RHS Thread: Planned Update 8.20

[el cid again]

From Panama I believe you MUST route to either Recife Brazil OR to Port Stanley
(going WEST around South America). You may not sail directly because one or the
other is on your route anyway. The hex symbol, when you set up the convoy, should
be in red = it won't work. Try routing to Recife (the shorter route) and then
from there to Capetown. If it is really necessary I can create a new link to do this.
There are now sufficient off map locations that we are constrained in terms of numbers
of links - not many slots are available.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: el cid again

CS Mode exists! But it is not easy to see! It appears only to
work with a transport convoy. In that case, you must go to 'set tf
routing' AND pick a DIFFERENT port for destination from whatever is
the home port of the task force. After that go back to the top level
task force display: you will see CS: name of destination port. I need
time to test how this works in practice?

Many of us have used CS for years..

It is similar to initiating "auto convoy", except the player gets to choose the port of origin, and the port to receive the cargo...Perfect if you are auto-convoying" to a forward point like Suva...and then using smaller legged ships to distribute the cargo from Suva to all local ports.
This also allows me to remove certain less strategic ports from "auto convoy" and forces a narrower more dedicated route from CONUS to the forward cargo dumps.VERY realistic!!
************UPDATE!!!************************
At present two separate CS convoys are successfully unloading at Cape Town from Western Europe!!..Further, they are still shown as assigned to Western Europe and set to return there once completely unloaded.

So far, only two CS convoys from Recife and Panama failed to unload on CS to Cape Town, and I suspect it was because of the recent patch.....Will report further...

[el cid again]

checking

OK - I see why you think so. ALL even numbered RHS Scenarios (= Simplified RHS)
have the brigades - also the recon unit - removed from the OB (so there is less to manage).
However, the 2nd Division itself still appears. You can see this if you load the 1945
Scenario (still under construction - Scenario 126). The BA 2nd Division is active as a whole.
It also can break into three parts. But the individual brigades are not present.

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

Hello again Sid and everyone [:)]

I just noticed the 2nd British Division (or brigades 4th, 5th and 6th IIRC) is missing in the AI oriented scenario (122?).

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: el cid again


From Panama I believe you MUST route to either Recife Brazil OR to Port Stanley
(going WEST around South America). You may not sail directly because one or the
other is on your route anyway. The hex symbol, when you set up the convoy, should
be in red = it won't work. Try routing to Recife (the shorter route) and then
from there to Capetown. If it is really necessary I can create a new link to do this.
There are now sufficient off map locations that we are constrained in terms of numbers
of links - not many slots are available.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: el cid again

CS Mode exists! But it is not easy to see! It appears only to
work with a transport convoy. In that case, you must go to 'set tf
routing' AND pick a DIFFERENT port for destination from whatever is
the home port of the task force. After that go back to the top level
task force display: you will see CS: name of destination port. I need
time to test how this works in practice?

Many of us have used CS for years..

It is similar to initiating "auto convoy", except the player gets to choose the port of origin, and the port to receive the cargo...Perfect if you are auto-convoying" to a forward point like Suva...and then using smaller legged ships to distribute the cargo from Suva to all local ports.
This also allows me to remove certain less strategic ports from "auto convoy" and forces a narrower more dedicated route from CONUS to the forward cargo dumps.VERY realistic!!
************UPDATE!!!************************
At present two separate CS convoys are successfully unloading at Cape Town from Western Europe!!..Further, they are still shown as assigned to Western Europe and set to return there once completely unloaded.

So far, only two CS convoys from Recife and Panama failed to unload on CS to Cape Town, and I suspect it was because of the recent patch.....Will report further...

Thank you...Will report on these CS convoys from Recife and Port Stanley as soon as they reachCape Town...So far I know the ones originating at Eastern U.S. and Western Europe are working as designed...

Gadzooks love these new ports...

[TulliusDetritus]

When I was investigating about the missing brigades of the 2nd British division (which I eventually found via the editor and fixed the problem myself) I came across this discovery.

The 70th British Division becomes of course two Chindit brigades: the 77th and 111st.

But looks like a third brigade should be kept: the 23rd. I know this does not seem serious at all ([:D]) but the wikipedia says ([:D][:D]) this 23rd brigade fought in fact in Kohima, whilst the other two chindit brigades were engaged in the traditional long range deep activities.

