It may be we will get some map art customized for RHS.
This will start with four seasonal maps which show the
RHS view of roads and rail lines at (or near) the start of the
war (depending on the season). RHS did "delete" a
few and added several. In particular, it would be nice to
be able to show the significant Tea and Horse Caravan Road
(which was of strategic import) without pressing the R key.
Also, it would be nice to have pack ice in art for some season
other than Winter - in RHS Arctic navigation is possible in
other seasons - and so showing the ice in art would be a fine
player aide. [Right now, you must turn on hexside details
and use blocked hexsides vice blue hexsides to see where you
may sail. The ice recedes slowly - and comes back fast -
so the best navigation is in the Fall - where the Arctic Ocean
is navigable along most of its coast.] Eventually we can
add maps to show road and railroad construction later in the war.
Here is part of a note from a new member of the RHS team:
hi sid!
sorry, but the mail probably went straight into the spam on your side...
i added a pgpsig that garbled the content somewhat.
here's the text again: (and yes! it's a daunting project but i'm up to it!)
hello sid!
thanks for your reply. i'm glad you like the idea of me doing mapart
for your scenario!
i'd really like to do more mapart for witp-ae and like i wrote,
people using stock or extended maps to play their games are already
well equipped with 'fresh' mapart.
RHS Level I Updates Suspended
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Map Art News
Apparently chemkid will start an RHS Map Art thread
for feedback from Forum members. This is officially
sanctioned. RHS is very much a product of the Forums
and feedback from them. I estimate that about half
of RHS features are from non-members of the RHS team.
If/when chemkid issues map art panels, we will adopt
them. An RHS principle is "anything better than what
we now have is in." Another is that we want to do
what users prefer: he has questions about what players
wish for? It is our policy to seriously consider all
suggestions and, where practical, to use them.
for feedback from Forum members. This is officially
sanctioned. RHS is very much a product of the Forums
and feedback from them. I estimate that about half
of RHS features are from non-members of the RHS team.
If/when chemkid issues map art panels, we will adopt
them. An RHS principle is "anything better than what
we now have is in." Another is that we want to do
what users prefer: he has questions about what players
wish for? It is our policy to seriously consider all
suggestions and, where practical, to use them.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: (Limited) CW in RHS Scenarios
This is pure chrome. It is not required players ever use this feature. It is also
possible (but unrealistic) to substitute conventional bombers into the Unit 731
Air Unit or to substitute BW bombers into other bomber units of the JAAF. It
does not matter much operationally.
Unit 731 was one of two major BW research and production stations, nominally of the IJA (nominally because the IJA leadership generally opposed BW, almost universally
after it got out of control on a large scale, but generally even before that). The other unit was Unit 100, at a different location, and with a different focus - on BW for use on animals and crops instead of humans. This information was considered of so much interest the US failed to prosecute most war criminals in exchange for information (which was never completely forthcoming). The US spent a decade developing and testing similar weapons, which is why we know their limitations.
I have all the classified test reports - and a list of them so I know it is all - which were declassified through a contractor - but which academics were unaware of until
I asked the contractor (Bectel, Las Vegas) and was pointed at them. I sent them to a BW academic at UC Berkeley.
The Unit 731 Air Unit is present mainly because it was the only significantly used BW program in the history of modern warfare. It is severely limited because BW is not
very effective (although it might be suitable for an effective terrorist campaign).
Also it is limited because I can not think of a way to implement its early use
(before WW2 at Nomanhan, using volunteers to poison water supplies with
anthrax - a tactic Stalin adopted for use if Moscow fell).
With some difficulty, I was able to model the unique, ceramic Uji 25 kg BW bomb.
This weapon had no bursting charge - lest it kill the fleas - which were present to
"vector" (carry) the disease to humans and animals (who in turn could infect humans). The ceramic simply broke, releasing the fleas. These weapons were
thrown by hand by technicians out the door of various light aircraft. We used
to simulate the aircraft with the Ki-36 BW - a type with a special bomb load.
