RHS non critical comprehensive update 7.945 uploaded

[el cid again]

Having done unit by unit reviews of CVO and EOS family sceanrios, and paid attention to threads on more general WITP matters,
there are a few items which are or may be issues with current files:

1) In EOS family scenarios, the Yokosuka Naval AA Regiment has the CVO family 12 cm AA gun instead of the 10 cm AA gun. This
can only be fixed by an update. Location file slot 979 weapon slot 1 should be device 294. It is not a serious issue and the function is properly performed.

2) In EEO and EBO scenarios ONLY the Korean Command Unit flies the wrong airplane. These scenarios replaced the Ki-36 with the dive bomber version of the B7 - a late war plane. There might be one other Ki-36 unit with the same issue that appears early in the war. Such units may be simply not used - or upgraded to the Val. They should not be used with B7 until this plane exists.

3) I thought there was a problem with the combined device 60 kg bomb or DC. This is an unfortunate compromise due to slot limits - below the size of "small DC" as used by ships - to represent some of the air ASW weapons. There IS a problem reporting this device in 7.94 - and there IS ALSO an update already issued re this device. It turns out the reporting issue may NOT be meaningful - and I am running tests with the device coded both ways - as a bomb and as a DC. Both work in a similar way - and how aircraft use them is not understood by anyone?
But it does appear they are carried and used (if not always reported in every kind of display) - and it isn't clear which is the best way to code this device? The most current file form is also the traditional RHS one before 7.94 - as a bomb - except the present "bomb" also has a depth rating - which may or may not be ignored. I will attempt to pin this down better - and also I will try to understand air ASW better. But it does appear we will have less powerful ASW air patrols by the mechanism of reducing bomb effectiveness to a standard accuracy - which in most cases involved large or vast decreases (we are using the lowest accuracy in the data) - so in the case of the 60 kg it went from 7 to 4 - almost cut in half.

[Amplification: this device is used by Japanese patrol planes and Anson - and it is used on both search missions and on ASW missions.
No matter what you do - both missions produce "hits" - even if NO weapons are loaded. What is the "hit" with? It may be a default slot - but which one? It may be abstract - arbitrary values. In an ASW mission, it may be that bombs are used on surfaced subs and ASW devices on submerged ones - but it may be only in some abstract sense - and either way - accuracy and effect and possibly penetration are probably used in a similar way. It may be the only impact of using this device is to permit flying bombing missions - or it may be this device will be used if specified in the loadout - as a torpedo bomber uses WHATEVER torpedo you load it with - but only one - no matter how many you load. Larger planes use true DC - the same as ships carry - but this device is used as an attempt to insure a smaller weapon is carried by planes unable to carry a larger one. It probably works at least vs ships and surfaced submarines.]

[el cid again]

4) There is a report that bombardment rockets can be made to work. I am comparing the workaround devices - that do work - in one test seires - with new ones - reclassified as rockets - to see which is better? Turns out the needed changes were already in RHS data - all we do is classify as rockets instead of naval guns. Whichever is better will be in whatever comprehensive update is next.

[el cid again]

I will focus on playtest games and collecting other eratta - and reports of possible erata - and issue updates in due course. There is no specific plan - but anyone wishing the most current edition can get it by asking.

The RHS site manager is out of communications and so files must be obtained from someone on the primary distribution list - until we regain the ability to post to the site. Art files are still current - but scenario data files are not. We may get a new form of the installer to make it automatic - when it appears things have settled down. To which end - focus is now on testing - the only way to know. But the lack of problems in spite of microscopic analysis is encouraging.

Most RHS news will shift to the AAR Forum.

[el cid again]

In MRAO (only) too many seaplanes are assigned to Mogami class cruisers. Only one ship cannot operate them - but all the class should be reated for 3 (vice 4) - and all the E13 groups should have one plane vice 2. You can land either seaplane group and you can assign a 1 plane group in its place if you have one you are willing to trade as a workaround.

In CVO and BBO families Mogami herself has a seperate upgrade path (so she becomes a semi-carrier seaplane type) - and that ship has the wrong initial compliment of 4 vice 3 seaplanes - although the air group is right at only 3.