In other words, if all above is more or less true another brigade (23rd) should be available in the British OOB [:)]

[el cid again]

Level I Update Link 2.50
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A


This update is comprehensive, but only barely. Most of the work is in map panels.
Only panels without hexes are being updated first. Here we are mainly working in trail systems, previously missing in all forms of AE. The only trails "missing" (from the newly worked panels - obviously they are not in panels not yet revised to have them) are if they are

a) Under railroads. As in stock, RHS (almost always) has a trail under a RR. [There is an exception - an overhead tramway is a minor RR and can move stuff but it has no "roadbed" to walk along]

b) When ferries cross between land bodies. HOWEVER NOTE THE ADDITION OF THE F (Ferry) symbol in map art. [Do not confuse this with the f symbol in the name of a location: that stands for 'fuel' and indicates basically a local sugar cane distilling operation - common in particular in islands just South of Japan.] The F symbol - introduced here - either means a trail (most common) or a minor road AND/OR a minor RR across that hexside. Trails are called "low capacity ferries" while a few places have secondary roads, which are "high capacity ferries" (borrowed from stock, where Shikoku is so connected to Honshu for example). If there is a RR ferry, it is a minor RR - usually a bit of a bottleneck in a major RR line. [Note that games starting in 1941 have a RR ferry between Honshu and Kyushu. But a year later that changes when two "under ocean" RR tunnels are completed - one for each direction. From Winter 1942 on, there is a major RR link and NO RR ferry between the two islands.

c) When there is extensive riverine traffic by minor vessels, often on rivers not classified as navigable for ships. This case is still not modeled in map art - although I am trying to think of a way.

These new trails have color codes, published in part on the map in places:

Most of the map has three trail codes

Green trails are year around.
White trails are Winter only.
Brown trails turn to mud and disappear in Monsoon only.

The two upper left panels (01 and 02) also have a fourth type - in the Himalaya's.
Green with a white stripe down the middle (symbolizing blocked by snow) disappear in Winter only.

Panels 02, 03, 04, 05 & 09 are "final" - no plans to further revise them. Panel 01 is just beginning the addition of trails - only Tibet itself is done - but it ties in nicely with 02 and 09.

These new maps try to help players understand the YEAR AROUND situation for most places. There will be other seasonal panels in due course - but one can play on the Winter art panels and know where the summer (or other seasonal) changes will be for navigable rivers, roads, trails and railroads - because of the symbols and because of notes. Mainly the ice art will change with seasons. The other thing that changes is that later year art will have (usually) more roads and railroads (a few are 'deconstructed' as well - e.g. the Eastern Malaya RR and two segments of the Baikal Amur Mainline).

The railroad NW from Baoji in China was removed from the start of game art - it is build later in the war.

Some of the art was modified to improve readability - not actually changed in content but rather in presentation style - so it is more visible. Some of the art continues to be 'cleaned up' - there was a surprising amount of 'dirt' in the art - in particular where rivers meet each other or the sea.

There is a reorganization of the RHS Seasonal Construction file - no changes in content - under RHS Documentation.

There is a new pwhexe.dat file - very slightly modified both for eratta and to better work with the trails.

There are a few eratta worked into scenario files. Some air groups - mainly to prevent return with late war planes early in the war - and location file eratta - and one device eratta. For safety all ships and classes and aircraft data was also updated in the installer - but I don't remember any actual changes.

The next few updates will mainly focus on bringing all map art up to current standards and on issuing later year Winter pwhexe.dat files. Other seasons will follow.

[el cid again]

Can you translate your suggestion in terms of unit ID (slot) numbers? Otherwise I have to play
detective and figure out what is presented, and what perhaps is missing?

[m10bob]

UPDATE:All of the new RHS off-map ports are capable of creating CS convoys to other off map ports, (except when iced over)..

I have routine CS loads going from Recife, Port Stanley, England and East coast CONUS to Cape Town with no problems.
Once unloaded, the ships are returning automatically to their home ports.



The pic is convoy WS 12 headed for Cape Town in 1941 with reinforcements for Singapore..Once at Singapore, my dad in law was aboard the Wakefield when hit by the bomb of a Betty bomber.

With military ships being the priority, the Wakefield was denied birthing room at Columbo and had to go to Bombay.