It still exists, renamed Unit 731 Ki-36 BW - but is no longer the default aircraft -
and was retained mainly because we developed it and art for it - as a player option.
We used to have a Ki-30 BW also with a special load, not in production or assigned to any unit. It is replaced (as of the next update) with a "Unit 731 Light Aircraft BW."
This is the unit actually in service and in very limited production.
These aircraft have been reworked into pure BW bombers - regardless of target - they have no mission using conventional bombs. That is because Unit 731's air element had none, nor training to use them, nor any kind of bomb sighting devices
at all! The names of the aircraft are intended to indicate they should only be assigned
to the Unit 731 Air Unit. In fact, JAAF refused to use BW bombs, so Gen Ishii made his own "air unit" by buying civil aircraft and using light plane pilots to fly them, and medical technicians to throw the bombs out the door! However, game mechanics permit players to put the aircraft into general production and to issue them to all JAAF bomber units. This is acceptable because BW is so ineffective it is a mistake to do that: a player who does is reducing the effectiveness of his air force. Ironically enough, JAAF was correct in its policy - ahead of the rest of the army - to oppose
BW altogether.
BW was extensively developed by the US military, and separately by the CIA, during the 1950s. It continues to be developed by Russia, China and Israel. For much of the Cold War it was also developed by numbers of smaller nations in Eastern Europe, and by Syria and Iraq. It was believed to provide such nations with a kind of deterrence cheaper than nuclear weapons - see The Continuing Storm (Yale University Press) - which theory should now be discredited (it didn't save either Iraq or Syria). However, the Russian theory (which probably is imitated in China and Israel) - that use of BW AFTER a nuclear war - might be a "practical" way to delay the recovery of the enemy. BW isn't effective where modern health care systems are functional: a terrorist cult in Japan conducted BW attacks for years, using laboratory cultured weapons of nominally deadly kinds, including ebola - yet it none of these attacks were detected and study of health statistics show no spikes at the times they happened. [The cult was discovered after a CW attack in a subway - was tracked down and interrogated in the thorough Japanese way.] The cult sprayed agents from mobile trucks as well as from the tops of high rise buildings in cities! Used since Biblical times - often by using animals that died of disease - BW is more a
harassing agent than an effective battlefield weapon.
BW is also a two edged sword. After the wind shifted during delivery of a BW attack, something like 60,000 IJA troops died. "It is worse than the enemy" they said - which was literally true. Apart from that, BW is affected significantly by weather conditions, wind in particular - a notoriously variable phenomena. Both these aspects are difficult to simulate in AE game terms. So that is another reason for the strictly limited modeling in RHS. We only have one, very small, air "group" - which nominally should be the only one with BW aircraft. (Future) scenario 106 (Downfall, full map) has neither the aircraft nor the air unit: never mind Gen Ichii consulted with Commander, Kwangtung Army about his weapons at the start of the Soviet invasion, both agreed that using them "would do no good" and probably would cause severe Allied reactions not in Japan's interests (including possibly trying to exterminate all Japanese). So they elected to destroy the evidence. Although they had BW agents, and in fact planned to use 12 atomic bombs and apparently CW weapons during invasion operations, the US had no plans to use BW at all - so that scenario has no BW in it.
All RHS scenarios always permit the USA to use 3 atomic bombs a month (1 uranium bomb, 2 implosion bombs) from August 1945 - in addition to 1 in July (the test could have been on an enemy target). These are special "conventional" weapons - each more effective than the stock atom bomb - but with no effect on victory level. There is no need for Allied CW of very limited effectiveness. And the US had not yet developed the BW bombs it later determined were not very effective anyway (at Dugway Test Center).
possible (but unrealistic) to substitute conventional bombers into the Unit 731
Air Unit or to substitute BW bombers into other bomber units of the JAAF. It
does not matter much operationally.
