RHS Thread: Planned Update 8.20

[el cid again]

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update mainly reworks Soviet Air Forces air groups. Also, some
technical changes to aircraft (upgrade types, dates), leaders, and
possibly devices, classes, ships and location file data.

Combined with some previous work, this attempts to simplify the presentation
of Soviet air units, with particular attention to the type of aircraft,
and how that type upgrades. Most groups increase in size to 32 in December
1942 and those that form after 1942 increase to 40 in December 1944. This
is pretty complicated and required integrating a lot of information, including
when the aircraft type is available in theater.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I'm trying to set up this scenario for my new computer. What official, beta, non-official updates or patches are or are not compatible with this mod? Also which map mods can be used?
Buck

BTD64 is correct. RHS is no longer compatible with any other map system. Early AE forms of RHS used the stock
map system. Later forms used Andrew Brown's Extended Map System. But this has been extended still farther
and now includes elements not compatible with it.

One should start with a full install of AE in it own folder for RHS. Then run the RHS Installer. Copy over
the pwhexe.dat, pwzone.dat and pwzlink.dat files to the top level folder. Copy all files in the RHS Art folder
to the game Art folder. Copy all files in the RHS Scen folder to the game Scen folder. It should then run.

[el cid again]

RHS found gross errors in off map movement such as it existed in stock and other mods. So a table
was built to show the true distances and compare them with what was previously used (both in terms
of hexes and in terms of nautical miles). See RHS Documentation: Extended MapPWLink Distance Modifications.
This is an Excel file.

A different potential issue is that RHS forces you to use certain off map routes. Thus, for example,
a task force moving from the North Atlantic generally must route via Recife, Brazil to reach South
Atlantic destinations. It does not go directly from Norfolk, New Orleans, Western Europe, etc to
Stanley or Capetown for example. We added many possible routes (links) - so you can go from Panama to
Recife, New Orleans, Norfolk, Halifax, or Western Europe. After a certain date North Atlantic task
forces may pass from Atlantic ports to Suez.

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

Running some tests of distances between Western Boarder off map bases. I am finding what appears to be strange distance irregularities when using ships located at each of Gulf Port, Cristobal, and Recife and checking the distance to each other as well as Eastern USA, Canada and Western Europe.

Won't go into details as the tests are quite easy to run for oneself. Thought it worth a comment to better minds than myself.

Buck

[Buck Beach]

I'll look for the documentation thanks. I just thought it strange that Recipe to Quebec at 88 was closer than Recipe to Eastern US at 91. Just thought I would mention it to you.

Buck

Couldn't find Recife on documentation spreadsheet.

[el cid again]

Micro Update 5.62

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update is confined to scenario files except for the Ship Bind List in
RHS Documentation which also is updated. It is a work in progress trying to
cover all stock and RHS ship bind codes.

There are two focuses of the scenario rework: adding and reviewing minor
Soviet naval vessels (classes and ships) and associated naval officers (adding
ship captains); and reviewing minor naval vessels (classes and ships) of both
sides. Some Soviet MO-4 class submarine chasers are added. Several Soviet
NKVD (and ex-NKVD re-assigned to the merchant marine) cargo and cargo passenger
ships are added.

[el cid again]

That does not sound right. But looking at a globe, I think it IS right in fact.
I used a table of routes for mariners. These are more or less great circle
routes modified in some places for actual standard navigational practice.
The way Canada juts Eastward in to the Atlantic Ocean corresponds to the
way Brazil juts Eastward into the Atlantic Ocean. It looks on a globe as if
those numbers are indeed about right. But the route length is based on
official tables of navigation, not something I measured on a map.

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I'll look for the documentation thanks. I just thought it strange that Recipe to Quebec at 88 was closer than Recipe to Eastern US at 91. Just thought I would mention it to you.

Buck

Couldn't find Recife on documentation spreadsheet.