[Bogo Mil]

A few issues I found in my CVO game against Drew Black. We started with 7.79.75 - maybe you already corrected some of them:

1. CL Tama is Kitakami class -- should be Kuma class.
2. I have 60 A6M5 in the pool right from the start. Strange. On the other hand, there are not enough Axis Hawk and biplane bombers to fill out the Thai squadrons when they arrive.
3. Around edit: Wuhan, not Honan, the map art differs significantly from the coded map (press R key) - road network is different, river doesn't cause shock attack.
4. A similiar issue in central Indochina (I didn't memorize these base names): The map art shows roads, even the R key shows roads. But the hex boundaries are impassable, no movement is possible there. That's a bit confusing...
5. At 2 bases the base name differs from the name displayed in the map art: Menado - Manado (NE Clelebes) and Llagan - Ilagan (Luzon).
6. Ningpo doesn't draw oil from Shanghai - this might be intentional, but it surprised me a lot (only one hex away).
7. The bases on Hainan start with 90,000 oil each. They neither produce nor consume any oil, so these stockpiles don't make much sense.

[Bogo Mil]

There is another point, though this isn't a real bug, mor a design issue: The Japanese have lots of AS ships, but not a single AD, and they will never produce one. This really hurts. In stock, you don't have a MLE - but at least you can convert AKs to MLE, so you will have enough after half a year. But it is impossible to convert anything to AD.

My suggestion: Change some (ca. 4-8) of the AS to AD. There are some transports which upgrade to AS ships (Heian Maru IIRC) - those could upgrade to AD instead. If the player really needs that many AS, he can pay merchant shipyard points to convert AKs.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

A few issues I found in my CVO game against Drew Black. We started with 7.79.75 - maybe you already corrected some of them:

1. CL Tama is Kitakami class -- should be Kuma class.

This is an interesting case: planned to be converted to Kitakami standards, it was not for lack of torpedoes. This is different in BBO and EOS families - but in CVO family (including RAO, MRAO and CAIO) it should indeed be Kuma as you say. The Kitakami design went through several iterations - and details can be found in Japanese Cruisers of World War Two.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

A few issues I found in my CVO game against Drew Black. We started with 7.79.75 - maybe you already corrected some of them:

2. I have 60 A6M5 in the pool right from the start. Strange. On the other hand, there are not enough Axis Hawk and biplane bombers to fill out the Thai squadrons when they arrive.

This A6M5 problem is one of those rare problems that must be my fault but I am not clever enough to fix it. It plagues all forms of CVO and BBO families - but disappears for some reason in EOS family. I have spent long hours searching for the cause - but not found it. I have traded slots for planes - and still it persists.

The only thing to do is not use the planes. Curiously - they also are recorded as "used" when they are not - from time to time.

The Hawk matter is corrected long since.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

A few issues I found in my CVO game against Drew Black. We started with 7.79.75 - maybe you already corrected some of them:

3. Around edit: Wuhan, not Honan, the map art differs significantly from the coded map (press R key) - road network is different, river doesn't cause shock attack.
4. A similiar issue in central Indochina (I didn't memorize these base names): The map art shows roads, even the R key shows roads. But the hex boundaries are impassable, no movement is possible there. That's a bit confusing...
5. At 2 bases the base name differs from the name displayed in the map art: Menado - Manado (NE Clelebes) and Llagan - Ilagan (Luzon).

Map art is not perfect - there was a long list of interactions between me and Cobra resulting in the present map. The list of items that needed changing was short when he lost his drives and stopped doing map art - but there are 4 or 5 such points. I play with reveal codes on to understand what is happeing anyway - so it does not bother me.

Map art names (generated by Cobra) are short to make the map less cluttered. Location file names (generated by me) are long - if I want you to understand what island or provice the location is in. Sometimes a city (see Tacloban) might be on different islands - both are in the hex - so I tell you in its name - which you only see when you put the cursor on the hex or bring up the location for full display. RHS is rich in location information - deliberately so.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

A few issues I found in my CVO game against Drew Black. We started with 7.79.75 - maybe you already corrected some of them:

6. Ningpo doesn't draw oil from Shanghai - this might be intentional, but it surprised me a lot (only one hex away).
7. The bases on Hainan start with 90,000 oil each. They neither produce nor consume any oil, so these stockpiles don't make much sense.