[el cid again]

Level I Update Link 2.50
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A



This is an unusually comprehensive update. It involves all kinds of files.
So update art, scenarios and pwhexe.dat files. Note also that RHS documentation
is updated, re Japanese aircraft.

Most of the updates are map art. There also are new Japanese air art filmstrips.
For the first time we are modeling Adam's Bridge in map art. Apart from adding more trail art (and "ferries"), and explanatory notes, quite a bit has been done to make things easier to see. Not least of these is a new way to show dot locations - in bright vs in pastel colors. [The only problem with that is that some places I wished to go un-noticed - so late war units can appear "behind enemy lines" - are more likely to be noticed. Mitigating that is the long time it takes to reach most of them may discourage capturing them.]

The Ki-51c and Ki-71 are redefined. The Ki-71 itself has new side art. Apart from trying to achieve accuracy, I hope these changes make the Ki-71 more likely to be put into production. It is actually a different type of plane - a horizontal bomber capable of proper photo recon missions - it is more likely to survive than a dive bomber with camera is. As well, a recon bomber can fly to 90% of transfer range on a pure photo mission - at the expense of it has no reduced bomb load. The Ki-71 bomb load is so small, it hardly makes sense to fly it on a reduced load anyway. But at least here there is more of a bomb load to carry - the assumptions it was the same as a Ki-51 were wrong. One reason it wasn't very much faster in spite of 50% more power is it carried more! It was really a command recon plane, capable of bombing, rather than an "attack" plane (Japanese for dive bomber). The Ki-51c is modeled on the actual Ki-51c but with attributes of late production Ki-51s - that is, 12.7 mm Ho-1 guns and 30 gallons more internal fuel. Like the Ki-51, it remains a dive bomber capable of photo recon (but not long range photo recon). The plan to make a dedicated recon varsion (Ki-51A) and a dedicated bomber version (Ki-51b) was scrapped in favor of a quick mount camera on all Ki-51s. The new side art for the Ki-71 is from a Japanese site, with the Japanese language comments removed.

Testing revealed HMNZS Achilles has always had the wrong captain - since stock. For some reason a low rated ensign commands. Never mind, the right captain was in the database. Except he was not even permitted to serve in the entire first year of the war! These issues have been resolved.

One location in Sinkiang has moved one hex, and changed names. It is the start of the traditional caravan's for India, and the next update will show that over the mountains route branching off from there. It is called Kargilik. That is a modern spelling and may not be correct for WW2. Other spellings add more letters but pronounce the same - and I need an old map to determine what was used in the 1940s.

pwhexe.dat changes are technical. Correcting errors in hex sides (mismatched river and land) or where map art and pwhexe.dat disagreed - including one hex dating from stock. A few trailheads in lowlands were added - these have winter only trails through the Himilayas but nothing prevents use of the trailhead year around. A few trails converted from year around to disappearing in Monsoon - that is - they change in color from Green to Brown - in India and China. The next edition will attempt to freeze the pwhexe.dat file - folding in all eratta and new trails in Tibet - only parts of which will appear in the Winter file (because most of their hexes are blocked in Winter - they will show in map art but not in pwhexe.dat - a white stripe down a green square means "blocked by snow in winter").

A small amount of location eratta and land unit data in the location file was corrected. An even smaller amount of technical development occurred on locations and land units. One location redefined manpower as light industry - which is correct - and that will backfit into ongoing games. There isn't a lot of eratta any more, but active games and reports by players are rooting out what remains to be found.

[el cid again]

Level II Update Link 2.493
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A

This update is, as advertised, mainly about map art. It also features what is probably the final stage of pwhexe.dat development (as opposed to eratta correction).

Here, by request, we added the last of the trail systems in Tibet: the direct route over the high passes from Srinigar to Kargilik in Sinkiang; and the long, looping trail which looks like a gigantic smile following the rivers of Southern Tibet. [A different, much longer, secondary road route from Srinigar to Sinkiang is partially on the map at
both ends, but it loops far to the West, leaving the map for half it length.] As well, the trail system of Nepal is now fully developed - looking like a poor man's alternative to the Tea & Horse Caravan Road.

