Matrix Games Forums

[font="times new roman"]el cid again,[/font]
[font="times new roman"]First off, thanks for all the hard work on RHS I have really enjoyed the EOS scenario![/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]
[font="times new roman"]How units upgrade is still a problem.[/font]
[font="times new roman"]It looks like most of the IJA independent const units upgrade to formation 2009 (USA Eng Unit) instead of 919[/font]
[font="times new roman"]The HHA Reg units upgrade to formation 2033 (USA 1943 infantry) instead of 2082[/font]
[font="times new roman"]The LAA Reg units upgrade to formation 2017 (USAAF Aviation reg) instead of 2083[/font]
[font="times new roman"]KNIL Batavia Coastal Gun Units upgrade to formation 2009 (USA Eng Unit) instead of 2096[/font]
[font="times new roman"]The AA 1st Motorized upgrades to formation 2005 (USA light tank) instead of  ? (2040?)[/font]
[font="times new roman"] [/font]There are more, I can list as many as I find if it helps. 

I have sent a complete list of the bad pointers to El Cid, hoping that he finally solves that problem. The list is very extensive, so I guess he will take a day or two before releasing all the corrections

I have decided to release 4.43 micro update with pointer corrections,

and corrections to British LAA units (thanks to Kerguelin - however it is spelled)

Also some eratta I detected (a duplicate sink)

revisions of locations of HQ to help Japanese home economics (HQ suck supplies)

and revision of the Japanese CD unit composition to include land devices rather than
naval ones.

I must work now - but I will continue to update any reported errors.

My initial test turn must be redone in light of these changes.

My AI vs AI test - into mid-1942 - is showing better behaviors. Cleaning things up may
help.

RHS v4.43 micro posted on download link page and aslo avail at RHS Web Site

Cobra Aus

ORIGINAL: CobraAus

RHS v4.43 micro posted on download link page and aslo avail at RHS Web Site

Cobra Aus

I apologize, I haven't been following closely lately, what is the link to the RHS web site where I can get the latest files?

I have been able to get a medium term AI vs AI run of RHS 4.43 (and also 4.42) - so I have some sense of
what happens when AI runs the economy. AI is really stupid: it will produce engines for which there is no
aircraft in production - in vast numbers - never suspending the plant or converting it! It will not increase production
of a plant either. So I must help it by planning properly. I just realized this is my job: I created engines that matter -
that are rated by size - and no less than four types are not in use when the game begins. I must figure out what they should be late in the war and arrange for it to happen - or Japan will only make a handful of late war planes.

Alvermartin provided an analysis of possible issues by an Excel comparison - and while many of the things which didn't make sense to his software are deliberate - nevertheless I found some issues. Notably Japanese fortresses may tend to disappear - to turn into immoblie but ultra light airborne units! Also they need better initial supply depots - many had out of depots from a different device list. And I decided to reclassify some aviation units as HQ or as EABs - to help the AI understand their functions. And I have changed some names so that, instead of abbreviations no one is likely to understand, I am spelling the Japanese names out.

I have a technical problem with units with light infantry support weapons - notably 81mm mortars and light ATG units.
The technical solution of defining them as infantry didn't work - and so I need a different package for these units.
Presumably you benefit from their presence if you get attacked, but they are of zero offensive value.

I discovered a problem with Alor Setar going all the way back to stock - it is a port! - and when AI is boss it BUILDS this land locked port! From version 4.44 RHS will not do that. I notified Matrix and Andrew.

Wake, Guam and Hong Kong garrisons now fall approximately on time. AI is able to take Singapore, Manila and Bataan as well - but not very fast. 40 units seem hard coded to move to Bataan. I also have a pesky naval station that refuses to stay put - even if you give it a static device. It won't even stay near the sea - but heads for Inner Mongolia all the time if AI is boss. It is a stock unit too - so I am mystified. Short of not using the slot I see no solution - so I may adopt that one. But ideas are welcome.

Once 4.44 is issued I will once again attempt to create a standard opening turn so we can get some human testing going. This should be in just over 12 hours.

Hi El Cid

In the following link goes it about the Australian 1st Parachute Battalion who is raised in 1943. Mayby can you add it as a what if unit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian ... _Battalion

I can add the unit - but it will be in a future release. Takes research. If it was raised it isn't "what if"
even if it wasn't used.