Ningpo WILL draw oil - but ONLY after it becomes a Level 3 port - OR after you capture enough road hexes for it to link to Shanghai (right now there are Chinese troops on the LOC).

Hainan is a location where oil is stockpiled - not that it is produced or consumed. You need to move it to a place that needs oil - or it never has a job. But it is an unusual location where YOU are in control - no LOC will suck it out - as in most places. It also appears that there may be a meaning to a 9 in the fifth digit - that is - 90,000 seems to help code "know" this is a location that is to be a shipping hub - assuming you let AI run ships - which I must do in AI scenarios.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

There is another point, though this isn't a real bug, mor a design issue: The Japanese have lots of AS ships, but not a single AD, and they will never produce one. This really hurts. In stock, you don't have a MLE - but at least you can convert AKs to MLE, so you will have enough after half a year. But it is impossible to convert anything to AD.

My suggestion: Change some (ca. 4-8) of the AS to AD. There are some transports which upgrade to AS ships (Heian Maru IIRC) - those could upgrade to AD instead. If the player really needs that many AS, he can pay merchant shipyard points to convert AKs.

The reason for this is historical: Japan did NOT produce any ADs. There was also only one true, regular navy AR - although there were a few auxiliary conversions. Repair ships are horribly expensive - in ways you cannot simulate in WITP - due to machine tools and specialists.
Letting a player convert an AK to a repair ship is a very poor simulation of the wartime situation in Japan. Letting it have any AD is a total misrepresentation of what they really did.

Now the MLE is different - it is a false ship type - present for a functional reason. You cannot load mines properly in most ports.. Matrix gave us the MLE so players could pick a few points besides Level 10 ports to load mines. I added 2 MLEs to Japan - and we will miss them in AE - which does away with the type - but does not correct the mine loading issue (which IRL is not an issue like WITP says). Matrix is hostile to mine warfare - does not want mines to be effective - and there is not much I can do about it. [In UV days one Matrix person posted if they did it the way mine warfare advocates want they should rename the game "mines in the pacific"]

[Bogo Mil]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil
1. CL Tama is Kitakami class -- should be Kuma class.

This is an interesting case: planned to be converted to Kitakami standards, it was not for lack of torpedoes. This is different in BBO and EOS families - but in CVO family (including RAO, MRAO and CAIO) it should indeed be Kuma as you say.

I thought it was just a small error - in the editor, Kuma and Kitakami are next to each other. Btw, the Tama has a floatplane in my game - Kuma class has 1 ac capacity, Kitakami class has none. Thus this floatplane became "reserve" and not usable.

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Map art names (generated by Cobra) are short to make the map less cluttered. Location file names (generated by me) are long - if I want you to understand what island or provice the location is in.

Yes, I understand this concept, it's a good thing. But read the names of these two bases carefully: It is not the common difference short name vs. long, detailed name or base name vs. island name. These names are spelled differently (2nd resp. 1st letter) - and that's confusing and imho a bug.

ORIGINAL: el cid again
The reason for this is historical: Japan did NOT produce any ADs.

[...]

Now the MLE is different - it is a false ship type - present for a functional reason. You cannot load mines properly in most ports..

Well, I think there is such a "functional reason" to add a few ADs, too: The Japanese were certainly able to replenish torpedoes in locations like the Marshall Islands, Formosa, Palau, Rabaul, ... In CVO, you have to go all the way back to Japan to replenish.

Sometimes the game engine does not allow to simulate all capabilities in the historically correct way. You don't get the correct reload capability without an incorrectly improved repair capability. But I think the lack of reloads hurts much more than the "wrong" help in repairs. Repairs are very simplified in witp anyways, there is not much historical correctness to break. In my opinion, it feels "historically wrong" and illogical, that you can put up torpedo reload stations for submarines at lots of small places simultaneously, while cruisers and destroyers have to go huge distances for replenishment and you can't do anything against this.


