RHS Version 2.60 Project [Updated at end]

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

4. In CHS there are a number of ships that were located around Hong Kong. In RHS these seem to be in Task Forces in the Manila square. Were they a target too soon and that is why they were moved?

Didn't move em. What task forces?

5. Ship 207 and 209 are named the same (Sugi) and arrive in the same location at the same time.


This is probably a duplication. Will check.
Thanks for all your work on this.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I have a CVO game running that I started roughly two weeks ago. I am up to early June '42.


I fear engineers are not engineers UNLESS they are stock engineers - my civil engineers (and others) are just dummies I bet. Hard code I bet. Checking.

1) Asansol (in India, maybe my spelling is off) does not build it's port, airfield, or fortifications. The base unit (lot of civil engineers) is present (with lots of supply), but things remain at 0% continually.

Never noticed that. This is the biggest "supply sink" in the game - and "eats" excess supplies from Asenol and nearby hexes. It is also a strange river port - but it may not be set properly. I will investigate - if it is set to an "airfield" instead of a "base" your behavior would make sense. This I can fix.
Nope. This is a different issue. Not sure what is going on there? I am not sure really want it to build? - for technical reasons - but I don't know how to make it not! Anyway, thanks for reporting.

I moved in an engineer/construction unit (Bombay Construction I think) and the construction percentages took right off. Not sure what you found but it seems to be a problem with the Civil Engineers.

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I2) Slot 3478, the Diamond Harbor Base Force, arrives at Dehli with a static facility (i.e. cannot move).

This is quite deliberate. (Kinda doubt it - see below) The 9.2 inch and 6 inch CD guns are fixed. For every pair you get a fixed facility. Also, it is a disguised supply sink, and I need it to stay there in order to "eat" excess supplies. This is a very common thing in RHS - unlike other WITP scenarios I try to prevent units with fixed heavy guns from marching all over the map.

Re-read this one - the 'Diamond Harbor Base Force' is a static unit in Delhi!!! I presume it should be in Diamond Harbor? [;)]

[EDIT: read later message that you already realize this.]

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I have a CVO game running that I started roughly two weeks ago. I am up to early June '42.

3) I have noticed that several Allied artillery devices do not work. I can tell this by ground combat at Mandalay, where many of the units cannot be ordered to 'Bombard'. This includes even the dedicated artillery units. Since this game was begun a couple of weeks ago and you have made so many changes, I know someone else might have caught this already. Let me know if not and I will forward you a list and a save game for your own review (it's an AI game).

This has not been reported. It may be related to the units that cannot divide. Are these units brigades and the ability to divide is not present?
If so, this issue should be corrected when I address the division problem - which seems to be fixable by bringing in clean records from CHS 177.
If not, give me a list of the units. I will investigate.

No - all are units that normally should not be able to divide (and cannot, so looks okay on that score). Some are artillery units, others are infantry units. I will make a list and email to you tomorrow along with a save game (just in case it helps to see what the heck I mean with this one).

[witpqs]

Sid,

I noted another anomoly, but I lost the note I wrote about it. One of the USN CV's - either Yorktown or Hornet - is introduced with 4 squadrons equipped with the following aircraft:

Wildcats
SBD's
SBD's
Yak-1

Luckily, the Yak-1 on board the CV can be immediately upgraded to Avengers (not sure if you adjusted the Avengers' availability date in later revisions), so it's of very little matter to game play. Only offered for completeness.

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: el cid again


4. In CHS there are a number of ships that were located around Hong Kong. In RHS these seem to be in Task Forces in the Manila square. Were they a target too soon and that is why they were moved?

Didn't move em. What task forces?

I don't have a copy of CHS up, but I recognize at least the following.
1075; 1077; 1079; 1081; 1083; 1085; 1093

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I noted another anomoly, but I lost the note I wrote about it. One of the USN CV's - either Yorktown or Hornet - is introduced with 4 squadrons equipped with the following aircraft:

Wildcats
SBD's
SBD's
Yak-1

Luckily, the Yak-1 on board the CV can be immediately upgraded to Avengers (not sure if you adjusted the Avengers' availability date in later revisions), so it's of very little matter to game play. Only offered for completeness.