I apologize, I haven't been following closely lately, what is the link to the RHS web site where I can get the latest files?

RHS Web Site

http://www.rhs.akdreemer.com/rhs_home.html

Cobra Aus

RHS v4.44 download avail on download link page and RHS Web Site

Cobra Aus

I have run a AI vs AI "calibration" test into Spring 1942 - to get a measure on how the AI is handling the new
aircraft and aircraft engine system I introduced - and to look for other things.

The most odd "other thing" is I have ONE maverik supply sink! To beat me - the AI (which may be intelligent after all) DIVIDED the sink - leaving the static device behind - with 10 labor squads - and sent the rest to attack a city in Malaya! All the way from Guam! This is a Japanese supply sink - the first to appear in the game. I had to change slots to beat the beaste. Same for a maverick base station - present since stock - that won't stay anywhere near the sea! Must be some wierd hard code in that slot.

My revised aircraft production figures are slightly lower than before: Japan produced only 65 zeros in Dec 1942 - and for some reason the number was set higher than that - as the most glaring example. I also reduced the size of a few engine plants to half capacity (40 vice 80). I have evolved some economic theory which I will write an essay about - to help players plan their economy intelligently - for their particular planned strategy. I find it amazing AI cannot stop producing engines not needed - or convert engine or plane plants that are needed - but it cannot. So this effort is to help AI players - mostly - as humans presumably can do such things.

Finally I had to tackel the problem of small weapons. I reverted to the old RHS system - modeled on aircraft machine guns - increasing the soft effect to the minimum value of 5 and decreasing other factors to compensate. WITP uses a product system - so how you get the product does not change the outcome. Under this revision all units should be able to attack and bombard when appropriate.

To incorporate these changes - and to input the revised numbers to get the economy somewhat better in later years for aircraft production under AI control - I have decided to issue what I hope to be the "final" version of RHS 4.4x
Someone is running a special analysis by spreadsheet seeking eratta - so I will wait for those results - in case there is anything to fold in. But I already did that for 4.4 - and it may not be he can find any more using the same analysis system.

Using this "final" version - 4.45 - I shall create a "standard opening turn" for Japan at once - and issue the identical turn to all the human testers. If anyone wants to go the other way - I can create a simple 'generic' opening turn for both sides - with the base economic stuff done - and published passwords - and then a tester can enter Allied operational orders. [The basic Japanese operational orders are in the scenario as such]. This should permit a number of simultaneous tests - and the first day's battles will in many cases be virtually identical in force composition -
which may make for good comparisons to get a sense of "does this situation always turn out the same way or not?"

In the RHS world - you participate when you decide to - in the way you decide to. Just say "this is what I want to do."
It is not a closed team - but an open one - and just as volunteers look at and correct specific sorts of data -
or do special projects like Cobra did for art or Mifune did for the manual - so testers are self selected. The other thing forum members have done is propose additions - which reminds me - there is that Aussie airborne battalion I should add to 4.45...

Reviewing Malaya and Sumatra for hex and hexside status (because of the routing issue and because of
the Alor Star issue)

I decided to add Great Natuna Island as an undeveloped base. It might be operationally significant
being located between Singapore and Borneo.

Regarding Japanese aircraft engines and the "AI" - this may sound like blasphemy but hear me out...

Why not say "an engine is an engine is an engine" - get rid of all the different types and have a single engine type for all planes - for the AI at least. This way one could easily "manage" the production by only having to increase production, rather than stopping or reducing production which the AI cannot do.

I suppose one could get "fancy" and have different engines designated by year of entry, eg "1944" for all planes entering at that time frame. Just another way of being able to "program" and control engine production better - in many cases to limit aircraft production to more historical levels.

Just food for thought...

Would it make sense to do like in CHS and rename Aden for example to Aden/Middle East/Europe and add small shipyard there?  It'd help with upgrades of ships that arrive in there. Otherwise one has to send them to Bombay etc. to upgrade.

ORIGINAL: Nicholas Bell

Regarding Japanese aircraft engines and the "AI" - this may sound like blasphemy but hear me out...