Most of the work went into other panels. MANY PANELS have been modified, some only slightly. Change all non-hex map panels (WPEN series). Art development extends all the way across the North to Western Canada - and now has reached as far South as Java (and the islands SE of it). This does not change anything in terms of how the game works. Instead, it makes it easier for players to understand how the game's invisible pwhexe.dat file works? Notes and symbols also help players understand how roads and trails change seasonally?

There is more than a little eratta. It affects the location file, the ship file, the aircraft file, the group file and the leader (H) file. There is new RHS documentation - no major new material - just better presentation of old material.

Mifune was working on some Allied air art when the hurricane intervened. Maybe next week.

[el cid again]

Level I Update Link 2.50
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A



This update is similar to the last one - the focus was map art but a little of a lot else is included in the package. The WPEN16 map panel (Eastern NEI, Southern Philippines, Western New Guinea) is the major rework. Half a dozen other, lowered panels have a little bit of cleanup.

The map work caused me to notice - and then remember - the stock pwhexe.dat file does not match stock art at Sambas (Borneo). Since we started over with the extended map pwhexe.dat file - that issue was preserved. Sambas is inland - not accessible from the sea - but only through the Sinkawang hex. So now there is a both hexside between them (vice land), and the formerly sea hexside NW from Sambas is now blocked. These two towns have reversed their relationship since WW2. At that time, Sambas was the main port AND airfield. But apparently there was not enough room to expand - these facilities are at or near their limits.

Never mind stock errors, I found two of my own. I had the wrong route for the trail on the NE arm of Celebes (Sulawese today). I correctly remembered it runs on the Southern side of the arm near its Eastern end, but I didn't check to see if it ran the entire arm that way? And I never saw it far West of Manado. So I checked my maps - and found that terrain causes the trail (now a road) to switch from the North side to the South side of the arm in the middle. And my trail to the Southern end of Helmahera (sort of a baby version of Celebes, with several arms) was based on an invalid assumption. There is still no trail there - on this almost undeveloped island. Note that Kao, in the middle, has great base potential. Built up by Japan, it became the HQ for the entire SW theater of operations. Just NE of there, on Daruba Island, Japan built a gigantic airfield, using it to bomb Australia. This field was later used by the US to support operations against the Philippines. Neither base appears in stock - never mind Daruba is vital to the Downfall scenario. Don't ask why? Any OB check would have revealed it as a big base which ipso facto must have the capability to build into a large airfield complex. But in spite of extensive development of the naval base on Helmahera, the trail system did not extend to the South. So I removed it. I also extended the trail on Palawan half a hex to the NE - the town at the end of the island (Taytay) was important even in the 16th century - and had a quite extensive trail system. Correcting those eratta means there is yet another pwhexe.dat - still perfecting the base file for Level II. We now have the most difficult map areas done so I hope no more errors turn up.

There is also some location file eratta. British and Commonwealth base forces were in some cases not in sync with the formations they point at. A couple of units had eratta - sometimes as simple as an invalid suffix to the name. There also is a bit of aircraft eratta - some Japanese transports lost a bit of payload: there is an entire family of Ki-21 Sally based transports - some military, some civil, even some in Navy colors, some with bigger or smaller engines (three different ratings) - and I got one of them with the wrong payload for its powerplant - so it is fixed. I am uncertain if any device, group, class or ship eratta were reworked since the last update - so all of those files were copied from the revised source for safety.

[el cid again]

Level I Update Link 2.50
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A

This update is comprehensive in that it involves art, scenario, documentation
and pwhexe.dat files.

Most of the work went into art panels. We began at the top - and now have reached
the bottom of the game map. Australia, New Zealand and the Solomans are done
here - some panels for the first time. The main addition is trails and ferries. Also
comments. And a tiny bit of map art - I drew a reef along the coast of New Caledonia - a mainly technical update I doubt anyone will notice. It 'explains' why the trail to the coast leads to a blocked hexside.

The B-18A GP is modified - not it is the B-18A RB. The main use of the B-18 was in a search and recon role. The recon bomber can be a normal bomber to normal range, but it also can go farther with only minimal bombs and a camera than it could go with the usual extended range load. There is no art change for this. Three air art documentation files were changed to reflect this.

Some groups were reworked - mainly USAAF bomber groups. I was on the quest to insure no units return with late war planes early in the war, but found OB issues. One bomber squadron that was never at Pearl is now not going to start the game there. Another one changes names - because the named one went to ETO - but the original data had it changing names - and the later name is actually right (but not the same unit). If you are confused, it is a confusing subject!