Apropos reload capability: I think there should also be a way to reload subs and minelayers on the Madagaskar mini map. Now all the vessels there are useless after their first sortie. My idea: Increase the port size of one of the minor bases to 9 and add a rule to the handbook, that this port may not be used for repairs, only to replenish ships.

Another point on Madagaskar is the economy: The island was not highly industrialized, but a 3rd world region. It feels strange that they use more resources than they produce. Suggestion: Add some resource centers and remove some HI.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil
1. CL Tama is Kitakami class -- should be Kuma class.

This is an interesting case: planned to be converted to Kitakami standards, it was not for lack of torpedoes. This is different in BBO and EOS families - but in CVO family (including RAO, MRAO and CAIO) it should indeed be Kuma as you say.

I thought it was just a small error - in the editor, Kuma and Kitakami are next to each other. Btw, the Tama has a floatplane in my game - Kuma class has 1 ac capacity, Kitakami class has none. Thus this floatplane became "reserve" and not usable.

The PLANE is right - the ship is wrong - and it IS an error - but one made because I once rebuilt the ship file - and missed that this ship was not the same in CVO as in BBO family. These are very old ships and many had been removed from front line service between the wars. They were regarded as training ships more than as front line warships by the time WWII approached - but IJN had a big problem with small numbers - so they were retained. I agonized over them in EOS family - more than once: they should be scrapped - and would be if the modern light cruisers appear in numbers - but we have no way to force scrapping (or to reward scrapping as should be done - steel is the most vital strategic material after petroleum). The Japanese need these ships when the war begins - and should replace them with newer ones (meaning their crews get newer vessels) which are designed for the later cruising speeds of IJN, have more effective weapons, and have fewer maintenance issues. I settled for what IJN really did - conversions to other functions - but you get more of this in EOS family: in the strictly historical scenarios these vessels become things like kaiten carriers - otherwise CLAAs; in EOS you get some of the CLAA versions contemplated but not executed - that is better CLAAs.

Not all ships with floatplanes have them assigned. You can transfer your plane ashore - or to another ship which needs one - or you can disband the unit once ashore at a base with the same type - and put it into the replacement pool.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil
1. CL Tama is Kitakami class -- should be Kuma class.

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Map art names (generated by Cobra) are short to make the map less cluttered. Location file names (generated by me) are long - if I want you to understand what island or provice the location is in.

Yes, I understand this concept, it's a good thing. But read the names of these two bases carefully: It is not the common difference short name vs. long, detailed name or base name vs. island name. These names are spelled differently (2nd resp. 1st letter) - and that's confusing and imho a bug.

There are several map art spelling errors. As far as I know there is no case of a location file spelling error. I cannot fix the map art - but it is in an overlay and could be fixed by someone who has the software to work on that. I don't think this will be done - but it - and a couple of places where rail lines don't show right - could be fixed - and would make use slightly better. We ended up with wonderful maps - but they remain imperfect. Note that in the high Arctic - lots of map pwhex coding errors remain - these inherited from CHS - but it isn't worth the vast amount of time to change them - since no one can go there anyway. Andrew never made the pwhex sync with the new art - and neither did I - in that area that is not used. For a long time I did add a few more hexes in the Bering Sea area - so now you can go farther North than before - but it is only cosmetic - why would you?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

ORIGINAL: el cid again
The reason for this is historical: Japan did NOT produce any ADs.

[...]

Now the MLE is different - it is a false ship type - present for a functional reason. You cannot load mines properly in most ports..

Well, I think there is such a "functional reason" to add a few ADs, too: The Japanese were certainly able to replenish torpedoes in locations like the Marshall Islands, Formosa, Palau, Rabaul, ... In CVO, you have to go all the way back to Japan to replenish.

Sometimes the game engine does not allow to simulate all capabilities in the historically correct way. You don't get the correct reload capability without an incorrectly improved repair capability. But I think the lack of reloads hurts much more than the "wrong" help in repairs. Repairs are very simplified in witp anyways, there is not much historical correctness to break. In my opinion, it feels "historically wrong" and illogical, that you can put up torpedo reload stations for submarines at lots of small places simultaneously, while cruisers and destroyers have to go huge distances for replenishment and you can't do anything against this.

