RHS 7.91

Please post here for questions and discussion about scenario design and the game editor for WITP.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
Buck Beach
Posts: 1974
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Upland,CA,USA

RHS 7.91

Post by Buck Beach »

The mounting evidence is that 7.91 is so seriously flawed in several areas (having nothing to do with any AI issue) that it is really unplayable. The non functional shipboard ASW devices is the final straw and it is a foolish waste of time to continue my current game. This, and the ship repair issue, could of and should of been discovered in any basic preliminary continuous test not involving running an actual game.

I am very disappointed.
el cid again
Posts: 16983
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm

RE: RHS 7.91

Post by el cid again »

OK - one big problem lies with the Russians in Russian active scenarios - that is half the set: I finally got the fighters to fly - that was AI - it simply does not fly all the time. But both escort and sweep will fly - and enough tests revealed it.

The other big problem is with ASW devices. I constructed a test bed and could not show any working.
I put stock devices into it - and the DC work - while the "special weapons" (Hedgehog, etc) don't seem to work.

I thought maybe it is the accuracy - the minimum stock value is 5 - but that is not it - some of ours are above that -
and even values like 90 don't work either.

I then looked at other fields - and there is something radical: there is a BIG range in stock.
I don't think it is range. Unless it was range in yards for a thrower - and since DC often are not thrown that makes no sense.
I think it is somebody's idea of depth in feet. Hundreds of feet make sense. This needs to be verified.

I am not sure why DC were able to drop from an airplane? But it may be stock does not see DC as different from bombs
when running air attacks. Anyway - the length of the string is not an issue. But it may be there are minimum values
just as with shells. We may have to settle for too large values - or we may be able to adjust effect to compensate.
el cid again
Posts: 16983
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm

RE: RHS 7.91

Post by el cid again »

When I get sick of test runs I look for ways to improve production and reduce fast ship repairs - Columbo, Trincolalee, Rangoon,
Sydney. The former got a new form of small sink organic to other units which is support neutral. The latter moved the sink out of the
city to an adjacent city with no repair shipyards. Also - some rural points in Australia and NZ lost their damaged resource centers.
This mechanism to increase production can be forced - but it is easier to force at a port or river port than it is at a non port. It is better when at a point that naturally can accumulate supply points - which is not always the same as where mines are sunk unfortunately.
Post Reply

Return to “Scenario Design”