RHS 5, 6 & 7 .760 Economic Utilities uploaded

[el cid again]

Time marches on. It is time to wind up the RHS project in its developmental form. We are about to enter an extensive testing phase to work out the many technical experiments incorporated - and that will lead to a difinitive form - x.80

At the moment all we are waiting for is clarification we have all ship art pointers right - and revised ship art to point at.
That will lead to the interim form x.760

I intend to return to developing a game on a Chinese invasion of Taiwan - Strait Crossing! -
possibly on the WOP platform. [Cobra has first impression maps on the wrong scale made from my hand made samples]

That isn't like moving to a foreign country - or leaving the Forum. But it does mean a lot less time working on WITP.
After x.760 (and the current x.7594 might become x.760 if we need no pointer changes), there will be a significant gap before we do another release. During that gap we will attempt the Tag Team game and a number of other human vs human games - and listen to reports from others. We also will run the AI scenario in AI vs AI tests of extended length. The goal is to find ways to make more improvements for the final form of RHS.

The only other development on the horizon is that I might do pwhex files for Cobra's winter and monsoon maps.
They could be used in an ongoing game. And that only for Level 7.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Time marches on. It is time to wind up the RHS project in its developmental form. We are about to enter an extensive testing phase to work out the many technical experiments incorporated - and that will lead to a difinitive form - x.80

At the moment all we are waiting for is clarification we have all ship art pointers right - and revised ship art to point at.
That will lead to the interim form x.760

I intend to return to developing a game on a Chinese invasion of Taiwan - Strait Crossing! -
possibly on the WOP platform. [Cobra has first impression maps on the wrong scale made from my hand made samples]

That isn't like moving to a foreign country - or leaving the Forum. But it does mean a lot less time working on WITP.
After x.760 (and the current x.7594 might become x.760 if we need no pointer changes), there will be a significant gap before we do another release. During that gap we will attempt the Tag Team game and a number of other human vs human games - and listen to reports from others. We also will run the AI scenario in AI vs AI tests of extended length. The goal is to find ways to make more improvements for the final form of RHS.

The only other development on the horizon is that I might do pwhex files for Cobra's winter and monsoon maps.
They could be used in an ongoing game. And that only for Level 7.

Do the American S-boats have the right art?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: herwin

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Time marches on. It is time to wind up the RHS project in its developmental form. We are about to enter an extensive testing phase to work out the many technical experiments incorporated - and that will lead to a difinitive form - x.80

At the moment all we are waiting for is clarification we have all ship art pointers right - and revised ship art to point at.
That will lead to the interim form x.760

I intend to return to developing a game on a Chinese invasion of Taiwan - Strait Crossing! -
possibly on the WOP platform. [Cobra has first impression maps on the wrong scale made from my hand made samples]

That isn't like moving to a foreign country - or leaving the Forum. But it does mean a lot less time working on WITP.
After x.760 (and the current x.7594 might become x.760 if we need no pointer changes), there will be a significant gap before we do another release. During that gap we will attempt the Tag Team game and a number of other human vs human games - and listen to reports from others. We also will run the AI scenario in AI vs AI tests of extended length. The goal is to find ways to make more improvements for the final form of RHS.

The only other development on the horizon is that I might do pwhex files for Cobra's winter and monsoon maps.
They could be used in an ongoing game. And that only for Level 7.

Do the American S-boats have the right art?

It depends on what art you use. They used to - and I use the old RHS art - so yes. But the new "standardized" art has many US (and Soviet) subs look like merchant ships! That art package is being redone. So is the pre standard RHS ship art package. Both are overdue and should release in revised form any time. Either can be used with a game in progress. I am prepaired for these reviews to show there may be a pointer error issue somewhere - but there might not be any - and when this question is resolved we are going to freeze RHS development. If there are no pointer issues or other eratta that matters, we might even just use the present file set. But I assume we will have one more release - called x.760

Note that Level 7 had fewer eratta for the x.7594 release than Level 6 did - the first time it was cleaner. Six was supposed to proove the concept of map edge movement tracks - and did. It also was long cleaner - and more suitable for playing - but apparently no longer. To reduce the management work - there are 21 RHS scenario file sets (7 scenarios times three levels) - we are going to abandon Six. Should have some time ago - but I don't want the ship art pointers out of sync - because some are using it.