Unit 731 was one of two major BW research and production stations, nominally of the IJA (nominally because the IJA leadership generally opposed BW, almost universally
after it got out of control on a large scale, but generally even before that). The other unit was Unit 100, at a different location, and with a different focus - on BW for use on animals and crops instead of humans. This information was considered of so much interest the US failed to prosecute most war criminals in exchange for information (which was never completely forthcoming). The US spent a decade developing and testing similar weapons, which is why we know their limitations.
I have all the classified test reports - and a list of them so I know it is all - which were declassified through a contractor - but which academics were unaware of until
I asked the contractor (Bectel, Las Vegas) and was pointed at them. I sent them to a BW academic at UC Berkeley.
The Unit 731 Air Unit is present mainly because it was the only significantly used BW program in the history of modern warfare. It is severely limited because BW is not
very effective (although it might be suitable for an effective terrorist campaign).
Also it is limited because I can not think of a way to implement its early use
(before WW2 at Nomanhan, using volunteers to poison water supplies with
anthrax - a tactic Stalin adopted for use if Moscow fell).
With some difficulty, I was able to model the unique, ceramic Uji 25 kg BW bomb.
This weapon had no bursting charge - lest it kill the fleas - which were present to
"vector" (carry) the disease to humans and animals (who in turn could infect humans). The ceramic simply broke, releasing the fleas. These weapons were
thrown by hand by technicians out the door of various light aircraft. We used
to simulate the aircraft with the Ki-36 BW - a type with a special bomb load.
It still exists, renamed Unit 731 Ki-36 BW - but is no longer the default aircraft -
and was retained mainly because we developed it and art for it - as a player option.
We used to have a Ki-30 BW also with a special load, not in production or assigned to any unit. It is replaced (as of the next update) with a "Unit 731 Light Aircraft BW."
This is the unit actually in service and in very limited production.
These aircraft have been reworked into pure BW bombers - regardless of target - they have no mission using conventional bombs. That is because Unit 731's air element had none, nor training to use them, nor any kind of bomb sighting devices
at all! The names of the aircraft are intended to indicate they should only be assigned
to the Unit 731 Air Unit. In fact, JAAF refused to use BW bombs, so Gen Ishii made his own "air unit" by buying civil aircraft and using light plane pilots to fly them, and medical technicians to throw the bombs out the door! However, game mechanics permit players to put the aircraft into general production and to issue them to all JAAF bomber units. This is acceptable because BW is so ineffective it is a mistake to do that: a player who does is reducing the effectiveness of his air force. Ironically enough, JAAF was correct in its policy - ahead of the rest of the army - to oppose
BW altogether.
BW was extensively developed by the US military, and separately by the CIA, during the 1950s. It continues to be developed by Russia, China and Israel. For much of the Cold War it was also developed by numbers of smaller nations in Eastern Europe, and by Syria and Iraq. It was believed to provide such nations with a kind of deterrence cheaper than nuclear weapons - see The Continuing Storm (Yale University Press) - which theory should now be discredited (it didn't save either Iraq or Syria). However, the Russian theory (which probably is imitated in China and Israel) - that use of BW AFTER a nuclear war - might be a "practical" way to delay the recovery of the enemy. BW isn't effective where modern health care systems are functional: a terrorist cult in Japan conducted BW attacks for years, using laboratory cultured weapons of nominally deadly kinds, including ebola - yet it none of these attacks were detected and study of health statistics show no spikes at the times they happened. [The cult was discovered after a CW attack in a subway - was tracked down and interrogated in the thorough Japanese way.] The cult sprayed agents from mobile trucks as well as from the tops of high rise buildings in cities! Used since Biblical times - often by using animals that died of disease - BW is more a
harassing agent than an effective battlefield weapon.
