE Spring 1944; 68/90 NE, 67/90 SE, Monsoon 1944; 67/90 E, 68/89 SW Fall 1944; 68/90 W/NE Spring 1945.

Indochina-Siam RR: Minor RR: 60/71 NW; 60/70 SE/NW; 59/69 SE/W; 58/69 E Entire Line Winter 1942.

Laos-Siam RR "Extension" (Bridge): Minor RR 62/57 SW, 62/58 NE Entire extension Winter 1942. [Eventually built by Australia half a century later].

Laos-Tonkin Mekong-Kanthabouli Link Railway: 62/57 E, 63/57 W Spring 1943; 63/57 SE, 64/58 NW Monsoon 1943; 64/58 SE, 64/59 NW Fall 1943; 64/59 SW, 64/60 NE Winter 1943; 64/60 E, 65/60 W Spring 1944.

Siam-Malay Link Road: Major Road: 49/73 SE, 50/74 NW Spring 1943; 50/74 E; 51/75 NW Monsoon 1943.

South Sumatra RR West Extension: Minor RR 45/91 E; 46/91 W Entire extension Spring 1943.

South Samatra RR North Extension: Minor RR 48/91 NW; 48/88 SW Winter 1943; 48/90 NW/SE; 47/89 NE/SE Spring 1944.

Early Completion of the Paken Baroe RR (aka 'the second death railway'): Trail 46/83 W & 45/84 NE Monsoon 1943; 45/83 E/ SW Fall 1943. SRD 46/83 W & 45/84 NE Fall 1943; 45/83 E/SW Winter 1943. Minor RR: 46/83 W & 45/84 NE Winter 1943; 45/83 E, SW Spring 1944;

Paken Baroe Railroad North Sumatra Link: Minor Road: 46/80 SE; 46/82 NE Monsoon 44; 46/81 NW/SW Fall 44. Minor RR: 46/83 NW; 46/79 SW Fall 44; 46/80 NE/SE; 46/82 NE/SE Winter 44; 46/81 NW/SW Spring 45.

Paken Baroe Railroad South Sumatra Link: 48/88 W; 45/85 SE Monsoon 44; 47/88 E/NW; 46/86 NW/SE Fall 44; 46/87 NW/SE Winter 44.

Completion of Nanning-Liuchow RR: Major RR 73/55 E/W Winter 1942.

Huangchow-Ningpo RR: Minor RR 90/55 SE, 91/56 NW Spring 1943; 91/56 E, 92/56 W Monsoon 1943.

Shou-Hsein RR: Minor RR: 88/49 SW, 88/50 NE Fall 1943.

Nanping RR: Minor RR: 87/56 SW, 86/57 NE Winter 1943.

Ichang RR: Minor RR: 84/49 NW, 84/48 SE Spring 1944, 84/48 W, 83/48 E Monsoon 1944, 83/48 NW, 82/47 SE Winter 1944.

Nanyang RR: Minor RR: 85/45 E; 86/45 E/W; 87/45 W Fall 1944

Bohei Gulf RR: Minor RR 95/46 E, 96/46 Spring 1945; 96/45, 97/45 W Monsoon 1945; 97/45 SE, 98/46 NW Fall 1945.

Early Completion of the Longhai Railway to Tanshui: 82/38 SE, 81/38 E Monsoon 1943; 82/38 W Winter 1943.

Formosa RR: Minor RR 87/64 NE, 87/63 SW Winter 1942. Remove RR 87/63 SE Winter 1942.

Hainan RR: 69/61 E, 70/61, 71/61 W Spring 1943.

Chifoo Road: Major Road: 98/46 NW Winter 1942.

Kaiyang Road: Major Road: 82/60 E, 83/60 W Spring 1943.

Haichow Road: Major Road 93/48 W, 92/48 E Monsoon 1943.

Sakhalin Road: Major Road 126/43 W; 125/43 E/SW; 124/46 NE; 124/45 NE/SW Winter 1942; 125/44 NE/SW Spring 1943.

Hokkaido Road: Major Road 122/50 SW/NE Winter 1942; 122/49 NW/SW, 122/48 SE Spring 1943.

Yinkow Road: Major Road 101/43 E, 102/43 W Winter 1942.

Fushun Road: Major Road 104/42 E, 105/42 E/W; 106/42 W Spring 1943.

Harbin Road: Major Road 107/41 NE, 108/40 SW,E, 109/40 W Monsoon 1943.

