RHS non critical comprehensive update 7.945 uploaded

[el cid again]

Ulithi Atol - the largest in the world - was turned into a major base by the US. It already has a port rating of 5.

Guam - which has a port basic rating of 2 - is very wrong. We proposed to base USS Ronald Reagan there - a ship bigger than a Yamato Class battleship or any other ship in the WWII era. We can rate it as 5 or 6. EDIT: Guam should be rated as port build = 6 and initial supplies = 1500.

While Saipan should not have a port rating of 5 - it is definitely better than a port rating of 1. It probably should be a 3.

While Tinian should not have a great port rating - it might warrant a 2 and it is only a 1 now - it should have an airfield rating of 7. It was the busiest airfield in the world - and rating it a 4 - the same as Saipan - gives the Allies no incentive to build it up as it was. [Ki-67 missions flown there just before a B-29 strike almost could not miss bombers - they were so tightly packed. It had no less than 5 airfields - 2 of them very large ones - which = 3 + (2x2) = 7 in the RHS system (otherwise it would be 3 + (2x3) = 9).

Palau may have correct port/airfield ratings (at 3/3) - or they might be bigger. But it is grossly underrated for resources. Germany developed bauxite mining there, and Japan expanded that. Japan also established industry there - and I had no idea it existed so early. Working on this.
EDIT: OK - Koror is a level 3 port in its own right. There are two other ports. Port level = 5. Airfield capacity = 6. The airport today can handle aircraft of gw 314,000 pounds, so it is inherently able to operate the largest WWII aircraft - if you build it up.

I had Eneweitok mixed up with Ulithi - and it is not a problem.

Kwajalein is very interesting: it is one of the few places the Pacific Islenders fought alongside the Japanese. [Another place that should have happened was Truk - but Truk was never invaded. The Japanese had cordial relations with the Trukese - facilitated by a long term resident and businessman.] Truk did have industry - but it was secondary to shops on Jaluit - which I need to investigate. [Sometimes "industry" is "light industry" and we use supplies to represent that - no HI points] It appears that Kwajalein is a suitable site for a large port - but not for gigantic airfields. If we make the port a 5 that pretty much solves your issue. EDIT: Industry is correct on Kwajalein - 2 supply = 730 tons per year.
But Jaluit needs to go from 1 to 4.

[el cid again]

Lahaina was the alternate anchorage and traditional fleet base for the United States Fleet - Oahu was developed more slowly and was considered better only for certain functions (e.g. ship repair or safety vs submarine attack). While it should not be a Level 8 port - it needs to be for torpedo reloading purposes - so it should be rated as 5 port build and 8 port development - meaning it cannot build any higher.

Whittier Alaska is the deep water port - used for tankers in WWII and for ocean liners today - and it is the only Level 5 port build in the Anchorage area. Anchorage is port build 3 - Kenai only a 2 - and Seward is a more conveniently accessable 4. But Bethel is also a 5 port build - it is the second largest medium draft port in the entire US West coast area. Kodiak is rated at 3 - but probably should be higher.
Trick - keep Seward higher than Anchorage - or feeding things in Seward is problematical until you have a vast stock.
EDIT: Kodiak now can birth - birth nor anchor - ships well over 1000 feet long - so it should be a level 6 port build = it can potentially birth any WWII era vessel.

[anarchyintheuk]

IIRC didn't a torpedo magazine blow up on Kwajalein durng the invasion in '44?

[el cid again]

The problem is that a code imposed rule is not really considering history - it is a compromise - and the foundation for the Matrix rule is valid. One may dispute the level at which it was set - or the rating of a particular port - but in principle - torpedoes do not grow on trees - and shops and specialists to care for them are not in every tiny port in the theater. Your point is entirely valid - that a torpedo magazine existed means the port should be rated so ships can use it - but that is not how a code function thinks.

New Zealand has one Level 5 port - Wellington - and that is probably the right port too.

New Caledonia is rated as a 4 - and likely should be much higher. Fiji is rated as a 3 - and possibly it might be 4 or 5. Tahiti is a 2 - and might diserve a higer rating. After investigating these I will issue a new release - mainly due to the port changes.'

Report any possible eratta to fold in here.

[ChickenOfTheSea]

The supply sink at Mersing is 99% disabled in EBO.

The insect-class boats at Singapore (DMS?) begin with a 4.2" mortar?
edit: looked this one up. Apparently they actually had 2 deck mounted 2" mortars apparently abstracted to 1 4.2" mortar due to slot limitations.