BW is also a two edged sword. After the wind shifted during delivery of a BW attack, something like 60,000 IJA troops died. "It is worse than the enemy" they said - which was literally true. Apart from that, BW is affected significantly by weather conditions, wind in particular - a notoriously variable phenomena. Both these aspects are difficult to simulate in AE game terms. So that is another reason for the strictly limited modeling in RHS. We only have one, very small, air "group" - which nominally should be the only one with BW aircraft. (Future) scenario 106 (Downfall, full map) has neither the aircraft nor the air unit: never mind Gen Ichii consulted with Commander, Kwangtung Army about his weapons at the start of the Soviet invasion, both agreed that using them "would do no good" and probably would cause severe Allied reactions not in Japan's interests (including possibly trying to exterminate all Japanese). So they elected to destroy the evidence. Although they had BW agents, and in fact planned to use 12 atomic bombs and apparently CW weapons during invasion operations, the US had no plans to use BW at all - so that scenario has no BW in it.
All RHS scenarios always permit the USA to use 3 atomic bombs a month (1 uranium bomb, 2 implosion bombs) from August 1945 - in addition to 1 in July (the test could have been on an enemy target). These are special "conventional" weapons - each more effective than the stock atom bomb - but with no effect on victory level. There is no need for Allied CW of very limited effectiveness. And the US had not yet developed the BW bombs it later determined were not very effective anyway (at Dugway Test Center).
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
7.232 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
This is the first of a series of air art updates. It includes a new Japanese Planeside filmstrip. It was necessary to do sides first in order to know what we had, and then address what we did not have. The next step is to make a corresponding top filmstrip - which I will do immediately. After that, I will do the rather larger Allied sides filmstrip, and then Allied tops. [Alphas will be issued together with tops; the days of missing tops and/or alphas are nearing an end because I have the tools to permit management of the filmstrips.]
The process of working on air art is intimate. Not only with the bitmap images, but with the corresponding aircraft data files. Doing that naturally led to discovery of a certain amount of eratta. [Any large collection of data always has some.] So that has been corrected. For example, the A6M7 Sam - a late war fighter - had a -J land version under development. Apparently I began to create a record for it but never completed it: now it is completed. I reworked the two Japanese (Army) biological warfare aircraft (see previous essay on the subject) - making them more specialized, unable to do conventional bombing operations (although they may bomb any target, it is with ceramic Uji BW bombs - with no explosives and no penetration - and other peculiarities).
For the first time in RHS/AE, I have added the peculiar Ki-64 interceptor fighter. [Mifune pointed out we had it in RHS/WITP days.] It is a peculiar concept involving two engines in an airframe the size of a Ki-61 - mounted both in front and also behind the pilot. That helps maneuverability (compared with two engines on the wings) and doubles the power, enhancing performance. On the other hand, with the fuselage of the aircraft filled with engines, and the wings filled with cooling systems, there is little room for fuel! Having invested in all that engine to gain performance, the designers were unwilling to compromise it with external weapons - so it carries no bombs at all. The result is an expensive interceptor (both IRL and in game terms - you pay 1 HI point for each engine) with relatively short range - but superb performance, good durability and a powerful armament (with 4x20 mm cannon). A very late development - the Ki-64 KAI - with two 1400 hp engines (vice the 1175 of the original) is also included: this version can maintain its rated power to twice the altitude - probably the best performance of any JAAF fighter design above 30,000 feet. These aircraft are more or less pure chrome. With the unique dual counter-rotating propellers they look cool! But it is probably a mistake to invest in them. They appear late or, for the KAI, hopelessly late - and cost 50% more than a single engine fighter does. But I believe the players - as the historical strategists - ought to have the power to make choices - even if some are not economical ones.
The really significant work was on air art. Both existing art we were not pointing at (for lack of tops) and brand new art - some just made today (yesterday now) by Mifune. This new file set reveals the rich art set we have - much of it either reworked or created from scratch by Mifune. The rest mainly comes from a common AE project to provide art to all mods. I am not an artist - just an organizer of art - and I made or modified none of the bitmaps. Still - we show perhaps 100% more sides then we did before - and it is a rich set indeed. In the process I compiled a collection of tops and alphas, and made a plan about what to do when they do not exist. In a few days I will match this art with the corresponding tops and alphas. With help from Mifune, and several days of work, I have become confident and I don't make copy mistakes any more! I test every time I copy an image - but testing never fails any more - which is a good sign.