[Yaab]

Scen 122, Allies

Two things:

- why is Chungking's fort level 0? Japs bombed this city from air since February 1938. The forts should be at least level 2-3 at game's start, if not level 6, as in the stock scenarios.

- there are four arty regiments in Chungking that have 12 eng squads (device 251) in their TOE. These are the only Allied arty units that have engineers devices. Since arty is always grouped with LCUs that have assault value, it relies on engineers from those LCUs for its fort/entrenchment construction. Consider deleting the enginners from the arty TOE (TOE ID is 2657)

[el cid again]

Micro Update 5.63

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update is limited to scenario files (mainly class, group, leader, location
and ship files; also aircraft and device files for safety in case I forgot
some record change).

The work combines continuing focus on adding minor Soviet auxiliary ships and
officers to command them and revising some Soviet Naval Air groups with a
review of all ships to insure consistent maneuverability and durability ratings
Rarely errata in ship armament is also corrected. Finally, the process of
dealing with ships that start in places winter does not permit has begun. These
ships are not lost, but move to the default national port. Still - I am now
correcting these errors. They mainly affect Soviet ships, but also some Canadian
and US ones. Code does not allow ships in most Arctic hexes in winter months.

[el cid again]

I will review the fortification level of Chunking.

Engineer units are mainly inherited from stock. Stock units generally have very simple TO&Es.
I generally added logistical elements and often minimal local light or medium AA guns to
artillery units, but not engineers. I am skeptical there are no exceptions to this - but only
if I found a true TO&E for a unit that had them. It would take a lot of work to review and change
engineer units generally for engineers. Particularly because tools that permit assigning TO&E to
units cannot be used if ANY unit of the type is not at full strength - which is often the case for
historical units. I also don't think I know for every army what engineers might be present in artillery
units. Many armies tended to separate out specialists. The US Army, the Japanese Army, and the
Chinese Army in particular. As far as I know Chinese engineers (vice pioneers - which are legion)
are fund almost exclusively in two regiments of engineers. I will review any specific unit with
specific OB data if you can provide any.

ORIGINAL: Yaab


Scen 122, Allies

Two things:

- why is Chungking's fort level 0? Japs bombed this city from air since February 1938. The forts should be at least level 2-3 at game's start, if not level 6, as in the stock scenarios.

- there are four arty regiments in Chungking that have 12 eng squads (device 251) in their TOE. These are the only Allied arty units that have engineers devices. Since arty is always grouped with LCUs that have assault value, it relies on engineers from those LCUs for its fort/entrenchment construction. Consider deleting the enginners from the arty TOE (TOE ID is 2657)

[el cid again]

Micro Update 5.64

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update is limited to scenario files.

It updates aircraft, class, device, leader (H), location and ship files.

It updates ALL Soviet Tank Brigades to a new, smaller TO&E. Basically
Far East Tank Brigades had two light tank battalions and no medium tank
battalion. This differed from other areas of the USSR.

It adds one more (the last) NKVD passenger-cargo ship. It adds captains
for both Soviet CA and the single Soviet DL in the Pacific Fleet. It
changes the aircraft types carried on the CA. They still are not right,
because we are out of slots, but use similar UK aircraft.

Numbers of classes were reviewed and updated/corrected for eratta. All of
these are Allied auxiliaries and minor combatants, except the two Soviet
CA and the DL. .

We are nearing the end of this process. A few more auxiliaries need to be
checked, and a few more minor Soviet patrol craft need to be added. Numbers of
Soviet ship commanders also need to be added.

No aircraft data per se was changed. Only date of availability and inventory
and production rates. Some devices were modified in terms of what they upgrade to
and availability or out of production dates, and production rates.

[el cid again]

I failed to review Chunking's fort level. Next time.

[el cid again]

Comprehensive update 5.65

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update includes map art, pwhexe.dat files and scenario files.

For some reason no version of WITP or AE has ever included the RR from
Borzya (Siberia) to Chovbalsan (Mongolia). This line runs E from 103/28
to 104/28 W & NE, 104/27 SW & NE, 105/26 SW & E to 106/26 W. It is a
major reason the USSR won the 1938 war with Japan over Khalkan Gol
(or Nomanhan).