I admit my thinking was about repairs - and about types historically used. I am not aware that ships cannot reload. Indeed - I am pretty sure ships DO reload torpedoes when they refuel. This is also correct - if they reload from tankers or from bases. If they don't - I will watch for this - your argument is persuasive.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil



Apropos reload capability: I think there should also be a way to reload subs and minelayers on the Madagaskar mini map. Now all the vessels there are useless after their first sortie. My idea: Increase the port size of one of the minor bases to 9 and add a rule to the handbook, that this port may not be used for repairs, only to replenish ships.

Another point on Madagaskar is the economy: The island was not highly industrialized, but a 3rd world region. It feels strange that they use more resources than they produce. Suggestion: Add some resource centers and remove some HI.

IRL the ships at Madagascar DID fight - but only once - and they didn't survive long enough to need rearming. I am very skeptical that there was much of a stock of mines or torpedoes - but there is likely to have been a small one. Wether or not it was any good is another question - storing such things in a warm place tends to make them useless (I have a wonderful report on German subs at Penang unable to use German torpedoes - so they tried to use Japanese ones - and found too many problems to make them work in German tubes - the poor state was attributed to heat and corrosion). Aside from making Diego Suarez a major port - it has the potential to be one but not really a Level 10 one IMHO - I don't think we have a good answer for this. Possibly we might put an AS there?

The economy is small - too small really for the forces persent IF they are fighting - and worse if part of it is messed up by enemy occupation or bombardment. Also - it connects mainly by SHIP - trails don't work very well when long - and not at all for supplies over more than 3 hexes. Resources and supplies ARE produced in the territory and its dependencies (islands) - BUT you MUST move them to benefit from them - and you can't do that once the Allies operate in the area (the AKs won't last). The bigger long term problem isn't resources but oil - how are you going to get more once the stocks run out? IRL they would get more from Africa - not an option here - and IRL neutral ships can sail unmolested - not an option here either. I do not see Madagascar as needing reform: it is a tiny local economy that barely functions in peacetime and collapses in wartime - as it should do. If you run out of resources - move some in from the outer islands and the ports that are not on the road/rail net - until either the Allies come or you run out of oil - when it no longer matters.

It is often hard to work with this too simple economic system. I classified many products of the French Indian Ocean Territories as supplies - in particular food items. This unfortunately converts them to ammunition and aviation and truck fuel when needed as such - also into spare parts.
But I worked hard to represent resources properly - and it is weight based - the numbers are the annual production in tons divided by days. Reserves are usually ten days of production except at a center - which may have values up to 30 days of production in stores. Code seems to want to have 10 days stores if not isolated (when it must accumulate forever) and if not required somewhere else - and it is the actual SOP in many industries.

[Bogo Mil]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
I admit my thinking was about repairs - and about types historically used. I am not aware that ships cannot reload. Indeed - I am pretty sure ships DO reload torpedoes when they refuel.

Ships reload torpedoes when they refuel in a port of size 8 or larger (for PTs, less is sufficient, IIRC size 3 or 4).

Truk is large enough. Rabaul is 3(5), so it can eventually become
size 8, but a lot of construction time is needed. No Australian port north of Brisbane is large enough, Palau, Kwajalein, Midway, Marianas, all ports in the NEI except Soerabaya are too small.

Worst locations are the central Pacific, where you have to go all the way back to Truk or Tokyo. If Truk and Rabaul are lost or isolated, next reloading ports are Manila and Soerabaya. These are huge distances... You see, the Japanese really need some ADs.

[Bogo Mil]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Aside from making Diego Suarez a major port - it has the potential to be one but not really a Level 10 one IMHO - I don't think we have a good answer for this. Possibly we might put an AS there?

I think a MLE is better. It sounds reasonable that they don't have unlimited supplies of torpedoes there. But mines are simple and rugged, they can stand the heat. If they sent minelayers there, they certainly sent mines for them, too. The MLE could be stationary (speed 0), so it can't leave the minimap.