There is a good deal of eratta included - mostly minor. A tiny bit of economic reform - Western Europe (UK in other mods) has lower starting stocks of supplies and resources - and should work as I intended. It will always export some fuel and supplies - but will reward imports with more. This broadly simulates the value of committing shipping to exporting - or perhaps to have ships sent to move units (when the War in Europe ends and troops appear in Europe) have brought in recourses instead of nothing. Numbers of very junior officers have been added to both sides - many of them assigned to command small vessels which were not effective with the "staff officer" the game tends to assign. Some LCU and locations had eratta fixed and tiny numbers of units (but no locations) were added. More ships and some air units were trimmed from "simplified RHS" (even numbered) scenarios - making the system more consistent and in line with the concepts involved. [In particular, Scenario 102, designed to use with AI, strives to completely remove all units that AI can not grasp how to manage? 104 and 106 are made consistent with 102, although only 106 - not yet playable - is an AI scenario. 104 has active Russians - and AI cannot deal with that unless you want a war with Russia in 1941! There are sound reasons I prefer active Russians - particularly from an Allied point of view: but RHS provides other options because AI cannot deal with that and because players may not want to deal with that. We try to serve all tastes.
There are revised pwhexe files and new art files as well. We are not done with either and there will be at least three more updates before we complete all of them. Hopefully at a pace of a week or so.
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
This is the first of a series of air art updates. It includes a new Japanese Planeside filmstrip. It was necessary to do sides first in order to know what we had, and then address what we did not have. The next step is to make a corresponding top filmstrip - which I will do immediately. After that, I will do the rather larger Allied sides filmstrip, and then Allied tops. [Alphas will be issued together with tops; the days of missing tops and/or alphas are nearing an end because I have the tools to permit management of the filmstrips.]
The process of working on air art is intimate. Not only with the bitmap images, but with the corresponding aircraft data files. Doing that naturally led to discovery of a certain amount of eratta. [Any large collection of data always has some.] So that has been corrected. For example, the A6M7 Sam - a late war fighter - had a -J land version under development. Apparently I began to create a record for it but never completed it: now it is completed. I reworked the two Japanese (Army) biological warfare aircraft (see previous essay on the subject) - making them more specialized, unable to do conventional bombing operations (although they may bomb any target, it is with ceramic Uji BW bombs - with no explosives and no penetration - and other peculiarities).
For the first time in RHS/AE, I have added the peculiar Ki-64 interceptor fighter. [Mifune pointed out we had it in RHS/WITP days.] It is a peculiar concept involving two engines in an airframe the size of a Ki-61 - mounted both in front and also behind the pilot. That helps maneuverability (compared with two engines on the wings) and doubles the power, enhancing performance. On the other hand, with the fuselage of the aircraft filled with engines, and the wings filled with cooling systems, there is little room for fuel! Having invested in all that engine to gain performance, the designers were unwilling to compromise it with external weapons - so it carries no bombs at all. The result is an expensive interceptor (both IRL and in game terms - you pay 1 HI point for each engine) with relatively short range - but superb performance, good durability and a powerful armament (with 4x20 mm cannon). A very late development - the Ki-64 KAI - with two 1400 hp engines (vice the 1175 of the original) is also included: this version can maintain its rated power to twice the altitude - probably the best performance of any JAAF fighter design above 30,000 feet. These aircraft are more or less pure chrome. With the unique dual counter-rotating propellers they look cool! But it is probably a mistake to invest in them. They appear late or, for the KAI, hopelessly late - and cost 50% more than a single engine fighter does. But I believe the players - as the historical strategists - ought to have the power to make choices - even if some are not economical ones.