Numbers of British and Commonwealth base forces were reworked. Their formations were right, but that isn't enough to make the daughter units right.
One must change them all. So I did.

Some eratta was worked in of the more minor sort. For example, changing an invalid suffix to battalion. Some more important eratta was worked in. Including starting fatigue and exhaustion and planning levels, supplies, and unit locations and dates.

[el cid again]

Level II Update Link 2.493
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A


This is a micro update probably confined to scenario files. Possibly
entirely to location and group files. For safety, aircraft, class, device
and ship files were also updated from source. For safety, art files
were updated as well - but I don't remember any changes since
2.492.

Four groups - all cruiser scout planes in the RNN - were updated so they
do not try to upgrade to a German tri motor transport (Ju-52).

About 10 RAAF - and several RAF - wings were redefined in location files.
Probably other land unit eratta was worked in as well.

[el cid again]

Level I Update Link 2.50
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A

This comprehensive update is comprehensive only insofar as
I copied over every kind of file. I think there are only two kinds
of files which changed: map art files and location files.

The location files involve mainly Canadian and New Zealand
base force updates. These records were not in sync with
the formation they pointed at. I got rid of one formation -
for RCMP base forces - creating a de facto new standard - but
they all are separate and do not point at any formation. There
are slight variations in the records of these tiny base forces.

Seven map panels were updated with respect to trails, ferries and
comments. The three upper right map panels, the three immediately
to the left of them, and the one in the "corner" (with the Seattle-
Vancouver BC area on it) those six panels form. These are very
comprehensive updates and involved representing much existing
information. Partly this was done for consistency - since these
panels were done RHS map art has evolved slightly. Now all trails
are shown, even those not present yet in 1942 - in the form of
"routes." These include the CANOL Project Route, the ALCAN
Project Route, the Road of Bones Route, and possibly others.

The only problem I have with this art is the lack of pack ice below
the Bering Strait. I have not learned how to make it yet!

There are only a few map panels needing anything (that I can make) -
mainly inter-island ferries in the Pacific. Adding these won't take long,
but may need so much more space we run into problems with the
installer or with the cloud used to link users to the installer. This is
issued for safety - the final "map art" version will probably release
tomorrow. The really good news is I am not finding any pwhexe.dat
errors - and this art forces me to look at it closely.

The next series (2.5xx) will focus on pwhexe.dat files for OTHER seasons
and years.

[m10bob]

Hello Sid...In scenario 122, roughly spring of 1942 I got my first American CVE with replenishment groups on deck, (marked as such), but they have the normal complement of 21 fighters and 9 DB's....I tried to re-size them, but every turn, it has reverted back to saying 21 fighters, 9 DB's...(I have NOT exhausted the limitation in game of squadrons which may be re-sized)...Any ideas on how this has occurred?...I have never experienced this issue in maybe 20 games?

[el cid again]

Below is a document defining Ferry symbols in the new RHS map system.
While the vast majority are "low capacity vehicle and passenger ferries" -
there are a few exceptions. These are defined in the document below.

RHS Level TWO map art is now completed and update 2.50 will release this morning.
RHS development will now focus on other seasons, and other years, of pwhexe.dat files.


RHS Ferries Explained and Decoded

There are several different ways ferries exist in RHS:

1) Ocean Going Ferries. Useful for strategic transit and amphibious operations, these always exist as individual ships in the order of battle.

2) Irrawaddy River Flotilla Vessels. The world’s largest ‘ferry’ operator in the period, this company has several different kinds of vessels. Virtually all of them are medium distance river and coastal transports of one kind or another. One is unique – the “Flat” – a sort of flatbed transport rated as an aircraft transport with a capacity of 1 in RHS – because it may transport an aircraft without disassembly. Vessels of this company always exist as individual ships in the order of battle.

3) Large vehicle and railroad ferries. When NOT absolutely required to service a MAJOR river crossing, these vessels might be requisitioned by naval units for minelaying or amphibious operations. These always exist as individual ships in the order of battle.

