RHS 5 & 6.7851 (final) & 7 comprehensive update uploading

[el cid again]

Working on ships - I did cruisers but got stuck in submarines - I found a good deal of either eratta or enhancements - which I then elected to backfit. It has been a long time since I looked at ships in detail - and I find a number of simplifications and compromises that can be changed by separating out sub classes. For example, submarines of the ABC series with 17, 18 and 19 torpedoes were all represented with 3 shots of 6 torpedoes. Now they are broken out so it is always 17, 18 or 19 torpedoes, and the 18 case is further broken out by scenario: CVO and BBO ("strictly historical") family get 6 shots of 3 while EOS ("Japan enhansed") family scenarios get 3 shots of 6. Formerly combined sub classes in terms of range/cruising speed can now be more precisely modeled instead of lumped. Cases where submarines "crept" between scenarios (EOS subs appearing in CVO for example) are now corrected - so you are stuck with HMG (or even MMG) instead of 25mm AAA, etc. for early war vessels.

Someone found an error in one location in one scenario - but that meant we need to reissue location files - so I began looking at land units - coast defense units in particular. Aside from actual changes for EEO - many of which should apply to EOS and AIO - I found some eratta - and have backfitted it. [We had the wrong 3 inch guns in IJN CD units. These were tiny, ancient, wheeled things, manpacked to points of use, and I decided they are best modeled by 75mm mountain guns, and very poorly modeled by old 3 inch AA guns, although they were indeed 3 inch guns - which is technically 76.2 mm].

I changed midget sub devices so we can look at other devices. Artillery reform - in spite of lots of noise about how it would be a big problem - has worked out well for AA and CD - and not harmed land combat. I will extend it to mortars - and possibly other weapons. I tentatively will rate mortars as similar to infantry guns, but divide accuracy by 2 to reflect they never are used for direct fire. That is, a 70-75 mm infantry howitzer or gun is rated at 120, so a mortar of that size - I don't think there is one - would be a 60. That is the reference point, so a two inch mortar will be slightly more accurate - with less punch - and a 81 mm mortar will be slightly less accurate - with more punch. This will make pure mortar units have more value, and units with organic mortars have slightly more firepower.

I reviewed air units for the subs that have them (or mostly don't have them) in EEO, and found a couple of cases where subs that should have air units in other scenario's did not, or other eratta. That is corrected. I will have to do the same thing for any carrier changes - and I will cross check for eratta.

x.785 will be comprehensive and will apply to all levels. It will hopefully be the last time I feel there is enough eratta to justify doing 5 and 6 (which will free me from a lot of data entry). The eratta here are getting very small - things no one would notice not intimately familiar with these vessels in many cases. [Some gunships lacked shields for some secondary guns or tirtiary guns, or had 3mm vice 2mm, or vice versa kind of thing]. But some of it was wrong enough to warrant correcting. [Just now I found 122 mm gun howitzers got misdefined - by me - in the latest issue - because of "adjusting" the wrong field - and 122s matter if the Soviets fight]

ETA Monday or Tuesday - with luck - and I will not release EEO before 7.785 level. EEO also will NOT have a Level 5 or 6 form.

[el cid again]

Tentative mortar scale:

Mortars use the same scale for soft effect as artillery: square root of effect which is weight in pounds
Mortars use HALF the scale as field guns/AT guns for anti-armor value: caliber in mm times 1.75 (divided by 2)

base: 3 inch = 76mm = 60 (half of a 75 mm Field Gun accuracy)

60 mm = 65
2 inch = 51 mm = 70
80/81/82 mm = 50
90 mm = 40
105 mm = 35 [Scale calibration point = half of a 105 mm howitzer]
120 mm = 30
4.2 inch = 130 mm = 25
150 mm = 20 [Scale calibration point = half of a 150 mm howitzer]
160 mm = 15
270 mm = 10
320 mm = 6
400 mm = 4

[Dukemourn]

I'm rooting for Monday, then I'll start up two games. I appreciate your efforts.