That is certainly an anomoly if true. On my list. Full plate as it were.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

ORIGINAL: el cid again


4. In CHS there are a number of ships that were located around Hong Kong. In RHS these seem to be in Task Forces in the Manila square. Were they a target too soon and that is why they were moved?

Didn't move em. What task forces?

I don't have a copy of CHS up, but I recognize at least the following.
1075; 1077; 1079; 1081; 1083; 1085; 1093

Essentially no TFs are different than in CHS - except 1 and 2 start near Hawaii - one day sailing from the attack point. Also, the units embarked on the invasion of Luzon are reversed - so 65 brigade won't try to invade on the wrong side of the island! I assume that I can get these TFs to behave properly by recopying them from CHS.

[Monter_Trismegistos]

(based on ver. 2.593 CVO) :

1) Why did you introduce names such as "Sixth Infantry Division" (word instead of number - instead of "6th Infantry Division)? For me it looks less clear now. And higher numbers are still named like "21st Infntry Division". Why mixing two naming schemes? Chose one and use it. Names using numbers instead words were better for me.

2) Have you ever thought about adding even bigger transport submarine? Sen-Ho type 2650ts on surface, 15kn max, 13000NM @ 14kn, armament: 2x80(mortar) 7x25aa 4tt533, 390(!) tons of cargo. Historically one completed : I-351 (comm 450128)

3) To keep the same pattern: ship with names "SS-1 Koryu Maru" and "SS-2 Banryu Maru", you could also rename "SS-3" (slot 2834) to "SS-3 Kairyu Maru".

4) Ship 3418 Tibilsi should be named Tbilisi (Тбилиси). Also a little cosmetic correction for the Leningrad class (class 1581) it seems that she had only 2 mine racks, not 4. But overall number of mines should not change.

5) You still didn't change anything in Soviet Navy, the errors that were already pointed out. Especially commisioning dsates, names of classes. Many SU ships starting war in theatre has 421206 instead of 411206.

6) Dutch PTs: TM-14 and T-15 should arrive in January 1942.

7) Ship 6372: LSD Lindenwald arrives 431015 before her historical commisioning date 431209.

8) Ship 6374: LSD Rushmore arrives 440615 before her historical commisioning date 440703.

9) Ship 6377: LSD Cabildo arrives 450115 before her historical commisioning date 450315.

10) Ship 6378: LSD Catamount arrives 450215 before her historical commisioning date 450415.

10) Ship 6379: LSD Colonial arrives 450315 before her historical commisioning date 450515.

11) Ship 6380: LSD Comstock arrives 450415 before her historical commisioning date 450702.

12) Ship 6381: LSD Donner arrives 450515 before her historical commisioning date 450731.

13) Ship 8787: LST-16 should not been here. Used in Torch, Husky, Avalanche, Shingle, Overlord, and not in Pacific. Many more mistakes in LSTs.. LST-17 also used in Overlord and not in Pacific.

14) Ship 9405: L-15 - Soviet SS are 9999eyed but still see a problem which possibly was copied into other versions: L-15 starts game in Colon. Should start game in Vladivostok.

[DuckofTindalos]

I've just been through the stock LST list and found 49 ships that shouldn't be in it, either because they were in the Atlantic, were never finished or were converted to other roles before being commisioned (i.e. were never LST's in the first place).

[Monter_Trismegistos]

I counted 566 LSTs that should be present, compared to 298 in stock. Stock number is correct when we dont count units transferred after Overlord/Southern France invasions to take part in Okinawa. But a lot of names of these LSTs are incorrect. For example LST-16 and LST-17 should be deleted, but LST-46 to 51, LST-53, LST-61, and LST-66 to 68 should be added instead. Again should be deleted LST-72 to 75 and LST-81 to 83, but added LST-117 and LST-118. And so on. Most of arrival dates are incorrect for each ship (but more less correct in sense of numbers of vessels arriving each month, minus units transferred from ETO after Overlord/SFrance).

[DuckofTindalos]

Yeah, there are lots who should be added, but I only counted those who should be removed. I have now done so in my own mod, replacing them with ships that were actually there...