4) Large vehicle and railroad ferries. When REQUIRED for compelling local economic reasons at a primary railroad river crossing, these show up in the form of the F symbol. There are three cases:

a) RED for both RR ferries and high capacity vehicle ferries

b) ORANGE for both RR ferries and low capacity vehicle ferries

c) YELLOW for ONLY high capacity vehicle ferries (no RR ferries at all)

5) Low capacity vehicle and passenger ferries: these show up in the form of a the F symbol in BLUE. The vast majority of ferries on the RHS Level II map system are of this type.

RED symbols are found on the Inland Sea at Takamatsu (to Okayama) and on the Yangtze at Wuhan.

ORANGE symbols are found on the Yangtze at Wu Hu and Nanking, and on the Yellow River at Pengpu. There is also one at Hakodate on the Tsugaru Strait between Honshu and Hokkaido. For the first year of the war there is one at Shimonoseki between Honshu and Kyushu. From Winer, 1942 this becomes a blue symbol because the RR link is replaced by two tunnels – one for each direction – treated as a land primary RR connection (because it is that).

YELLOW symbols are found at Seattle (to Bremerton) and San Francisco (to Oakland and to Vallejo/Mare Island. There is also one on the Inland Sea at Takamatsu (to Fukuyama).

[el cid again]

No idea. The first CVE should be Long Island. It has a capacity of 16. It should have two squadrons of
8 aircraft - VC(F)-42 and VC(T)-42.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello Sid...In scenario 122, roughly spring of 1942 I got my first American CVE with replenishment groups on deck, (marked as such), but they have the normal complement of 21 fighters and 9 DB's....I tried to re-size them, but every turn, it has reverted back to saying 21 fighters, 9 DB's...(I have NOT exhausted the limitation in game of squadrons which may be re-sized)...Any ideas on how this has occurred?...I have never experienced this issue in maybe 20 games?

[el cid again]

Level I Update Link 2.50
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg74A7TujZK_wdrKG1A

This edition contains the FINAL WPEN (no hex) map art panels.
They add a new system to indicate the kind of ferries by the color
of the F at the ferry location. That is documented in a new document
under RHS Documentation: RHS Ferries Explained and Decoded.
There is also a new Axis Air Art Filmstrip (alpha).

More review was done of Allied air groups to insure no units reappear
(after being disbanded or destroyed) with later aircraft types than
they should. A few cases were found in US bomber units and CVE units.
There may be one aircraft eratta update. There may be location file
eratta.

RHS development now shifts to other season pwhexe.dat files (bringing
them up to current standard) and to later year files. We will continue
to fold in all detected or reported eratta.

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

No idea. The first CVE should be Long Island. It has a capacity of 16. It should have two squadrons of
8 aircraft - VC(F)-42 and VC(T)-42.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello Sid...In scenario 122, roughly spring of 1942 I got my first American CVE with replenishment groups on deck, (marked as such), but they have the normal complement of 21 fighters and 9 DB's....I tried to re-size them, but every turn, it has reverted back to saying 21 fighters, 9 DB's...(I have NOT exhausted the limitation in game of squadrons which may be re-sized)...Any ideas on how this has occurred?...I have never experienced this issue in maybe 20 games?

Hello Sid...Specifically the ship is the USS Copahee....In some of my games I have used those replenishment CVE's as regular escorts by altering the size of airgroups to 21 and 9 but this ship appears with 18 and 9 (IIRC) and as replenishment should be 21/21, IIRC).

[el cid again]

USS Copahee is probably the second US CVE to appear in all 1941 RHS scenarios. It indeed does appear
with an air group of 18 F4F's and 9 SBD's. It is not possible to resize these squadrons to 21 and 21.
One reason is that the ship's capacity is formally 33 - 21 plus 21 = 42. Another reason is that RHS
uses actual US air squadron organization at the time a ship appears.