We continued to review Allied auxiliary ships for eratta (mainly involving
maneuverability and durability, and occasionally weapons). Ships were
updated to this weapons standard.

We continued to add Soviet naval officers.

The fortification level of Chunking was reviewed and increased.

[el cid again]

IMPORTANT Micro update 5.70

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

A player report that there were issues with task force assignments
in strictly historical RHS scenarios (121 to 124 and 126) caused
a comprehensive review. It was found there were errors in ship
records - many of which had task force assignments from 125 and 129.
Important ship records were reviewed. Other ship eratta was also
detected - mainly in Scenario 124 - which had JES instead of historical
ship data for many ships.

Most revised records are in ship files. A few eratta were corrected in
class files, and a few missing class file records were added (so some
classes can upgrade). Task Forces were also added as required - these
being in the location files. Only a few class and ship file records
in Japan Enhanced Scenarios 125 & 129 were changed. Note that the
1945 Downfall Scenario 126 is incomplete. Even so, it was vastly
improved. Most task forces were removed. Most sunk ships were removed.
Many ships were updated to their 1945 forms and locations. This scenario
presently serves as a test bed for 1945 weapons, ships and aircraft. If
I live long enough, it will become the first full map Downfall Scenario.

[el cid again]

This ship in 1941 should be named Patrol Boat No 33
It is Momi class APD configuration.

It is assigned to the wrong task force (since stock). It was sunk at Wake,
so it should be assigned to the Wake Invasion Task Force 8016.

[el cid again]

This ship in 1941 should be named Patrol Boat No 37
It is Momi class TB (old DD) configuration.

It is wrongly named Hishu in stock. It should be
Patrol Boat No 37 / Hishi. Assigned to Tientsin, it was
probably based in Japan.

[el cid again]

This ship in 1941 should be named Patrol Boat No 37
It is Momi class TB (old DD) configuration.

It is wrongly named Hishu in stock. It should be
Patrol Boat No 37 / Hishi. Assigned to Tientsin, it was
probably based in Japan.

Ship slot 340.

[el cid again]

This ship in 1941 should be named Patrol Boat No 33
It is Momi class APD configuration.

It is assigned to the wrong task force. It was sunk at Wake,
so it should be assigned to the Wake Invasion Task Force 8016.

Ship slot 340.

[LargeSlowTarget]

Yes, there are several numbered PBs which were formerly named DDs.

Not shown PB-1 Shimakaze and PB-2 Nadakaze



Edit: PB-31 to PB-33 might not have been APDs. Their TROMS on Combinedfleet.com do not mention a conversion to APDs, while for PB-34 to PB-39 the conversion to APDs is being specified:

1941:
PB-3x undergoes reconstruction. Her aft funnel is removed and her stem is cut down to form a ramp. She is fitted to carry and launch two 46-ft Daihatsu landing craft. Her forward interior spaces are modified to accommodate up to 150 troops. The 25mm AA suite is increased.

It is possible but unlikely that the authors forgot to mention the conversions to APDs for PB-31 - 33, if they have been modified.

[el cid again]

IMPORTANT Micro update 5.71

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update adds one subclass of warship, permitting old destroyers
to be represented as minor tenders. This permitted ships to be classified
properly when the game begins. The class is Momi - old destroyers
considered to be TB by RHS unless converted. But most of them were converted.

Otherwise, many minor warships and a few auxiliaries were reviewed, ship by
ship, to insure the right start date, sinking date, starting location or task
force, and the proper class assignment.

[el cid again]

IMPORTANT Micro update 5.72

https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwhZAU7bdtWbbscE_oLg

This update contains documentation and scenario files.

It updates class, device, group, leader (H), location, and ship files.
It is a gigantic eratta hunt, with most changes in strictly
historical files, affecting both sides minor vessels and associated
units, air groups and leaders.