The really significant work was on air art. Both existing art we were not pointing at (for lack of tops) and brand new art - some just made today (yesterday now) by Mifune. This new file set reveals the rich art set we have - much of it either reworked or created from scratch by Mifune. The rest mainly comes from a common AE project to provide art to all mods. I am not an artist - just an organizer of art - and I made or modified none of the bitmaps. Still - we show perhaps 100% more sides then we did before - and it is a rich set indeed. In the process I compiled a collection of tops and alphas, and made a plan about what to do when they do not exist. In a few days I will match this art with the corresponding tops and alphas. With help from Mifune, and several days of work, I have become confident and I don't make copy mistakes any more! I test every time I copy an image - but testing never fails any more - which is a good sign.
There is a good deal of eratta included - mostly minor. A tiny bit of economic reform - Western Europe (UK in other mods) has lower starting stocks of supplies and resources - and should work as I intended. It will always export some fuel and supplies - but will reward imports with more. This broadly simulates the value of committing shipping to exporting - or perhaps to have ships sent to move units (when the War in Europe ends and troops appear in Europe) have brought in recourses instead of nothing. Numbers of very junior officers have been added to both sides - many of them assigned to command small vessels which were not effective with the "staff officer" the game tends to assign. Some LCU and locations had eratta fixed and tiny numbers of units (but no locations) were added. More ships and some air units were trimmed from "simplified RHS" (even numbered) scenarios - making the system more consistent and in line with the concepts involved. [In particular, Scenario 102, designed to use with AI, strives to completely remove all units that AI can not grasp how to manage? 104 and 106 are made consistent with 102, although only 106 - not yet playable - is an AI scenario. 104 has active Russians - and AI cannot deal with that unless you want a war with Russia in 1941! There are sound reasons I prefer active Russians - particularly from an Allied point of view: but RHS provides other options because AI cannot deal with that and because players may not want to deal with that. We try to serve all tastes.
There are revised pwhexe files and new art files as well. We are not done with either and there will be at least three more updates before we complete all of them. Hopefully at a pace of a week or so.
-
Adolf Galland
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:34 am
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
Hallo
You and your Team build a very nice Mod...[&o] good job.
My Hi question for japan is: Need japan really for his ca.5600 Hi points 44800 tons fuel per day ? ( 1 Hi x 8 Fuel )
Is that correct or you mean per Month....
???
You and your Team build a very nice Mod...[&o] good job.
My Hi question for japan is: Need japan really for his ca.5600 Hi points 44800 tons fuel per day ? ( 1 Hi x 8 Fuel )
Is that correct or you mean per Month....
???RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
Why specifically do you like Russia active for scen 105? What game enhancement does it entail?
Also, engines cost 18 HI not 1 and a planes cost is 18 per engine in addition to the price of the engine. So a 2 engine interceptor is 18x2 for engines and 18x2 for airframe (72 HI) compared to 36 for single engined.
Galland: yes, but it is not as bad as you think. Each Ref produces 16 fuel per day and Japan starts with a deficit of only 20k fuel per day. Which means you only need to capture 1250 ref and the oil to feed them (there are about 3000 or so in the DEI, including 1500 oil just in Balikpapan) so there is really no worry at all about fuel.
and think about this, the Japanese AT START produce 23,000 HI points per day (each factory produces 4 HIpts), and is running a resource surplus, all this is before any conquests. Add in the 58,000 daily supply production, and there is no worry at ALL for the Japanese economy. What it means is, you can just capture Balikpapan and run your economy at about 50% greater output than you can in Scen 2, for the entire war.....
Also, engines cost 18 HI not 1 and a planes cost is 18 per engine in addition to the price of the engine. So a 2 engine interceptor is 18x2 for engines and 18x2 for airframe (72 HI) compared to 36 for single engined.