Note that in RHS there is NO allowance for use of a "deck park." This is for two unrelated reasons.
First of all, code does permit flight operations up to 7/6 of the rated air group size (formally up
to 115% I think). Somewhere around 37 or 38, the group will refuse to fly at all (although it can be
transported). Resizing too big to fly seems poor mod design. Second, a deck park is essentially
"cheating" in game terms - because there is no provision for loss of the deck park in bad weather - nor
any requirement the carrier EVADE bad weather. Code will have the ship close enemy targets anyway,
and it will never lose any to bad weather, even when it is present. For this reason, since WITP days,
RHS has never rated carries with deck storage - only with hanger storage. And this is strictly determined
by the hanger capacity using the aircraft assigned AT THE TIME of the game - not (in the case of Kaga, Akagi,
Saratoga or Lexington) using smaller aircraft in the 1920s. The effect of rating a carrier for a deck part,
and then permitting flight operations with up to 15% more than that (when deck parks in fact maximized the
plane count already) is not historical simulation in my view. I regard that as gamey. I also don't like
different standards for different sides - just because Japan did not use deck parks does not mean they could not
have done so. Letting the Allies use them (because they did) but the Japanese not (because they didn't) is
not really simulating what COULD HAVE BEEN DONE - and it also is not my cup of tea. Commanders should be
able to do whatever they could do - the operational and tactical choices are theirs. If I did allow a deck
park (because the weather problem was addressed) I would do so for both sides. Not insisting they use them,
either - still starting with actual historical squadron sizes.

Squadron size is tricky and modders have a problem. Our ability to change that size is limited. The data research
needed to identify actual squadron sizes for every squadron in the war is also daunting - perhaps a man year or two
of work. I didn't do that. Instead, I use standard or typical sizes and apply them uniformly unless some specific
reason exists to change it. Even that is somewhat subjective: a nominal squadron of 18 planes IRL in USN averaged
19; code allows you to add a few more, so you can go oversize if you want - above the average oversize of only 1.
But I like the code solution - I think its 'reserve' aircraft limits are reasonable - and see no reason to mess with that
by giving actual sizes greater than nominal TO&E.

So in this case, the limits you ran into are my fault. For cause. It - and all matters - are up for discussion.
But I see little chance Copahee should (or even could) be rated to fly 42 machines in game terms. [That is, 49 in
game terms = 42/6 x7 = 49] In fact the ship can carry that many or more - but not operationally as a carrier.

Note that in RHS most carriers - and all CVE's - may rapidly convert to (and back from) AKV status - permitting transporting
of any type of aircraft with wings attached - so they unload ready for use. In code terms, an AKV does not care what
the squadron size is - but only allows for one squadron regardless of type or plane count. It isn't the best way
to model an AKV, but that is how AE does it - and it is somewhat justifiable given it might be heavy bombers. AKV's
are in RHS, however, not because they can carry airplanes - but because they are superb transports for troops, cargo
and units. ALL carriers actually are - but code does NOT allow carriers to be used in that form. So convert the
ship and get a rather fabulous fast transport. IRL when a carrier is used as a transport, it is stripped of aviation
support equipment and people, and certain extra things are installed for troops. That is why the short 'conversion'
process - both directions. To use it as a carrier again means re-equipping for aircraft support.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: el cid again

No idea. The first CVE should be Long Island. It has a capacity of 16. It should have two squadrons of
8 aircraft - VC(F)-42 and VC(T)-42.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

Hello Sid...In scenario 122, roughly spring of 1942 I got my first American CVE with replenishment groups on deck, (marked as such), but they have the normal complement of 21 fighters and 9 DB's....I tried to re-size them, but every turn, it has reverted back to saying 21 fighters, 9 DB's...(I have NOT exhausted the limitation in game of squadrons which may be re-sized)...Any ideas on how this has occurred?...I have never experienced this issue in maybe 20 games?

Hello Sid...Specifically the ship is the USS Copahee....In some of my games I have used those replenishment CVE's as regular escorts by altering the size of airgroups to 21 and 9 but this ship appears with 18 and 9 (IIRC) and as replenishment should be 21/21, IIRC).

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

USS Copahee is probably the second US CVE to appear in all 1941 RHS scenarios. It indeed does appear
with an air group of 18 F4F's and 9 SBD's. It is not possible to resize these squadrons to 21 and 21.
One reason is that the ship's capacity is formally 33 - 21 plus 21 = 42. Another reason is that RHS
uses actual US air squadron organization at the time a ship appears.