In RHSAIO v7.783 the Centurion Class BB Anson, in Port in Bombay, has no main guns, only AA guns. It looks like a BBAA.

[m10bob]

Dukemourn, that was a history lesson for quite a few of us which Sid threw in.
The Brits had a "decoy" which they used to make the Japanese think was the BB and it really was only armed with AA guns as you pointed out.
You can do a google search under "decoy Anson" and will find the history of this real ship.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Dukemourn

I'm rooting for Monday, then I'll start up two games. I appreciate your efforts.

In RHSAIO v7.783 the Centurion Class BB Anson, in Port in Bombay, has no main guns, only AA guns. It looks like a BBAA.

Aha! You got fooled by a deception ship!!!

She is not much of a BBAA - very few AA guns!

She is IRL HMS Centurion - a WWI era battleship - converted (mainly by judicious use of plywood) to look like a KGV class battleship - specifically HMS Anson. So she will report as a BB to the enemy, she is so classified.

Pull her up on your screen and notice her CLASS = HMS Centurion.

She was at Bombay when PTO erupted into war. Later she went to Egypt and WAS converted to a BBAA after all - by adding AA of course. Eventually she was expended as a breakwater at Normandy. This ship was useful because her engines worked in spite of their age.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Tentative mortar scale:

Mortars use the same scale for soft effect as artillery: square root of effect which is weight in pounds
Mortars use HALF the scale as field guns/AT guns for anti-armor value: caliber in mm times 1.75 (divided by 2)

base: 3 inch = 76mm = 60 (half of a 75 mm Field Gun accuracy)

60 mm = 65
2 inch = 51 mm = 70
80/81/82 mm = 50
90 mm = 40
105 mm = 35
120 mm = 30
4.2 inch = 130 mm = 25
150 mm = 20
160 mm = 15
270 mm = 10
320 mm = 6
400 mm = 4

Mortar HE shells are about three times as effective as gun ammo and about 50% more effective than howitzer ammo. On the other hand, supply is a big issue close to the front lines. Accuracy is much poorer, due to the fin stabilisation, so don't expect them to hit point targets except by accident, and even then the fragmentation is not the primary kill mechanism.

[el cid again]

I see - you are talking about mortars - duh - so was I! The reason mortars are pretty good at hitting targets is they are not shooting at long ranges. But it is not the same as spin stabolized artillery - that is for sure. Further - mortars are somewhat like ships in that they don't normally know exactly where they are in the sense an artillery FDC knows where it is. But they should be able to hit a NON MOVING point target - if it is not really tiny. And of course they tend to be used on soft targets that are not exactly point targets anyway - so "damage" occurs when some of the men in the target element are hurt or killed. I am not sure what you mean by "more effective"? But our system inherantly means smaller shells are more effective re soft targets. The bigger the shell, the less the "soft effect" value goes up - as a root function. So big shells are not nice - but not nearly as efficient pound for pound. Is that what you mean?

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

I see - you are talking about mortars - duh - so was I! The reason mortars are pretty good at hitting targets is they are not shooting at long ranges. But it is not the same as spin stabolized artillery - that is for sure. Further - mortars are somewhat like ships in that they don't normally know exactly where they are in the sense an artillery FDC knows where it is. But they should be able to hit a NON MOVING point target - if it is not really tiny. And of course they tend to be used on soft targets that are not exactly point targets anyway - so "damage" occurs when some of the men in the target element are hurt or killed. I am not sure what you mean by "more effective"? But our system inherantly means smaller shells are more effective re soft targets. The bigger the shell, the less the "soft effect" value goes up - as a root function. So big shells are not nice - but not nearly as efficient pound for pound. Is that what you mean?

For effective, read lethal area.

[el cid again]

Are you saying that a mortar bomb, of equal weight, has a greater lethal area than a howitzer shell does?

[We have discounted AP shells because there is more structure and less bursting charge. Should we to the opposite for mortars - increasing the "effect" - or at least the "soft effect" over the standard for normal bombs and shells?]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Are you saying that a mortar bomb, of equal weight, has a greater lethal area than a howitzer shell does?