Galland: yes, but it is not as bad as you think. Each Ref produces 16 fuel per day and Japan starts with a deficit of only 20k fuel per day. Which means you only need to capture 1250 ref and the oil to feed them (there are about 3000 or so in the DEI, including 1500 oil just in Balikpapan) so there is really no worry at all about fuel.
and think about this, the Japanese AT START produce 23,000 HI points per day (each factory produces 4 HIpts), and is running a resource surplus, all this is before any conquests. Add in the 58,000 daily supply production, and there is no worry at ALL for the Japanese economy. What it means is, you can just capture Balikpapan and run your economy at about 50% greater output than you can in Scen 2, for the entire war.....
-
Adolf Galland
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 10:34 am
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
ORIGINAL:
Galland: yes, but it is not as bad as you think. Each Ref produces 16 fuel per day and Japan starts with a deficit of only 20k fuel per day. Which means you only need to capture 1250 ref and the oil to feed them (there are about 3000 or so in the DEI, including 1500 oil just in Balikpapan) so there is really no worry at all about fuel.
and think about this, the Japanese AT START produce 23,000 HI points per day (each factory produces 4 HIpts), and is running a resource surplus, all this is before any conquests. Add in the 58,000 daily supply production, and there is no worry at ALL for the Japanese economy. What it means is, you can just capture Balikpapan and run your economy at about 50% greater output than you can in Scen 2, for the entire war.....
Hi
In Dei is enough oil for Japan HI but enough for the navy ?
I hope the IJN Navy Fleet have enough Fuel to operate in late game...
In RHS Test game have Val DB,Betty TB,Nell TB, (Greif HB/DB) 1 x 60 GP Bomb for Ground Attack not many ???
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.232 (air art plus)
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
This is similar to comprehensive microupdate 7.321:
It mainly concerns work on Japanese tops, and aircraft and documentation
following from that. However, it turned into something somewhat more extensive.
For one thing, a number of eratta and enhancements were done affecting
aircraft, including Allied aircraft, and air groups, and locations. At one point
I did some work on Scenario 106 - the future Downfall Scenario issued only
for comments - resolving certain technical issues needed to make it work for
a 1945 game start. There also is new air art. Both Japanese tops and sides
are reissued with considerable additions. And the integration of both Allied
and Japanese pointers has permitted more art already present to be revealed
to players. The filmstrips from which I am working had no actual documentation
of what is in them where? So I keep figuring things out. Numbers of "new"
art will be seen - not all of it actually added - because I was able to point at it
properly.
Unfortunately, I have not yet mastered how to make an alpha, and am going to
spend one more day completing the Axis tops before I convert them all to
an alpha in a single act. I have determined that much of the Allied art is
in fact present - and some more of it has been revealed here - in spite of
not working on it per se (only documenting what I will do in detail - which
documentation is included here).
There is nominally one new Allied plane type - a transport variation of the
SB-2 (Soviet) bomber. This because it looks like the bomber sufficiently
that we can present it, and also because I have not presented Aeroflot
in Full RHS scenarios (those with odd numbers). The aircraft is unusual
for a transport in that it has drop tanks - extending its range. It actually
is named for two similar machines - the ANT-35 and the PS-1 (which
is more numerous and the version actually fitted for drop tanks).
Now I am able to move art, I brought over art by Cobra Aus on Japanese
gliders. I also developed the gliders - partly due to information not previously
known to me. The Ku-8 is now presented with an upgrade path (to the Ku-8 II) -
which is slightly more efficient. This in turn can upgrade to the Ku-7 - if players
want to. The Downfall scenario starts with 9 and no planned production. In spite
of its name, the 7 is much bigger than the 8 in capacity - and towed by a somewhat
better armed tug (but actually not very fast). Note that Scenario 105 has NO
gliders at all - and the glider units appear as more light airborne infantry units
instead of the (slightly) more heavily armed glider infantry regiments. [Like
airborne, airmobile "regiments" have only two battalions.]