Taonan Road Link: Major Road 107/39 SE, 108/40 NW Fall 1943.

Konan Road: Major Road 105/47 NW, 105/46 NE/SE Winter 1943; 105/45 NE/SW; 106/44 SW Spring 1944.

Tsitsihar Road Link: Major Road 109/38 NW, 108/37 SE Monsoon 1944.

Kuching Road: Minor Road 58/88 SW, 57/89 NE Winter 1943.

Burma-Siam Highway: Upgrading to primary road along Burma-Siam RR: Spring 1944: 55/57 NW,SW; 55/59 NW,SW; 55/61 NW; 55/56 SE; 55/58 NE,SE; 55/60 NE.

Early Completion of Glenn Highway: Major Road 181/35 NE, 182/34 SW Winter 1942.

Trans Canada Alaska RR Eastern Section: Trail 204/40 NE, 204/39 SW/NE, 205/38 NE/SW, 205/37 NW/SW, 205/36 NE/SE, 205/35 SW Fall 1942. Major RR: 204/40 NE, 190/33 E/NW, 204/35 W, 205/35 SW, 203/35 E/NW Fall 1942; 205/36 SE/NE, 191/33 E/W, 204/39 SW/NE, 203/34 NW/SE Winter 1942; 192/33 E/W, 205/38 NE/SW, 202/33 SE/NW Spring 1943; 193/33 W/NE, 202/32 NW/SE, 205/37 Trans Trans Canada Alaska RR Glenallen Section: Major RR: 183/34 E/W Fall 1942; 182/34 E/SW, 184/34 W Winter 1942; 181/35 NE Spring 1943.

Trans Canada Alaska RR Northway Section: Trail 186/34 NE, 186/33 SW/NW, 186/32 SE Fall 1942; Major RR 186/34 NE, 190/32 W/SE Fall 1942; Winter 1942; 186/33 SW, 189/32 E/W Spring 1943; 188/32 W/E Monsoon 1943; 186/33 NW Fall 1943; 186/32 E/SE, 187/32 W/E Winter 1943.

Trans Canada Alaska RR Nome Section: Trail: 170/31 E, 171/31 W/NE, 179/30 W, 178/30 E/W Monsoon 1942; 172/30 E/SW to 177/30 E/W Fall 1942; Major RR: 179/30 W, 178/30 E/W Monsoon 1943; 176/30 E/W, 177/30 E/W Fall 1943; 174/30 E/W, 175/30 E/W Winter 1943; 172/30 E/SW, 173/30 E/W, 169/32 NE, 169/31 SW/E, 170/31 W Spring 1944; 170/31 E, 171/31 W/NE Monsoon 1944; 168/30 E, 169/30 W/SE, 169/31 NW Fall 1944.

Teller Highway: Major Road: 169/32 NE, 169/31 SW, 168/30 E, 169/30 W Monsoon 1945; 169/30 SE; 169/31 NW Winter 1945.
NW/SW, Monsoon 1943; 194/32 NE/SW, 201/31 SE/W Fall 1943; 200/31 W/E; 199/31 W/E Winter 1943; 198/31 W/E, 197/31 W/E Fall 1944; 196/31 W/E 195/31 W/E Winter 1944; 194/31 E & SW Spring 1945.

Seward Highway: Secondary Road 181/36 E, 182/36 W Winter 1942; 182/36 SW; 181/37 NE/SE Spring 1943; 182/38 NW Monsoon 1943. Primary Road 181/36 E; 182/36 W Spring 1943; 182/36 SW; 181/37 NE/SE Monsoon 1943; 182/38 NW Fall 1943.

Kenai Highway: Secondary Road 181/37 W Monsoon, 1943; 180/37 E Fall 1943; Primary Road 181/37 W Winter, 1943; Primary Road 180/37 E Monsoon 1944.

Kenai RR: Major RR 181/37 W Winter 1943 1943; 180/37 E Spring 1944.

Upgrading ALCAN to primary road (25 minor road hexes upgraded IF construction not suspended as IRL): 182/30, 183/30, 184/30, 190/32 W, 191/33 E, 192/33, 197/31, 198/31, 199/31 W, 200/31, 201/31, 202/32 Monsoon 1944; 184/31, 185/32 NW, 189/32, 193/33, 195/31, 196/31 Winter 1944; 185/32 E, 186/32 E/W, 187/32 E/W, 194/32 NE/SW, 194/31 E Spring 1945.