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

I counted 566 LSTs that should be present, compared to 298 in stock. Stock number is correct when we dont count units transferred after Overlord/Southern France invasions to take part in Okinawa. But a lot of names of these LSTs are incorrect. For example LST-16 and LST-17 should be deleted, but LST-46 to 51, LST-53, LST-61, and LST-66 to 68 should be added instead. Again should be deleted LST-72 to 75 and LST-81 to 83, but added LST-117 and LST-118. And so on. Most of arrival dates are incorrect for each ship (but more less correct in sense of numbers of vessels arriving each month, minus units transferred from ETO after Overlord/SFrance).

AKDreemer is compiling a list. I spotted 12 which transferred to UK/Greece- but he says there are many more never in PTO in the CHS list. There are many missing - so we will replace the wrong ones with them. We may also replace lesser craft with the missing LSTs. This takes a lot of work to research - more still to enter.

[el cid again]

Ship 207 and 209 were indicators of a problem in the range 200-227 - almost purely with names of frigates - although two were the wrong sub-class (Matsu vs Tachibana). Fixed. Thanks.

[Herrbear]

Are you sure that the revised 2.59.5 060 files have the updated and corrected aircraft files? I still show the Zekes with the 57 mm cannon?

[witpqs]

Sid, FYI to avoid duplication, this is the message I emailed to you with attachment.

_____________________________________
Hi Sid,

Here is the promised list of devices that seem to be bad, plus a save file for you to look at yourself if you wish. First, a comment about Civil Engineers.

As you know, I have seen a problem with building in Asansol, India when only the Indian Asanol Civil unit was present (no building took place in spite of huge amounts of supplies). I should point out that in Noumea with only the BIC Noumea Bn present facilities were put up at a truly furious pace, so Civil Engineers in general seem to be working. The Indian Asanol Civil unit has 1395 Civil Engineers, while the BIC Noumea Bn has 400 Civil Engineers plus 12 Engineers [Pioneers]. Maybe this is a key difference? I don't know. Maybe the answer lies elsewhere - maybe just the Indian Asanol Civil unit itself is messed up.

Back to the Arty problems:

Look at Mandalay and you will see that the following units which should be able to bombard but which cannot bombard. I have only listed those devices that should enable the unit to bombard.

2444 RIA 21st Mtn Gun Rgt
3.7 in Howitzer

2445 RIA 24th Mtn Gun Rgt
3.7 in Howitzer

2446 RIA 25th Mtn Gun Rgt
3.7 in Howitzer

2412 RIA Burma Frontier Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer

2417 RIA 13th Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer

2418 RIA 16th Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer

2420 RIA 1st Burma Rifles Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer

2421 RIA 2nd Burma Rifles Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer

The following two units can bombard. Note they each have one arty device in addition to those that the units above have.

2414 UK 1st Burma Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer
4.5in Field Gun

2415 UK 2nd Burma Brigade
81mm Morter
76mm AT Gun
18pdr Howitzer
4.5in Field Gun

From this I conclude that the 4.5in Field Gun device functions properly, while the other listed devices do not function properly (3.7 in Howitzer, 81mm Morter, 76mm AT Gun, 18pdr Howitzer).

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Herrbear

Are you sure that the revised 2.59.5 060 files have the updated and corrected aircraft files? I still show the Zekes with the 57 mm cannon?

I am sure my test file set runs properly with respect to aircraft. However, for safety sake I have recopied these working files and uploaded again - as 2.59.51 - the only change being that the ship name files are corrected for the slot 207/209 problem (which was a bit bigger than that in fact). All the Japanese "frigates" are now named properly.

[el cid again]

I am certain that the civil engineers do not function - and that the pioneers (renamed engineers - to distinguish them from engineers with vehicles) did all the work at Noumea. I must rename my civil engineers - coolies? Mine hands? Something. And put a few real engineers in civil engineer units if I want demolition effects.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

(based on ver. 2.593 CVO) :

1) Why did you introduce names such as "Sixth Infantry Division" (word instead of number - instead of "6th Infantry Division)? For me it looks less clear now. And higher numbers are still named like "21st Infntry Division". Why mixing two naming schemes? Chose one and use it. Names using numbers instead words were better for me.