[We have discounted AP shells because there is more structure and less bursting charge. Should we to the opposite for mortars - increasing the "effect" - or at least the "soft effect" over the standard for normal bombs and shells?]

Yes, for two reasons: greater bursting charge and the lethal area is circular in shape rather than more-or-less elliptical. (The lethal area for howitzer shells is actually lunate in shape, as is the lethal area for gun shells, only more so. If the gun shell operates by shotgun rather than fragmentation, the lethal area is elliptical with the range axis longer, but the area is about the same.)

[Dukemourn]

Thanks for info on BB Anson m10bob & Sid. Nice little wrinkle Sid. Now don't answer any more of my posts until you finish 7.785.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: Dukemourn

Thanks for info on BB Anson m10bob & Sid. Nice little wrinkle Sid. Now don't answer any more of my posts until you finish 7.785.

There are other "Easter eggs" thruout RHS but maybe not so well "hidden".
Most have to do with things like OOB corrections, aircraft stats/weapons, ship armament, etc, because while Sid has pretty much edited everything for public consumption, EVERYBODY has input.
Problem might percieved that Sid will sometimes play the devils' advocate and make you prove certain points to validate why they might be included in RHS (or sometimes other forum members will argue because after 30-50 years of mis-information, their mind is made up.)
Life goes on and we move on.[;)]

[el cid again]

A reported problem with ship art led to a correction of a Soviet sub pointer. This also led to correcting the location that SN S-51 appears - should be Vladivostok vice Colon Panama. And this also led to correcting dates for all RHSAIO Soviet submarines - they should not appear until 1945 - because this is a Russian passive scenario and code gets all messed up with Soviet subs in a passive scenario (thinking they are USN I guess).

[el cid again]

It turns out that Dutch CL, British CA, and secondaries on Richeleiu all have DP capability. Japanese heavy guns also have AA shells. All these weapons will have very low effectiveness due to the way our system works. Working on folding this in.

We may modify the effect rating of mortars by some simple system. Leave "effect" = weight of shell - so the data is obvious - but modify "soft effect" by a K factor. Following Herwin, lets go with 150% - the correct ratio re howitzer shells. That was the base model for artillery - HE shells from howitzers.

[el cid again]

I am continuing to work on EEO - and backfitting eratta/enhancements discovered into other scenarios. I will issue x.785 tomorrow (Wednesday).

[Dukemourn]

Good Cid.....Looks like I'll be able to start playing again today.

[el cid again]

Level 7 is in packaging and upload to primary distribution list at this time. 5 and 6 will follow tonight (Alaska time).

[el cid again]

This is the unreleased 6.785 plus a significant review of aircraft production - because we wanted to end Level 6 updates in a reasonably correct form and we found that factory production and off map replacement production needed coordinating.

It also changes the F7F to a night fighter - land plane only - and does the opposite for the night fighter variant of the TBF - which now is carrier capable. That changes two squadrons which had been flying F6F night fighters so they could operate of dedicated night fighter CVLs. The USMC night fighter squadrons that start with F6Fs now upgrade to F7F.

Aircraft production in Australia is more than tripled. We not only added numbers, but also a new type of aircraft - the Beaufighter. Aircraft production in the USA is rearranged as well - and the Boeing Renton plant, the biggest building in the world - is added at Tacoma.

A few more eratta were found and worked in - and a few technical minor enhancements - so this is slightly ahead of 7.785 level. Levels 5 and then 7 will follow.

These should be the final updates for Level 6 and Level 5.

[el cid again]

Level 5.7851 files in the upload process.

[el cid again]

Level 7 updates are now uploading. This series is not completed. RHSEEO is not yet quite done and doing it may lead to more enhancements, but they probably will not be backfitted to Levels 5 & 6. If there are no eratta, we will freeze Level 7 here for now, and EEO will issue at 7.7851 level. Otherwise, Level 7 (only, hopefully) will have a 7.7852 update (possibly a microupdate).

These files are in pretty good shape. The new changes have worked out rather well. They are suitable for starting longer term test games.