Note that in RHS there is NO allowance for use of a "deck park." This is for two unrelated reasons.
First of all, code does permit flight operations up to 7/6 of the rated air group size (formally up
to 115% I think). Somewhere around 37 or 38, the group will refuse to fly at all (although it can be
transported). Resizing too big to fly seems poor mod design. Second, a deck park is essentially
"cheating" in game terms - because there is no provision for loss of the deck park in bad weather - nor
any requirement the carrier EVADE bad weather. Code will have the ship close enemy targets anyway,
and it will never lose any to bad weather, even when it is present. For this reason, since WITP days,
RHS has never rated carries with deck storage - only with hanger storage. And this is strictly determined
by the hanger capacity using the aircraft assigned AT THE TIME of the game - not (in the case of Kaga, Akagi,
Saratoga or Lexington) using smaller aircraft in the 1920s. The effect of rating a carrier for a deck part,
and then permitting flight operations with up to 15% more than that (when deck parks in fact maximized the
plane count already) is not historical simulation in my view. I regard that as gamey. I also don't like
different standards for different sides - just because Japan did not use deck parks does not mean they could not
have done so. Letting the Allies use them (because they did) but the Japanese not (because they didn't) is
not really simulating what COULD HAVE BEEN DONE - and it also is not my cup of tea. Commanders should be
able to do whatever they could do - the operational and tactical choices are theirs. If I did allow a deck
park (because the weather problem was addressed) I would do so for both sides. Not insisting they use them,
either - still starting with actual historical squadron sizes.

Squadron size is tricky and modders have a problem. Our ability to change that size is limited. The data research
needed to identify actual squadron sizes for every squadron in the war is also daunting - perhaps a man year or two
of work. I didn't do that. Instead, I use standard or typical sizes and apply them uniformly unless some specific
reason exists to change it. Even that is somewhat subjective: a nominal squadron of 18 planes IRL in USN averaged
19; code allows you to add a few more, so you can go oversize if you want - above the average oversize of only 1.
But I like the code solution - I think its 'reserve' aircraft limits are reasonable - and see no reason to mess with that
by giving actual sizes greater than nominal TO&E.

So in this case, the limits you ran into are my fault. For cause. It - and all matters - are up for discussion.
But I see little chance Copahee should (or even could) be rated to fly 42 machines in game terms. [That is, 49 in
game terms = 42/6 x7 = 49] In fact the ship can carry that many or more - but not operationally as a carrier.

Note that in RHS most carriers - and all CVE's - may rapidly convert to (and back from) AKV status - permitting transporting
of any type of aircraft with wings attached - so they unload ready for use. In code terms, an AKV does not care what
the squadron size is - but only allows for one squadron regardless of type or plane count. It isn't the best way
to model an AKV, but that is how AE does it - and it is somewhat justifiable given it might be heavy bombers. AKV's
are in RHS, however, not because they can carry airplanes - but because they are superb transports for troops, cargo
and units. ALL carriers actually are - but code does NOT allow carriers to be used in that form. So convert the
ship and get a rather fabulous fast transport. IRL when a carrier is used as a transport, it is stripped of aviation
support equipment and people, and certain extra things are installed for troops. That is why the short 'conversion'
process - both directions. To use it as a carrier again means re-equipping for aircraft support.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

ORIGINAL: el cid again

No idea. The first CVE should be Long Island. It has a capacity of 16. It should have two squadrons of
8 aircraft - VC(F)-42 and VC(T)-42.

Hello Sid...Specifically the ship is the USS Copahee....In some of my games I have used those replenishment CVE's as regular escorts by altering the size of airgroups to 21 and 9 but this ship appears with 18 and 9 (IIRC) and as replenishment should be 21/21, IIRC).

I'm wit ya' 100% on your comments, but since dedicated to RHS, let me relate some "stock WITP-AE things to you.

"Replenishment CVE's do carry more planes than the plane quota, so as you call them "plane parks", that is just what they seem to be.
The replenishment CVE's have no designation as such outwardly, and can only be detected by looking at the plane complement when examining each of those ships.
(This could be an appreciated improvement, simply renaming those ships to say something like "Copahee(R)", or such.)

Please look at your RHS scenario 122 and when you see the complement, you may note the words "replenishment group" do appear behind the title of the squadrons on the ship.


On a separate issue...Some islands (like Baker Island near Howland) have zero port size, and cannot be built to accept any port size whatsoever.
How do you feel about giving such atolls even an ability to have a size one port to represent perhaps an anchored ship to off load supplies from, similar to the "Mulberries"..I know I going abstract here, but the concept was common.