The Dutch Battlecruiser is commanded by Lt. Col. Suzuki of the IJA. He can be replaced by Dutch admirals or IJA Lt. Col's.
Dutch counterintelligence is on the lookout for more Japanese moles posing as Dutch Naval Officers.

[Buck Beach]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The problem is that a code imposed rule is not really considering history - it is a compromise - and the foundation for the Matrix rule is valid. One may dispute the level at which it was set - or the rating of a particular port - but in principle - torpedoes do not grow on trees - and shops and specialists to care for them are not in every tiny port in the theater. Your point is entirely valid - that a torpedo magazine existed means the port should be rated so ships can use it - but that is not how a code function thinks.

New Zealand has one Level 5 port - Wellington - and that is probably the right port too.

New Caledonia is rated as a 4 - and likely should be much higher. Fiji is rated as a 3 - and possibly it might be 4 or 5. Tahiti is a 2 - and might diserve a higer rating. After investigating these I will issue a new release - mainly due to the port changes.'

Report any possible eratta to fold in here.

I am following this thread with interest and have been making the adjustments to the latest CAIO you sent me on an ongoing basis . Please continue to inform us of the details of the changes you are making. I have not started a game but I have made many changes in the river port bases in India opening them up. These changes of course would be wiped out with a new update.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: ChickenOfTheSea

The supply sink at Mersing is 99% disabled in EBO.


REPLY: YES it is - one wonders why - when it isn't in other scenarios? I have long suspected editor induced errors - and this is a case where I suspect that: why would copying a unit fill a field?

The insect-class boats at Singapore (DMS?) begin with a 4.2" mortar?
edit: looked this one up. Apparently they actually had 2 deck mounted 2" mortars apparently abstracted to 1 4.2" mortar due to slot limitations.

The Dutch Battlecruiser is commanded by Lt. Col. Suzuki of the IJA. He can be replaced by Dutch admirals or IJA Lt. Col's.
Dutch counterintelligence is on the lookout for more Japanese moles posing as Dutch Naval Officers.

REPLY - there WAS a Japanese RAF officer in Malaya FYI - and worse - he was in operations - so he knew the mission planning. He would radio it just in time to mess up the mission. He was shot.

This is code - not me: no captain is assigned. Why would code assign a ship classified as Dutch a Japanese captain????

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The problem is that a code imposed rule is not really considering history - it is a compromise - and the foundation for the Matrix rule is valid. One may dispute the level at which it was set - or the rating of a particular port - but in principle - torpedoes do not grow on trees - and shops and specialists to care for them are not in every tiny port in the theater. Your point is entirely valid - that a torpedo magazine existed means the port should be rated so ships can use it - but that is not how a code function thinks.

New Zealand has one Level 5 port - Wellington - and that is probably the right port too.

New Caledonia is rated as a 4 - and likely should be much higher. Fiji is rated as a 3 - and possibly it might be 4 or 5. Tahiti is a 2 - and might diserve a higer rating. After investigating these I will issue a new release - mainly due to the port changes.'

Report any possible eratta to fold in here.

I am following this thread with interest and have been making the adjustments to the latest CAIO you sent me on an ongoing basis . Please continue to inform us of the details of the changes you are making. I have not started a game but I have made many changes in the river port bases in India opening them up. These changes of course would be wiped out with a new update.

Noumea should start as a Level 3 port and should have a port build rating of 6. It is a wonderful natural harbor and only needs development.
So many ships were sent there - compared to facilities - that it was normal in 1942 to ride at anchor 5 months waiting your turn to load! Needless to say - they developed the port a great deal.

Suva should have a Level 5 port build. It also has teriffic port potential, now being expanded yet again.

Samoa is OK. Tahiti (Papeete) should have a Level 5 Port build.

Japanese BC - both B-64 and B-65 - in those scenarios that have them (BBO, RPO and EBO at least) - should have durability = 81.

[ChickenOfTheSea]

El Cid,
This does seem to be a remnant of the leader bug. If I form a single ship task force, Lt. Col. Suzuki is the commander. When I go to change that I get a choice of 3 Dutch Admirals, Suzuki, and one other Japanese Lt. Col. If I appoint a Dutch admiral and go to change him, Suzuki is still a choice, but the other Japanese Lt. Col. is replaced by a Dutch Admiral that was not available before. When the task force is disbanded, the commander defaults back to Suzuki.