[DuckofTindalos]

Wow! Would that mean that we would get the Scenario Design forum back?

[el cid again]

Did you lose it?

Would it be better off if there had been no RHS?

Would it be better off if it was dominated by hostile comments?

[The answers are left as an exercise for each student to form in his or her own mind]

[Dili]

I just have to say i dont understand the level of hostility towards el cid. I have already disagreed strongly with him in certain subjects and agreed in others but that is just it.

[m10bob]

I agree. Sid was pretty much a "new kid on the block" just over a year ago and met a lot of criticism for expounding so much hypothesis on "sacred turf", but having listened and watched his activities on this forum, I have learned a lot about the game engine.
Too, I've been mightily impressed with the unfolding of many of his experiments.
The fact he has kept an open mind and allowed many of my ideas to be included (OOB-wise) has been an egotistical rush.(Pretty certain others feel this way as well.)

The contibutions of CHS and RHS are something one might expect of paid staffers, but from contributors driven by nothing but their own internal challenges and goals toward a game for the sake of other fellow gamers leaves me even more grateful.

[Buck Beach]

I too am amazed at this hostility. You would think those constantly jabbing at everything he has to say actually paid for a product that he sold them under false pretenses. Maybe its because he dares to infringe into their perceived sacred club. Big T (as his name is coined by Sid) appears to have little life outside scouring WITP threads for anything Sid posts so he can throw in a dig or two and then the lemmings follow suit.

I also thank Sid for his extra ordinary efforts (with appreciation to the CHS people also) with this game.

Editted comments:

My, my, my as I read closer a few posts back, jealousy is exactly where Terminus is coming from. To Quote: "Wow! Would that mean that we would get the Scenario Design forum back?"
Who ever gave him the keys to the WITP gate? Who does he mean and include with WE? He really should just "bugger off" to use a phrase from our southern hemisphere friends.

[Historiker]

Will it be possible to uprade an ongoing game?
It will make not too much sense, starting a new PBEM with RHS, if it's impossible to upgrade it later...

[m10bob]

You can always put in the new versions but any changes will not be seen in your on-going games.(Nor will they hurt your on-going games.)
The exception to this is if you ever change map art, Pwhex files, or any kind of art work. These items will be seen in your on-going games..

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Will it be possible to uprade an ongoing game?
It will make not too much sense, starting a new PBEM with RHS, if it's impossible to upgrade it later...

In general, it is not possible to upgrade an ongoing game in any form of WITP. But we never will find the bugs if we never play it - in particular issues that won't show up in the first few days require we play longer games. Humans do things AI does not - and humans playing also notice things that AI games won't reveal.

IF a PROBLEM exists in an ongoing game - a programmer could fix it. Also - if ART changes - upgrading ART is not an issue in any game of any mod. We expect to have new ship art - probably two different sets - which will work for all levels and all scenarios of RHS (not all the art is used by every scenario). Similarly, any changes (and none are contemplated) in pwhex can be done DURING an ongoing game. [We might offer a monsoon or winter pwhex one day for Level 7 scenarios]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

You can always put in the new versions but any changes will not be seen in your on-going games.(Nor will they hurt your on-going games.)
The exception to this is if you ever change map art, Pwhex files, or any kind of art work. These items will be seen in your on-going games..

Quite right - BUT you must restart the program to see new art. Just restarting the game turn will let you see pwhex changes.

[Historiker]

Can you already recommend RHS EOS for a PBEM?

[TheElf]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach
Big T (as his name is coined by Sid) appears to have little life outside scouring WITP threads for anything Sid posts so he can throw in a dig or two and then the lemmings follow suit.

You might be suprised one day...

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Can you already recommend RHS EOS for a PBEM?