Completion of the Yellowhead Highway to Prince Rupert: Secondary Road 200/41 SW; 200/42 NE/SW; 199/43 NE Winter 1942. Primary Road Monsoon 1944.

Restoration of Anyox Tramway: Minor RR 199/42 SE, 199/43 NW Winter, 1942. Note: This unusual “railroad” has NO trail or road along its route. The main function of this is peculiar case is logistical rather than to move troops. There is a similar case in Northern Luzon.

Completion of the Alice Springs to Birdum RR. This was surveyed from 1939 to 1942 by the Australian Army but never built. Entire line completes Winter 1942. 76/130 SE, 76/131 NW/SW, 76/132 NE/SE, 76/133 NW/SW, 76/134 NE/SE, 76/135 NW/SW, 76/136 NE/SE, 76/137 NW/SW, 76/138 NE/SW, 75/139 NE/SW, 75/140 SW/NE, 74/141 NE/SE, 75/142 NW/SW, 74/143 NE.

Completion of the Mt Isa to Tenant Creek RR. This was surveyed in 1942 by the Australian Army but never built. Entire line completes by Spring 1943. Tenant Creek is on the Alice Springs to Birdum RR listed immediately above. 76/137 E, 77/137 E/W, 78/137 W/SE, 79/138, NW/E, 80/138 W/SE, 80/139 NW/E, 81/139 W/SE, 82/140 NW/SE, 82/141 NW/SE, 83/142 NW.

Upgrading of Bengal & Assam RR to main line completed (15 hexes from existing line near Gaibandha to Ledo including major river bridging; 8 hex spur to Chittagong) [Takeover 1 March 1943; 59/34 SE & 59/35 NW,SE washout in Monsoon 1942; Entire line upgrades during Spring 1943! In 1941, 59/34 SE & 59/35 are destroyed during Monsoon season!] Major RR: 55/36 E, 56/36 W/NE, 60/36 NW/SE, 56/35 SW/NE, 59/35 NW/SE, 58/34 SW/E, 59/34 W/E, 60/34 W/SE, 55/41 NE, 56/40 SW/NE, 56/39 SW/E, 57/39 W/E, 58/39 W/E, 59/39 W/NE, 60/38 SW/E, 61/38 W/NW/E, 60/37 NW/SE, 62/38 W/E, 63/28 W/E, 64/38 W/E, 65/38 W.

Ledo Road upgraded to primary road to Myitkyina: Winter 1944: 65/38 SW; 64/39 NE/SW; 64/40 NE/SW; 63/41 NE/SE & 64/42 NW.

Ledo Road upgraded to primary road to Lashio: Spring 1945: 63/43 NE/SW & 63/44 NE/SW; 62/45 NE/SE; 63/46 NW/W; 62/46 E.

Ledo Road extension to Lao Wing: Major Road: Monsoon 1945: 63/46 NE; 63/45 SW.

Ledo Road extension to Paoshan: Major Road: Fall 1945: 63/45 E; 64/45 E/W; 65/45 W/NE.

Ledo Road extension to Tsuyung: Major Road: Winter 1945: 66/44 SW/E; 67/44 W/SE; 67/45 NW/SE.

Dimapur-Ledo Road: Major Road: Spring 1945: 62/38 E; 63/38 E/W; 64/38 E/W; 65/38 W.

The Tea and Horse Caravan Road Upgrade 1: Upgrading the Northern Branch of the Tea Road: Monsoon 42: The ROC plan to upgrade the peculiar (hard surface but often narrow) Tea and Horse Caravan Road was born because the Burma Road was rendered moot by the fall of Rangoon late in February 1942. Construction of the Eastern end was only practical until the start of the Monsoon; construction at the Western end could theoretically start at the same time and continue through the Monsoon. IRL Tibetan border officials refused to permit crews at the Western end, killing the project. In JES scenarios, pressure from UK and China changes this. By Monsoon 1942 the upgraded road includes: 50/32 NE, 59/31 SW/E, 60/31 W/E, 61/31 W/E, 62/31 W/E, 63/31 (Lhasa, already primary road) W/SE, 64/32 NW/E; 65/32 W/SE; from here the normally secondary road is reduced to trail status because of the Monsoon and the lack of improvements. From the Chengdu end, the upgraded road includes 74/41 SW, 72/42 NE/SE/W, 71/42 E/W (all technically approaches to the Tea Road before it begins) as well as 72/42 E/NW (Ya An, the official beginning of the Tea Road), 71/41 W/SE, 70/41 NW/E, 70/40 NW/SE and 69/39 NW/SE - where the road reverts to trail status for the duration of the Monsoon.