As you said, this is clearly a code issue and doesn't seem to affect any of the other new Dutch ships. If we still have this in AE, I hope they will at least give us an option to have them shot. (edit: the Japanese imposters, not the AE team[:D])

[el cid again]

Packaging to upload completed - but I must go to work. Will upload 7.945 non critical comprehensive update when I return.

[el cid again]

The revised files are uploaded to the primary distribution list. The only way to obtain them at this time is from someone on that list.

[Mistmatz]

Regarding higher maximum port size for some PAC bases I wonder if this might give the allied an edge once they come back and can embark/disembark way faster and also may have an advantage for damaged ships, especially with a stack of ARs. Eventually the allies will also benefit longer from the port than the japanese.

This is assuming the allies have enought supplies to build up those bases, which I believe they will have.

[el cid again]

Intelligent observation.

However - since in all but one case these port builds are correct - they only give the Allies the potential they should have had along.
I think there is a problem in the game - according to Joe construction is too fast for the Allies - and that means they build up faster than history. But Matrix can fix that any time they want to. The infrastructure in the vast ocean area was poorly developed before the war and teh war caused vast increases - mostly due to Allied construction - but also due to Japanese construction. Operational and strategic decisions should be made in the context of actual port potentials - and so I feel this is a valuable reform - and the only reason it was not present before is that we have tended to follow existing numbers. You cannot look at all 133,000 fields - so you look at a few at a time. It also takes time to run down every last datum. But the more we do that - the better the game becomes - if the goal is more accurate representation of locations - which in my view it should be.

But I do worry about the Allies - so as Japan I do NOT build up places I expect to lose to them - and I also take places just to slow down when they can start building them up. The combination of bases and long range bombers is deadly - later in the war.

[Bogo Mil]

I thought about it again, and I still think the Japanese need ADs for the reloads.
It is correct that they didn't have unlimited numbers of torpedoes in the real war. But I think there are two reasons why we shouldn't put this in the game:

1. The game engine doesn't allow to manage the shortage. A whole cruiser squadron will fire all it's torpedoes in a long lance attack against very low value targets like some PTs or a lone merchant. This is something the real IJN would never do, but the player can not do anything to prevent it in the game. It is a flaw in the game engine - and if reloading is as difficult as it is now in RHS, this flaw becomes much more serious.

2. It is inconsistent. In the game, the air forces have unlimited numbers of torpedoes. There are so many AS ships, that the subs have no difficulties as well. Only the surface ships are handicapped, and this just doesn't make sense. Regarding auxilliary shoips, you should not only look at what the IJN built in the real war, but also what they would have built if the real war had mechanics like witp. If this was the case, they would have built less AS, but more AD and MLE, that's for sure. Japan was not Germany. They relied on the surface fleet much more than on the subs. Thus they wouldn't build lots of AS, but no AD, if ADs were necessary to operate the ships.

Increasing some potential port sizes does not solve the problem, imho. The reasons are already told: The construction takes time, it uses precious engineer capacity and supplies and those big ports will help the enemy once he takes them. And at veveral points there are still too long distances to go for reloads.

I don't ask for more tender ships. I only want a more sensible allocation of the types. I think 2-5 MLE, the rest roughly 50:50 between AS and AD would be a good mix. You can give the player more flexibility, if you let some (all?) AS ships upgrade to AD and/or vice versa.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

I thought about it again, and I still think the Japanese need ADs for the reloads.
It is correct that they didn't have unlimited numbers of torpedoes in the real war. But I think there are two reasons why we shouldn't put this in the game:

1. The game engine doesn't allow to manage the shortage. A whole cruiser squadron will fire all it's torpedoes in a long lance attack against very low value targets like some PTs or a lone merchant. This is something the real IJN would never do, but the player can not do anything to prevent it in the game. It is a flaw in the game engine - and if reloading is as difficult as it is now in RHS, this flaw becomes much more serious.

