Observations of RHS testing

[m10bob]

Over the last year I have been running tests of the RHS mods, playing human vs AI and while I figured each scenerio would go askew after entering "updates", I wanted to see how the updates might change an "in progress" game.
The most significant problems observed have been disappearing convoys/fleets, or the inability to create them at a port.
I had a Brit BB fleet intercepted by Nell bombers off Tavoy take a real beating. I was quite surprised to see the damaged ships "teleport" back to Aden,(rather than sink!)
I assembled a carrier group at Pearl,with Sarataoga in the lead, but when I created a replenishment TF to follow it, the carrier group (and all of its' ships had gone AWOL!.)
PWHEX files do not apparently mess up "ongoing games",(except if ships are caught in spots covered by the walls of newly installed sea corridors), but OOB updates certainly do.
Approx a month ago somone commented on his inability to create a TF/convoy and had asked if there might be a cap/limit on them.
I am sure this updating DURING games might be a reason.
It should be remembered RHS is still in testing mode at present,(all flavors), and anomolies to be expected...

[el cid again]

I did add a gigantic historical convoy that did not start the game on day one - and people think this may have messed up the ability to form convoys over a certain number. I think it is wrong not to have convoys date set - philosophically speaking - but this is now removed.

I do not recommend changing OBs during a game - and unless you have an editor that does turns - you cannot.

[wdolson]

Changing the database while a game in progress should do nothing.  The saved game file holds all the data from the database, as far as I can tell.  A saved game editor doesn't exist, so changing a game in progress is not possible at this time.

Bill

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Changing the database while a game in progress should do nothing.  The saved game file holds all the data from the database, as far as I can tell.  A saved game editor doesn't exist, so changing a game in progress is not possible at this time.

Bill

Bill, I am not a computer programmer, but as a layman, I have experienced symptoms I could only describe as "bleed over" of OOB's, somehow.
For instance, last week, I recieved word 7 ships had just arrived in Aden,Karachi,etc.
Problem is, I had been using those same ships for maybe a month already, and sure enough, I found them "newly arrived" at Aden, Karachi,etc. (as if the program were still reading old (or updated) arrival dates, and implementing them into a "saved game"??
(The sams ships which I had been using,fully loaded, were gone and their cargo was located, also at Aden, the Brit 18th Division..)
Two of the ships were the Rhona and sister ship Rajula..
Another incarnation of this has been the aforementioned "teleporting" of those much-damaged Brit BB's to Aden, as if newly arrived,(except they still had the recently acquired damage)..
Things that want to make yuh go hmmmmmm

Yeah, I know, you can say I have a flawed download, but I have worked with these upgrades and seen strange anomolies similar to this for months.
My original posting was to warn some of the newer, easily frustrated folks who might not keep in mind that this is not yet a "finished product", but a work of art in the making.......

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Changing the database while a game in progress should do nothing.  The saved game file holds all the data from the database, as far as I can tell.  A saved game editor doesn't exist, so changing a game in progress is not possible at this time.

Bill

Bill, I am not a computer programmer, but as a layman, I have experienced symptoms I could only describe as "bleed over" of OOB's, somehow.
For instance, last week, I recieved word 7 ships had just arrived in Aden,Karachi,etc.
Problem is, I had been using those same ships for maybe a month already, and sure enough, I found them "newly arrived" at Aden, Karachi,etc. (as if the program were still reading old (or updated) arrival dates, and implementing them into a "saved game"??
(The sams ships which I had been using,fully loaded, were gone and their cargo was located, also at Aden, the Brit 18th Division..)
Two of the ships were the Rhona and sister ship Rajula..
Another incarnation of this has been the aforementioned "teleporting" of those much-damaged Brit BB's to Aden, as if newly arrived,(except they still had the recently acquired damage)..
Things that want to make yuh go hmmmmmm

Yeah, I know, you can say I have a flawed download, but I have worked with these upgrades and seen strange anomolies similar to this for months.
My original posting was to warn some of the newer, easily frustrated folks who might not keep in mind that this is not yet a "finished product", but a work of art in the making.......

I had this same thing occurring and the disappearance coincided with the addition of a new TF. I surmised it was occurring because I ran out of TF slots as I was in the first couple of weeks of the war when I had many single ship TF escaping the PI, all of the Soviet subs were active (and in single ship TF) and all the other subs were active and being dispersed. There was some discussion that it may have had to do with the TF Sid had generated but I don't know. I will say again it occurred simultaneously when I create a new TF.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Changing the database while a game in progress should do nothing.  The saved game file holds all the data from the database, as far as I can tell.  A saved game editor doesn't exist, so changing a game in progress is not possible at this time.

Bill

Bill, I am not a computer programmer, but as a layman, I have experienced symptoms I could only describe as "bleed over" of OOB's, somehow.
For instance, last week, I recieved word 7 ships had just arrived in Aden,Karachi,etc.
Problem is, I had been using those same ships for maybe a month already, and sure enough, I found them "newly arrived" at Aden, Karachi,etc. (as if the program were still reading old (or updated) arrival dates, and implementing them into a "saved game"??
(The sams ships which I had been using,fully loaded, were gone and their cargo was located, also at Aden, the Brit 18th Division..)
Two of the ships were the Rhona and sister ship Rajula..
Another incarnation of this has been the aforementioned "teleporting" of those much-damaged Brit BB's to Aden, as if newly arrived,(except they still had the recently acquired damage)..
Things that want to make yuh go hmmmmmm

Yeah, I know, you can say I have a flawed download, but I have worked with these upgrades and seen strange anomolies similar to this for months.
My original posting was to warn some of the newer, easily frustrated folks who might not keep in mind that this is not yet a "finished product", but a work of art in the making.......

I had this same thing occurring and the disappearance coincided with the addition of a new TF. I surmised it was occurring because I ran out of TF slots as I was in the first couple of weeks of the war when I had many single ship TF escaping the PI, all of the Soviet subs were active (and in single ship TF) and all the other subs were active and being dispersed. There was some discussion that it may have had to do with the TF Sid had generated but I don't know. I will say again it occurred simultaneously when I create a new TF.

As RHS testers, I have felt a long time we were in uncharted waters. Sid is both brave and adventurous to add a lot of the stuff we have, but till it is finished, I'm sure there will be more interesting "Twilight Zone" moments.
BTW, for the sake of scenerios like RHSCVO where Russia is supposed to be inactive, I say shuck the subs and let them come in during fall 1945 as reinforcements.

[el cid again]

Tales of teleporting and disappearing date to UV days - and things are a lot better now then they once were. I don't think these have anything to do with data files per se - or not usually. I run many tests and sometimes such things occur - but it is very rare.

Russian passive scenarios originally had no subs at all for the Soviets. The problem with your idea is that the deterrence value of a non-existent sub fleet = zero - and RHS specifically wants Japan to WORRY about those subs. Just keep em in port. There is no way to have Allies under AI control - so it should not be a problem.

REVISION: AI must control Soviet subs in a Russian Passive scenario (CVO and RPO) - so it is a problem -
these are all set to 450801 from x.677 on.