The Tea and Horse Caravan Road Upgrade 2: Winter, 1942 (upgraded during the Fall): 69/38 W/SE, 68/38 E/W, 67/38 NW/E, 66/37 NW/SE, 66/36 NE/SE, 66/35 NW/SW, 66/34 NW/SE, 65/33 NW/SE.

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 1: The Baikal Amur Mainline was not completed until 1991. The first two segments are on the map (from Taishet to Bratsk and then to Ust Kut). This option assumes a modified plan and maximum effort to work on the Northern segments of the line due to increased concerns about the Japanese in the Far East. Trail: [Ignore if already road, defines RR]. Major RR one month after given trail date.

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 2: Ust Kut Crew: Trail: 107/12 SE Winter 41 (Ust Kut); 107/13 NW Spring 42; 107/13 SE Monsoon 42; 108/14 NW Fall 42; 108/14 SW Winter 42; 107/15 NE Spring 43; 107/15 SE Monsoon 43; 108/16 NW (Sverobaikalsk) Winter 43; 108/16 SE Monsoon 44; 108/17 NW Winter 44; 108/17 SE Monsoon 45 (Meeting Irkutsk Crew).

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 3: Tynda North Crew: 117/26 NW Winter 41 (Tynda); 116/25 SE Spring 42; 116/25 NW Monsoon 42; 116/24 SE Fall 42; 116/24 NW Winter 42; 115/23 SE Spring 43 (Olekma); 115/23 NW Monsoon 43; 115/22 SE Fall 43; 115/22 W Winter 43; 114/22 E (Chara) Spring 44; 114/22 NW Monsoon 44; 113/21 SE Winter 44 (Meeting Chita Crew). 109/18 NW Monsoon 45 (Meeting Chita Crew).

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 4: Tynda South Crew: 117/26 SE Winter 41; 117/27 NW Spring 42; 117/27 SE* Monsoon 42; 118/28 NW* Fall 42; 118/28 SE Winter 42; 118/29 NW/SE Spring 43; 119/30 NW Monsoon 43; 119/30 SE* Fall 43; 119/31 NW* Winter 43; 119/31 SE Spring 44; 120/32 NW Monsoon 44; 120/32 SE Fall 44; 120/33 NW Winter 44; 120/33 SW* Spring 45 (Meeting Komsomolsk Crew). Major RR: 124/42 NW* Monsoon 45; 123/41 SE* Fall 45; 123/41 NW* Winter 45; 123/40 SE* Spring 46 (Meeting Komsomolsk Crew).

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 5: Komsomolsk Crew: 121/39 NE Winter 41; 122/38 SW Spring 42; 122/38 NE Monsoon 42; 122/37 SW Fall 42; 122/37 NW Winter 42; 122/36 SE Spring 43; 122/36 W* Monsoon 43; 121/36 E* Fall 43; 121/36 NW* Winter 43; 120/35 SE* Spring 44; 120/35 NE* Monsoon 44; 121/34 SW* Fall 44; 121/34 NW Winter 44; 120/33 SE* Spring 45 (Meeting Tynda South Crew). Major RR: 121/39 SE Monsoon 45; 122/40 NW* Fall 45; 122/40 E* Winter 45; 123/40 W* Spring 46 (Meeting Tynda South Crew).

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 6: Irkutsk Crew: Trail: 111/20 (Ust Muya) W Spring 43; 110/20 E Monsoon 43; 110/20 NW Fall 43; 109/19 SE Spring 44; 109/19 NW Fall 44; 109/18 SE* Spring 45; 109/18 NW (Novyy Ulun) Fall 45 (Meeting Ust Kut Crew).

Modified Partial Completion of the BAM 7: Chita Crew: 111/20 SE (Ust Muya) Spring 43; 111/21 NW Monsoon 43; 111/21 E Fall 43; 112/21 W Winter 43; 112/21 E Monsoon 44; 113/21 W Winter 44 (Meeting Tynda North Crew). 109/18 SE* Monsoon 45 (Meeting Tynda North Crew).

* This is already a road hex but crew builds foundation for RR in this hex in this month.