Why not say "an engine is an engine is an engine" - get rid of all the different types and have a single engine type for all planes - for the AI at least. This way one could easily "manage" the production by only having to increase production, rather than stopping or reducing production which the AI cannot do.

I suppose one could get "fancy" and have different engines designated by year of entry, eg "1944" for all planes entering at that time frame. Just another way of being able to "program" and control engine production better - in many cases to limit aircraft production to more historical levels.

Just food for thought...

Seems to defeat the design intent of different engine production - and the impact of hitting one or two critical high power engine factories on a critical type of plane.

Anyway - I love this stuff - and so I mess with it. I want much more detail - twice as many types - rather than less.
Engine investment matters - and mainly I design for human players - I just am helping out AI for those who use it as much as possible. AI is never going to be very great.

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Would it make sense to do like in CHS and rename Aden for example to Aden/Middle East/Europe and add small shipyard there?  It'd help with upgrades of ships that arrive in there. Otherwise one has to send them to Bombay etc. to upgrade.

Well - there IS a shipyard at Panama! YOu can send ships to the USA, to Panama, to Australia, or India.

Aden and ME have no shipyards able to do such work - so I am inclined to think not. But I AM inclined to add
UK and GULF COAST USA and EAST COAST USA - if I can figure it out. Cobra and I work on such things - and Madagascar and the Strait of Magellan.

Some issues have arisen - but calibration testing is proceeding well.

1) I carefully corrected pointers for all IJA and JAAF construction battalions - to the wrong formation!

2) The way to code Alor Star is slightly up in the air.

3) A new way to define squads has been proposed - putting the year in the name - to help us identify if errors are present? It takes time to update all the devices for all the scenarios.

4) Looking at LCUs has caused me to spot some technical issues: supply depots are often not big enough -
weapons are sometimes drawn from ships instead of land devices - which I am not certain is the best way -
and sometimes other things. In particular I am carefully making the Dutch units be what I think they were intended to be - but not always are. We have oddities like "battalions" with more squads than brigades or regiments - and
stuff like that.

This may all be sorted out tomorrow. When it is, I will issue 4.45 and proceed to medium term testing.

I did add the First Australian Para Battalion in 1944.

If we get the planes rated, we will go to 5.00. We seem to have found a function that works better - and are working out possible exceptions to it now. But there are 249 types to calculate before we can use ANY!

Sid,

You were looking for data on the size of explosive charges in armor piercing shells. In my reading I have found a little data on Japanese naval shells. Note, that although the bursting charges seem small, a real target would also receive considerable damage via penetration itself and the transfer of kinetic energy (in the form of heat, shock waves, and momentum imparted to debris further causing damage). This would be true even if the shell passed completely through the target – it leaves a hole, can start fires, sends shrapnel flying, etc.

Japanese Shell / Length / Weight / Bursting charge

8 inch AP
3 feet long
277 pounds
6.9 pounds

14 inch HE
5 feet long
1,425 pounds
63 pounds

18.1 inch AP
6.5 feet long
3,219 pounds
75 pounds

This is from James D. Hornfischer, “The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors”, 206.

The chapter notes cite the source as “Japanese Naval Guns”, www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_main.htm, updated Sept. 10, 2002.

I realize this is very little data – and you might not like the source, but it's 'I got what I got', so I'm passing it along in case it is helpful. I also realize that you might already have other data, but this might be useful for comparison.

A note about the website – I am unable to connect to it. I've tried www.warships.com, and although I get a connection it is a blank page.

Can't vouch for any of this - but now you got what I got.

witpqs:

Naval Weapons part is moved to: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/index_weapons.htm

I need to do a new pwhex file for RHS 4.45

because I have moved Alor Star.

The rail line goes from Singora to Alor Star to Georgetown - and in the new file set it
won't look like that until Cobra changes the map panel. Alor Star moves one hex
NW - to the sea - and the hex it used to be in is now empty.

Until the new pwhex file is issues, things won't want to move to Alor Star by land
very well. So that I will do - tomorrow probably.

4.45 itself is now dependent on data entry : how soon can I get all the fields corrected?
The comprehensive spreadsheet listing helps understand everthing fast. Soon.

There are always some cosmetic things too - like changing air group names so the service
designator is in front - an RHS convention. Tons of that to do - and I always do a little.