Diego Suarez is 4(5), so it already CAN become size 8 for torpedo reloads - if the Japanese send engineers (only 8 squads are present) and hold out long enough to do all the expansion work. Both seems to be highly unlikely, though.

[el cid again]

The mission and function of the military in a colonial possession like Madasgar was

Primo (Ichi): maintain power vs anyone with illusions not to "cooperate" with the colonial power - these are armies of occupation first of all

Secundo (Ni): deter an attempt to annex the place by a rival colonial power

Tirtio (San): delay an invasion by a rival long enough for forces to arrive from the mother country (a matter of a few weeks).

Now Madagascar was a classic colony - but its situation was extremely awkward. France had been defeated by Germany and it was under the Vichy regime - a collaborationist one nevertheless legally (and morally) neutral in WWII. It was no longer a "mother country" able to send a relief expedition to its colonies - but the forces in Madagascar were frozen in time - there being no way to change their material, training or organization. Note they DID hold out long enough to perform mission three - but no relief was going to come.

These missions require the main forces be infantry. Madagascar is a de facto division combat team with small air and naval auxiliaries. These auxiliaries are NOT designed to fight a naval or naval air campaign of any duration. Instead, they have entirely minor naval and naval air missions: they can go out and find smugglers and slavers and drug runners; they insure no single enemy warship will dare to make trouble of any sort; they provide the basis for enough resistence to support a technical claim of sovereignty no matter how large an invasion force shows up (provided they actually engage); and they can move infantry and supply infantry to remote parts of the big island or to remote islands as required. The "observation bombers" can even provide minimal air support for the infantry. But this is not a force designed to fight a regular army - it is a classic colonial force - with a single battalion of politically reliable white settlers and two regiments of natives under white officers. They did very well in the conditions - fighting professionals for half a year before losing the capital - yet the issue was never in doubt. It took only a day or two to wipe out the air an naval auxiliaries - and then it was mainly a fight up the mountain spine of the island to secure the rail/road LOC to Tenareve. The landings at Diego Suarez were dismally opposed. This was not a force intended, equipped, trained or inclined to fight in the sense of first line troops. This is military power on the cheap - which means there is minimal local support. You stock parts to fix the engines - and shells for guns - but probably not complex weapons like mines and torpedoes. In many such situations it would be SOP to have only what is embarked - and any others would be obtained as units rotated back to and from France.

Note, however, that Japanese players DO have MLE vessels in RHS - and the recommended RHS house rule for this mini map of "CL or below" includes auxiliaries - so it is legitimate to send one there if you want to. The number of MLE is very low - and arguably too low - but while we might add more for IJN - I find it hard to imagine one in a small Vichy naval force of less than ten vessels.

One thing likely missing from Madagascar is AKs. I do not have more identified, but I suspect there are more than than we have.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

ORIGINAL: el cid again
I admit my thinking was about repairs - and about types historically used. I am not aware that ships cannot reload. Indeed - I am pretty sure ships DO reload torpedoes when they refuel.

Ships reload torpedoes when they refuel in a port of size 8 or larger (for PTs, less is sufficient, IIRC size 3 or 4).

Truk is large enough. Rabaul is 3(5), so it can eventually become
size 8, but a lot of construction time is needed. No Australian port north of Brisbane is large enough, Palau, Kwajalein, Midway, Marianas, all ports in the NEI except Soerabaya are too small.

Worst locations are the central Pacific, where you have to go all the way back to Truk or Tokyo. If Truk and Rabaul are lost or isolated, next reloading ports are Manila and Soerabaya. These are huge distances... You see, the Japanese really need some ADs.

In defense of Matrix logic, it is true that Japan had a gigantic problem with mines and torpedoes. This was made much worse when hundreds of torpedoes were lost on two raiders sunk in the Indian Ocean. Production rates were low - and the game has no real way to limit numbers directly. So they took an indirect approach. Also - the Nanyo (South Seas - meaing seas to the South of Japan - not South of the Equator) was an economic desert - almost devoid of major infrastructures - with little land area suitable to turn into such - and less capital available to do so. But it also is probably true that Kwajalein has the potential - and possibly so do Guam, Palau, Eneweitok and maybe one other point. We can fix that by making potential port build = 5.