< Message edited by el cid again -- 3/19/2015 7:16:36 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 476
RE: RHS Thread: RHS Comprehensive Update 7.12 (pwhex, ... - 3/19/2015 6:09:51 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi

This is a comprehensive update involving many files.

The primary changes are in pwhexe.dat files for Winter seasons. These add Winter trails in Siberia (on the major tributary of the Lena River) and Alaska (the Ididarod overland Winter trail system) - and neither appears in any other season. They are mainly chrome - to show the historical (and still used today) routes. They do have the effect of making overland movement between Irkutsk and the Sea of Othosk, and between airfields at McGrath or Galena and Nome or Anchorage more feasible. Both are too long to move supplies except near the ends. They also add the Tea and Horse Caravan Road between Darjeeling, India and two points in China - via Lhasa. This is presented as a secondary road (although it has been paved for a thousand years - with cobblestones - and in some sections is 16 feet wide - most of it is only 4 feet wide and many of the bridges can only handle the smallest of vehicles). However, in Japan Enhanced Scenarios, from Winter 1942, it is presented as a major road because ROC tried to upgrade it (hiring a major construction convoy at the Indian end which ran into political problems at the border). Upgrading an existing road with a partial hard foundation is not too difficult for the Allies. Also, a port on the Bhramaputra and a port on New Guinea were fixed. Not presented in Winter files, but defined, is the Haines Cutoff (or Haines Highway) - which is blocked in Winter by snow. This is an alternative war emergency route in case the Whitehorse and Yukon RR is blocked or damaged. The 1944 and 1945 WINTER pwhexe files were build on the wrong foundation so they have been completely rebuilt (using the 1943 WINTER file as foundation, adding only changes since 1945 to roads and railroads).

Most of the other changes are either eratta fixes or slight improvements for locations and land units. Two locations were moved (near the Chinese ends - there are two - of the Tea road) and one added (in the middle of the Tea road, where it branches). Perhaps a dozen locations were renamed to mark the courses of the North Silk Road (in Sinkiang and nearby provinces) and the South Silk Road (in Yunnan Province). The Marshall Islands had economic upgrades as they have more production than I had understood (and a substantial population) as well as more infrastructure potential and development. One of them had an oilwell instead of a resource center - which was fixed (and which will backfit into existing games). A large number of land units got changes to their commands - to make more sense given their locations. A fair number of land units, and some devices, got cosmetic or technical changes because of lessons learned in test games or because they were reported by our eratta hunter in Poland (who studies files in Tracker). There are a couple of changes in RHS documentation - mainly to update the RHS Seasonal Construction file to current standards.

There may be a few ship art revisions. Virtually none of these affect scenarios in use - they mainly concern scenario 99 - which still needs a bit more ship art. Mifune has become able to contribute to scenario 99 again - and we also got help from Gary Childress related to art for it. It is a good idea to update the ship art - but probably only a couple (or no) cases affect scenarios 101-105 - the ones suitable to use. 99 & 106 are still in construction and are presented only for comments or (in the case of 106) as a 1945 test bed for ships, aircraft, missiles etc. Actually these scenarios get MORE work than the ones in use - gradually converting them to their final forms.



< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:56:54 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 477
RE: RHS Thread: RHS Comprehensive Update 7.13 (pwhex, ... - 3/24/2015 8:56:38 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		7.14 link
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi

The primary changes in this comprehensive update set are that all Winter pwhexe.dat
files are reissued to a new standard. All but the last - JES45WINTER - differ from 7.12 only with respect to two hexes. JES45WINTER was rebuilt to include all the new changes such as the Tea and Horse Caravan Road, the Ididarod Trail, and the Winter Trail from Irkutsk to the Sea of Othosk.

7.12 and 7.13 involve changes that mess up Tracker. Location slots 814 & 988 were added (and an older version won't know about them). As well, locations 726, 730 and 1788 were modified with respect to the x,y map position - that might be something Tracker cares about. I do NOT intend to add more locations - and almost cannot - since there are very few left. I do NOT intend to move locations either. Present work will simply bring other seasons into sync with the new standard set here. Future work will involve the "off map" area - and may or may not involve location file changes. I seek to make the "lies" my pwhexe files tell become true: they show real world rail and road locations - but these do not work in the map edge area. I believe that changes to special files (pwzone and pwlink) will address that - without changing anything in location or pwhexe files.