Definately NOT. This is why RHS AIO was created. AI has a big problem understanding navigation between the ocean and interior river/lake systems - so AIO has removed the latter entirely. AI also has problems with understanding active Russins not in the war - so they are passive. AIO is EOS with no interior river systems and passive Russians

AND

it has few Japanese political points - same as CVO - but the points are distributed (since the Ai won't use em - mostly)
in a way that helps AI "know" where to send a unit

Sid

[Historiker]

I don't want to play against the AI - that's why I asked for playing EOS as PBEM - so with a human opponent! There shall be no problems with interior lake and river systems, as I play against a human, no? Are the poltitical points low for EOS as Japan, too, or only against the AI?

And again the question: Can I play EOS against a human opponent, so not against AI in a PBEM?

[witpqs]

I think 'yes'. There are bound to be further adjustments later on, but that could be a while (unless Sid comes back to say he's got something he's about to release).

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Historiker

I don't want to play against the AI - that's why I asked for playing EOS as PBEM - so with a human opponent! There shall be no problems with interior lake and river systems, as I play against a human, no? Are the poltitical points low for EOS as Japan, too, or only against the AI?

And again the question: Can I play EOS against a human opponent, so not against AI in a PBEM?

Sorry - I was brain dead after coming home from work in the wee hours of the morning. I somehow changed PBEM to play vs AI in my head. Yes - yes - you got it right. Humans have no problems playing with interior river systems, and these are often very significant. It is a moderately important distortion they are NOT in regular WITP. Rivers permit you to flank the enemy, supply where roads do not go, etc. The mattered IRL in Manchuria and Burma and China. They might have mattered in a campaign in India, Thailand or Indochina. I didn't put in the Yukon one - no ports anyway except Whitehorse are on it (and no slots) - but you can move very heavy things on the Yukon well above Whitehorse - and this is how it was done in those days.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I think 'yes'. There are bound to be further adjustments later on, but that could be a while (unless Sid comes back to say he's got something he's about to release).

Well - a challenge to the data on the C-46 has me convinced that our standard reference data is misleading. Reviewing the matter, I have decided to revise the way we calculate air cargo ratings - comprehensively. So there will be an enhancement - if you care about this sort of thing. Seems code only uses full cargo weight - and we long ago decided that typical operational values get priority for range - so we will do that for cargo as well. It means you will get normal cargo rating at 50% range - there is no normal range or extended range for transport - although we have tricked it into making extended range = 50% range. Now we will trick it into believing max load = normal load. The downside is that you can use transports at slightly smaller airfields without as bad an attrition penalty - but that is not entirely bad in my view.

Another change that will fold into the next (final?) release for the present is removal of two US Army shipping engineer regiments - one went to ETO and the other didn't exist. I might also shift the rest back in time because none made it into use until 1943. Sounds easy - but it takes time to change all those landing craft (even at 60 per unit).

For EOS and AIO I found the Midway land assault force is too small - and it will at least gain a reserve tank company. I have found that Hawaii can be taken, but AI will never even try - no matter how much you throw at it.

Otherwise, I have problems with an "empty" HQ slot - a fixed immoblie naval HQ unit at Manila wants to run to Bataan - some wierd hard code - a unit that is static always goes there. I might fix it - if it can be fixed - or kill it for AIO - because it never will stay put if you let AI run the Allies. Or just say "always have humans play Allies" - which of course we should say because AI has big problem with Allies anyway. Letting AI run the Allies is the best way for Japan to win the war!

[witpqs]

Sid,

If you're looking to put out another update soon then I have another item for you.

Some time ago you researched and updated the capacity of the various AO's. One class of them, the Kennebec class, had a value that was too large for the game engine. It actually showed up in-game as a negative number! You temporarily resolved the issue by reducing the Kennebec class capacity to 16000.

Some time later, Joe Wilkerson reported that item as fixed in a release. I just tested this, and now the maximum capacity (for AO's and tankers - not sure about other stuff) is 32767. If you go up to 32768 the editor saves it as a negative number, but 32767 works just fine (and comes up in-game just fine).

I do not know what the correct capacity is for the Kennebec class, or if there are any other classes that you reduced to accommodate the limitation. BTW, Kennebec class is slots 349 and 1483.