REPLY: The PT boat issue is essentially correct - except the last part: it has nothing whatever to do with RHS - and RHS increased many port ratings already - so it is less of an issue than with CHS/Stock. The PT boat problem was addressed 2 or 3 times by Matrix - and the way this works - they may even have fixed 2 or 3 of the reasons it happens - but it still happens (albiet I think less often than in UV days - I have two cases in many games ongoing). IRL Japanese torpedoes were not as good as theory suggested - this from Capt Hara who literally wrote the torpedo manual - describing Coral Sea and his frustration that so many fired failed to hit (only a later round bore fruit). I worked on torpedos to get them into the right range - inventing something called "effective range" so it is an objective standard relatively fair to all - and they are now more or less right. Torpedoes WERE intended for lone merchants - which is why hundreds were aboard AMCs - who hardly were to use them on warships - and the basic issue is well addressed by WITP using the effective range values of RHS.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

I thought about it again, and I still think the Japanese need ADs for the reloads.
It is correct that they didn't have unlimited numbers of torpedoes in the real war. But I think there are two reasons why we shouldn't put this in the game:



2. It is inconsistent. In the game, the air forces have unlimited numbers of torpedoes. There are so many AS ships, that the subs have no difficulties as well. Only the surface ships are handicapped, and this just doesn't make sense. Regarding auxilliary shoips, you should not only look at what the IJN built in the real war, but also what they would have built if the real war had mechanics like witp. If this was the case, they would have built less AS, but more AD and MLE, that's for sure. Japan was not Germany. They relied on the surface fleet much more than on the subs. Thus they wouldn't build lots of AS, but no AD, if ADs were necessary to operate the ships.

Increasing some potential port sizes does not solve the problem, imho. The reasons are already told: The construction takes time, it uses precious engineer capacity and supplies and those big ports will help the enemy once he takes them. And at veveral points there are still too long distances to go for reloads.

I don't ask for more tender ships. I only want a more sensible allocation of the types. I think 2-5 MLE, the rest roughly 50:50 between AS and AD would be a good mix. You can give the player more flexibility, if you let some (all?) AS ships upgrade to AD and/or vice versa.

There is some truth to the inconsistent part. However - know that in RHS I HAVE limited air torpedoes. By seveal means. I reduced air base sizes so they won't load torpedoes. I made some carriers air groups "torpedo planes" NOT load torpedoes (where this is justified by fact).
I made some land based air units with nominal "torpedo bombers" armed without them (again, where justified by fact). And also - the need to build a port up is good simulation of the logistic effort needed to build a torpedo servicing station - and man it.

The reason for the AS construction was a doctrine related to the "Advance Force" (submarines) - which doctrine was never fully or properly (e.g. consistently) implemented - although there are hints it was well founded in the main. If you want to see the subs used as they should be - play me. There are barely enough AS for a theater wide implementation of a force of this size.

My instructions are "get the data right, and I will get the code right" (from a Matrix lead programmer). Each issue of the game gets better. I hate ahistorical ships - and am on both sides of the MLE issue for that reason. Japanese torpedo attacks are very effective - and you cannot just find those unique creatures anywhere and everywhere. They didn't have dedicated destroyer tenders - and so I am reluctant to provide them.

Also RHS development has ended unless we find a problem. That is, something wrong with how we did it. Changing the port sizes was not planned - but a courtesy - and I also think an improvement because it is more historically accurate. I will think about this for a while - pending some other reason to update - and I will see if I have any problems as a player - but so far - my DD are doing well enough without ADs -
and I am reluctant to make an ahistorical change.

A better fix would be to reduce the port size that can reload torpedoes - so I will point that out by the backchannel. Not that there is any intention to rewrite the code more than presently planned - I do feel they pay attention to recommendations - and they often end up in a future release.

[Bogo Mil]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
My instructions are "get the data right, and I will get the code right" (from a Matrix lead programmer).

Well, maybe it becomes better in AE. I hope so. In old witp, they didn't get the code right, and they will never do.

I hate ahistorical ships - and am on both sides of the MLE issue for that reason. Japanese torpedo attacks are very effective - and you cannot just find those unique creatures anywhere and everywhere. They didn't have dedicated destroyer tenders - and so I am reluctant to provide them.

As I said before: Everything related to reloading and repairing is highly abstracted in the game. Thus it is difficult to achieve "historical" and consistent effects with a 100% historical roster. I think when in doubt, the effect is more important.

A better fix would be to reduce the port size that can reload torpedoes - so I will point that out by the backchannel.

Yeah. And the supply cost should be vastly increased. I think something like 10 (or even more) supplies for every single torpedo would represent the logistical difficulties much better. This could be "rounded up" by a minimum supply requirement of 10k-20k at the base for all torpedo ops (reloading ships and aircraft using torpedoes).

But I'm not optimistic that they'll implement anything like that in the old witp.