Because I wanted to freeze location development, and because my mind said there was a problem in British North Borneo - in re Japan Enhanced Scenario road and rail construction - I reviewed the area. It turns out the roads shown (in JES files) were generally correct - and almost all of them have been built today (except about half a hex worth of swamp crossing). The reason the map "looks wrong" to my mind was that the spur road to Kudat was missing. And that was because Kudat has always been in the wrong hex! So I moved it - by exchanging the data with a former island hex to the NE. And the old Kudat becomes a malaria free (because of altitude) hex with some potential for mining development. The Japanese plan to extend the rail line makes some sense: it was the standard gage of Japan itself, and very fuel and labor efficient in terms of moving the products of the area, including logs, ores, oil and agricultural products than a highway would be.

If you load the Winter 1945 pwhexe file you can see the almost the end of scenario state of development of roads and rail lines (if you use reveal codes keys R and Y to show them). If you load the JESWINTER 1945 pwhexe file you can see the same thing for the alternate Japan Enhanced Scenarios. Only a tiny bit of construction occurs in 1946. [For example, in JES, one hex of the Baikal Amur Mainline becomes available in Spring 1946. By Winter, 1945, the RR to Nome is completed - and the entire ALCAN is paved - in JES scenarios. And other similar projects. A tiny number are not built - the CANOL Road being the most extensive and expensive case - a boondoggle identified as such during the war.]

There are a few changes and enhancements to other files.

The device file changes the production status of the WWI Type H mine - used in particular by NEI ships. I had previously determined that the stocks were too large for AE fields - and that we had to use a system of identifying how many became available in theater per month. I defined the rate of production. But I failed to turn production on - it was off because obsolete out of date things normally are off. From now on (even in existing games) these mines will "produce" (that is, become available) so ships can rearm.

A dozen or so locations were changed with respect to names to identify them as being on the North Silk Road, South Silk Road or the Tea and Horse Caravan Road (in or near China). 20-30 locations were redefined in terms of stockpiles of resources and supplies, or to correct eratta reported or detected. Generally, stocks are declining slightly, especially in remote and isolated locations. A few air groups and land units were redefined in terms of commands assigned or dates.

There are no ship art changes in this update. There are still some ship classes to review because of new ship art provided to me - but I didn't do that with this update.

The RHS Seasonal Construction document was revised to correct errors and to reflect what happens to the Tea and Horse Caravan Road in JES scenarios (it gets widened, a ROC project not implemented in the war - but which might have been in a war in which the threat from Japan was greater).



< Message edited by el cid again -- 4/6/2015 12:56:24 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 478
RE: RHS Thread: RHS Comprehensive Update 7.14 (pwhex, ... - 4/5/2015 11:55:38 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=30E506228938D79E!2716&authkey=!AMrDULsG2RJdsI8&ithint=file%2cmsi

The nominal purpose of this update is to revise Fall seasonal pwhexe.dat files.
That process indeed is begun here, but there are minor changes to many other
files (all except art). I will first comment on these pwhexe.dat files. Fall is the season of greatest naval freedom of navigation. It is the only season in which the Arctic
Ocean is navigable (although the ice cap still exists in those days - unlike today - in the Fall - there is a band along the coast which is ice free). This band provides access in particular to the Lena River and to the Mackenzie River in particular - both of which permit navigation deep into their respective continents. This is generally of use only to the Allies - who can use the river and sea routes to export resources, supplies (and in the case of Canada, oil) only during the fall. As well, they might use these routes to build stocks for air bases to use in other seasons. However, in the 1942 campaign year (for practical purposes), these routes ALSO could be used by Japan for an invasion. Indeed, if it has done well enough to have forces available for such operations, they might provide the additional victory points needed to achieve an auto victory - capturing locations not easily defended. Allied policy of moving some assets into these areas is wise, and minimalist: it might be wiser to have done a good deal more a good deal sooner. [For example, my regiment, the Alaska Territorial Guard, did not form in time for the 1942 campaign season - when both its presence and its local expertise might have been critical. And the Alaska National Guard had been sent to California for the duration - to train troops - where its Arctic expertise was wholly wasted.] The fully developed ALCAN and the Trans-Canada Alaska RR are only featured in the JES versions of these files. As well, the Baikal Amur Mainline is only fully developed in JES files. [In the standard, strictly historical files, you get the BAM only as a trail! Because the foundation was substantially completed by 1944, yet the rails were not entirely laid - to a revised design - until 1989! Even then, only half the rails were laid - it was always a dual track foundation but only a single track RR!] The JES42FALL file is also the first to show the upgraded Tea and Horse Caravan Road - a potentially important link (which ROC China tried to get in 1942 - I have a photograph of the construction vehicles approaching the Tibet border where they ran into political difficulties). Much of the route actually was paved - but only 4 or 8 feet wide - and there were many gaps and inadequate bridges for motor traffic. Anyway - these (Allied) super projects all are at least partially visible in the JES file variations. As well, these are the first files in which the Lena River/Alden River Route to the Sea of Othosk are actually navigable. [You can't quite get there - there is a two hex gap between an upriver port and the sea - connected by secondary road. That location also was redefined from a level zero to a level one port in the location files.] This was an important route in history, and potentially important if there is a Siberian campaign in game terms. Normally it matters to the Russians, permitting support for a base (which in fact has a Level 3 airfield in 1941) in range of the Sea of Othosk. It MIGHT be useful to the Japanese on the offensive as well. This river route is navigable in Monsoon as well as Fall - but in Monsoon it only can reach Irkutsk and points West of it on the Lena River - ice blocks access to the Arctic Ocean.