REPLY: It is standard practice to spell names up to twelve, and to use Roman numbers for higher numbers. I won't be changing them back - too much trouble - and nothing pleases everyone. Artistically some entries are too short "US 1st Div" is not pleasing to read - but art is a matter of taste more than of "facts."

2) Have you ever thought about adding even bigger transport submarine? Sen-Ho type 2650ts on surface, 15kn max, 13000NM @ 14kn, armament: 2x80(mortar) 7x25aa 4tt533, 390(!) tons of cargo. Historically one completed : I-351 (comm 450128)

You missed it - it is present - as Type D1/D2. Actually it is present in more than one form - the upgrade has kaiten! And the original one has midgets - because originally that was the plan - not in the event used that way (possibly I should distinguish this between CVO and BBO - never thought of that).  Both army and navy small transports are also present.  If these work, I will be adding US planned transport subs (FDR liked them) for BBO.

3) To keep the same pattern: ship with names "SS-1 Koryu Maru" and "SS-2 Banryu Maru", you could also rename "SS-3" (slot 2834) to "SS-3 Kairyu Maru".

Actually - that is history! ONLY these first two ships had names!

4) Ship 3418 Tibilsi should be named Tbilisi (Òáèëèñè). Also a little cosmetic correction for the Leningrad class (class 1581) it seems that she had only 2 mine racks, not 4. But overall number of mines should not change.

This is my fault - I don't spell well (except in German and Japanese) - and I know you are right. Possibly a typo even.

5) You still didn't change anything in Soviet Navy, the errors that were already pointed out. Especially commisioning dsates, names of classes. Many SU ships starting war in theatre has 421206 instead of 411206.

I had to redo them at one point and no longer had the corrections. But 411206 is clearly needed. Got it.

6) Dutch PTs: TM-14 and T-15 should arrive in January 1942.

How do you know this? I am happy to fix it.

7) Ship 6372: LSD Lindenwald arrives 431015 before her historical commisioning date 431209.

That is because my Russian material says otherwise. I bet I have her completion date, which may not be the same thing.

8) Ship 6374: LSD Rushmore arrives 440615 before her historical commisioning date 440703.

And - if I had my way - would require a month to work up before going to war. But I didn't change these dates - I inherited them. I will happily fix it.

9) Ship 6377: LSD Cabildo arrives 450115 before her historical commisioning date 450315.

10) Ship 6378: LSD Catamount arrives 450215 before her historical commisioning date 450415.

10) Ship 6379: LSD Colonial arrives 450315 before her historical commisioning date 450515.

11) Ship 6380: LSD Comstock arrives 450415 before her historical commisioning date 450702.

12) Ship 6381: LSD Donner arrives 450515 before her historical commisioning date 450731.

13) Ship 8787: LST-16 should not been here. Used in Torch, Husky, Avalanche, Shingle, Overlord, and not in Pacific. Many more mistakes in LSTs.. LST-17 also used in Overlord and not in Pacific.

Yeah - someone is working on this. I have removed 12 identified LSTs which never were USN except on paper - transferred to UK or Greece but somehow on the CHS list. The problem is - to fix this - we need to look up every last ship!

14) Ship 9405: L-15 - Soviet SS are 9999eyed but still see a problem which possibly was copied into other versions: L-15 starts game in Colon. Should start game in Vladivostok.

[el cid again]

ORIGINAL: Monter_Trismegistos

I counted 566 LSTs that should be present, compared to 298 in stock. Stock number is correct when we dont count units transferred after Overlord/Southern France invasions to take part in Okinawa. But a lot of names of these LSTs are incorrect. For example LST-16 and LST-17 should be deleted, but LST-46 to 51, LST-53, LST-61, and LST-66 to 68 should be added instead. Again should be deleted LST-72 to 75 and LST-81 to 83, but added LST-117 and LST-118. And so on. Most of arrival dates are incorrect for each ship (but more less correct in sense of numbers of vessels arriving each month, minus units transferred from ETO after Overlord/SFrance).

Send me your list - I would prefer all the LSTs that should be present to those that should not and to smaller amphibs.  I also shortly will have some ex AK slots.