As a workaround, you might include some stationary ADs. Give them names like "Kwajalein reloading station" + zero speed, and it is clear that those are not ahistorical ships, but artificial devices to bring the game mechanics on the right track. Moving them would be prohibited by the "primary house rule". Each "station" would require one of the precious ship slots, though.


Another point about the tender ships: Many of them have a cargo capacity in RHS. This simply doesn't work (except for AE) - you can not load anything on a AR/AS/MLE. At Truk I have an AR preloaded with fuel - it can't even unload. It's only confusing, I think you should reduce all those capacities to zero. Again: The better solution would be to change the code and allow the modders to give cargo capacity for every ship type - but they'll not implement this.

[m10bob]

IRL Japanese detroyer squadrons were assigned to a CL as the flagship. Does anybody know if those CL's carried any torp spares?

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Bogo Mil

ORIGINAL: el cid again
My instructions are "get the data right, and I will get the code right" (from a Matrix lead programmer).

Well, maybe it becomes better in AE. I hope so. In old witp, they didn't get the code right, and they will never do.

I hate ahistorical ships - and am on both sides of the MLE issue for that reason. Japanese torpedo attacks are very effective - and you cannot just find those unique creatures anywhere and everywhere. They didn't have dedicated destroyer tenders - and so I am reluctant to provide them.

As I said before: Everything related to reloading and repairing is highly abstracted in the game. Thus it is difficult to achieve "historical" and consistent effects with a 100% historical roster. I think when in doubt, the effect is more important.

A better fix would be to reduce the port size that can reload torpedoes - so I will point that out by the backchannel.

Yeah. And the supply cost should be vastly increased. I think something like 10 (or even more) supplies for every single torpedo would represent the logistical difficulties much better. This could be "rounded up" by a minimum supply requirement of 10k-20k at the base for all torpedo ops (reloading ships and aircraft using torpedoes).

But I'm not optimistic that they'll implement anything like that in the old witp.

As a workaround, you might include some stationary ADs. Give them names like "Kwajalein reloading station" + zero speed, and it is clear that those are not ahistorical ships, but artificial devices to bring the game mechanics on the right track. Moving them would be prohibited by the "primary house rule". Each "station" would require one of the precious ship slots, though.


Another point about the tender ships: Many of them have a cargo capacity in RHS. This simply doesn't work (except for AE) - you can not load anything on a AR/AS/MLE. At Truk I have an AR preloaded with fuel - it can't even unload. It's only confusing, I think you should reduce all those capacities to zero. Again: The better solution would be to change the code and allow the modders to give cargo capacity for every ship type - but they'll not implement this.

If my understanding is correct, they will implement tracking of some devices - so you then may get limited torpedoes. In my games (which require vastly more human effort on the logistic side) we track every last torpedo by model and location in theater. Then there is no grousing "they didn't have the torpedoes to do that." Either they do - or they don't - but they prooved it in the data. Also - we do it for mines - so again - no grousing - "they didn't have that many mines" - if they produced them and moved them and planted them (mine planting is not an instantaneous affair - less so if you want to safely pass those waters) - then they got them there - otherwise - they are not. It is a simple technique suseptable to a computer solution: if we can track them on spreadsheets - a program can do it in a database.

In fairness to Matrix - lots of things got better with WITP - and there IS going to be another WITP update. The list of changes is always long - and if it is never "good enough" for us purists, it is unfair to say it isn't significant.

Your proposed solution is brilliant - and we already have 'invisible stationary support ships' in RHS. They appear after the game ends - so you never see them. BUT they DO function. They are "training aircraft carriers" - and US ones include Sable and Wolverine - historical training ships on Lake Michigan. I discovered that an air unit assigned to such a ship - ALSO given a date to appear - appears at the default location. It appears "carrier qualified and carrier capable" and it NEVER resizes because its ship never is in the wrong port at the wrong time! This is a typical RHS technical solution - but I failed to think of it. "Reloading stations" are a great concept - and we will put them in the next update.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: m10bob

IRL Japanese detroyer squadrons were assigned to a CL as the flagship. Does anybody know if those CL's carried any torp spares?

The old CLs were designed before the Long Lance - and lacked reloading magazines - or any place to put them.

But the idea of the new CLs was different - and they were theoretically supposed to replace the old ones (although that didn't happen much). Some newer cruisers had reloads. There is also the question of what is a CL? A Mogami is a CL as built - but not in her wartime guise. They had half reloads - enough for two of the four banks.