Other changes are generally very minor. The most significant include:

1) Reworking the names of Soviet Air Units - and sometimes their sizes. I have finally figured out the Russian language meaning of the Romanized abbreviations of unit names. These names tell the kind of unit as well as its size. But the last letter - indicating size - was not always correctly correlated in the database - in particular where the unit size should have been a squadron. Now either the designation is changed or the unit size was changed to make them match. As well, a technical change to the aircraft file permits upgrading of fighter units to use night fighters. This was often briefly done (with fighter, bomber and recon units) - but generally was impossible in game terms. I made the oldest Soviet fighter (I-153) upgrade to the first night fighter variant of the Pe-3. If they don't use this route, players will only be able to get one night fighter unit - and none at all early in the game. The Pe-3 now exists in three forms - a recon aircraft - a long range fighter - and a night fighter. It is comparable with the P-38, and one of the finest performing Soviet aircraft - and the only long range escort fighter in theater.

2) Reworking minor Japanese naval vessels - generally coastal transports - so they may convert to patrol boat form. This because these were so converted early in the war (and are the reason the Doolittle Raid was detected 600 nautical miles East of Japan - they had enough to have a patrol line in sight of each other thousands of miles long!). Also, the ancient cruiser minelayer - present in the game as a CM - Tokiwa - easily converts between CA and CM forms - so it can perform missions it really did perform. As well, it may back fit to its earlier form, with the after 8 inch turret remounted - but this is a long term conversion and gets rid of the mine capability. Several other minor changes were made - mainly to correct errors or increase player options - to minor vessels of both sides.

3) Reworking command relationships for Allied air units and ground units. Testing indicates initial values often prevent realistic reassignment of units to various commands. Related to this, a couple of commands were slightly reworked. These changes are meant to make the game more player friendly as well as more historically realistic. Command relationships turn out to be hard to understand - not every command presents itself as an option for players - even if they want it or it really was assigned! As well, early war assignments often were significantly changed historically later in the war. It is hard to preserve these even as options - but a major effort has been made to include as many as possible - where these are identified. I keep finding more instances to rework into hopefully better form.








(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 479
RE: RHS Thread: RHS Yokosuka 2nd SNLF - 4/8/2015 6:16:15 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		Hard to believe as it may be, because it is virtually never listed that way, the Yokosuka Second SNLF is an airborne unit - although it was not used for airborne operations.
Needless to say, from the next update, RHS will reflect this. It is important even if not used for airborne ops because it means it has far fewer heavy weapons, and also because it has a different logistical footprint (in terms of lift and feeding).

The 1st Yokosuka SNLF (Special Naval Landing Force) was formed 20 September 1941, at Yokosuka Naval District, round a battalion of 520 paratroopers. The 2nd Yokosuka also formed at the Yokosuka port area, 15 October 1941, with 746 men and trained as such, took no part in any airborne operations and became an island defensive base unit. The 3rd Yokosuka was formed on 20 November 1941, again at the Naval facility and consisted of 850 men. This unit was involved in the invasion of Dutch West Timor as airborne inserted infantry, setting off from the captured air base at Kendari.[2]

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 480
Page:   <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Scenario Design and Modding >> RE: RHS Thread: "Final" Update 6.80 Page: <<   < prev  14 15 [16] 17 18   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.607