A small number of other types were added - mainly because art permits it -
and a larger number of types no longer share art - but have art specific to the
model. The former Ki-36 armed for biological warfare is now replaced with
a "Unit 731 Light Aircraft" type - using an obscure light plane otherwise present
anyway. The former Ki-30 armed for biological warfare is now replaced with
a Ki-36 armed with 25 kg Uji BW bombs. Both cases represent a slight
decrease in delivery power for biological weapons. Both cases also lost their
ability to carry GP bombs - the crews do not train for and the planes are not fitted for regular bombs. Uji bombs are simply thrown out the door - not aimed! The BW
capability is pure chrome, and not a particularly effective weapons system - although
they probably do cause increased fatigue and attrition to land units in the target hex. Due to peculiar code mechanics, they also do kill a few squads outright - apparently
"a hit = a squad" (quoting private correspondence with a programmer).
The most significant change lies with how the He-177 based designs are presented.
These exist in several flavors - and only in Full RHS scenarios (odd numbered ones) - not in Simplified RHS scenarios (even numbered ones). These now are all present
in all odd scenarios - instead of having different planes in the same slots in different
scenarios - which was too difficult to manage without errors. These planes have
main bodies that look like an He-177 - but completely different engine concepts - and not one attempted to pretend it was a dive bomber. The flavors are:
1) G7M (original design - with four engines separately mounted - for which I have improvised tops). Because it can use smaller engines, it is available sooner - but there is a penalty in maneuverability for four engines - and they are also slower and less well armed due to design concepts existing before the Pacific War began. There is a torpedo version and a pure bomber version as well as a recon version. The torpedo version is better than any other torpedo plane in the world - to normal range - as it carries a 21 inch submarine type Long Lance torpedo. These are named G7M1a (b for recon). An option late in the war is an upgrade to G7M2 with more powerful engines (the same ones used on the 2 engine version) and armed with Japanese ASMs.
2) G7M (later design - with two engines - but larger in power - replacing two coupled engines in the German version. Because it takes longer to get such engines, this is a later war development. There are torpedo bomber, pure bomber and recon versions.
These are named G7M1c (d for recon). This type retains the heavy torpedo or heavy bombs philosophy of the series - and there is no missile or atomic bombing version.
This is the type IJN elected not to produce in favor of waiting for the G8N1.
3) The G5He1 (and 2) are projects by Hitachi built with an actual licence for the He-177 (for which did not enter production in spite of some of all the plans and some of the tooling arriving in Japan). Dr Hoenkel himself spent three years at Hitachi promoting his aircraft, engines and designs. Similar to the G7M1a series, Hitachi did not like the idea of coupled engines, nor of diesel engines, and elected to use four independent, smaller, available sooner engines. There are bomber and torpedo versions, and a G5He2 version with more powerful engines an IGo ASMs. This series is ONLY present in Japan Enhanced scenarios 105 and the unreleased 99 -
because it requires extraordinary measures to get or make the rest of the tooling.
All three series are modeled using four sets of bitmaps - although I am contemplating a fifth set with missiles visible. I don't like using art without Japanese markings - so I need to learn how to edit the art (instead of just manage it) before I will present that.
Mifune did manage to identify Tojo art with an arrester hook. This was intended by the JAAF for service on Army carriers late in the war - and so is presented in that form in strictly historical scenarios 101 - 104 and 106. Navy versions are only available in Japan Enhanced Scnarios. The Ki-44 III carrier variant did not enter service IRL, but might have. Although the Navy had no similar interceptor, and although the Navy did adopt a few Army aircraft (Ki-46, Ki-67), it did not acquire the Ki-44 at all. So it is an option only in a Japan enhanced scenario. Probably the focus on the Ki-43 series as the main land based fighter type was a mistake - the Ki-44 held its own for a long time due to its superb rate of climb, speed and reasonable armament. Like most early Japanese military aircraft - the I and II had no armor - but this mattered less than for other types because it was large enough to take considerable punishment.
I found the formula for calculating durability so the Ki-64 (twin engines driving
dual counter-rotating propellers on the nose) instead of guessing - and it picked up 4 points in durability. This makes it slightly more worth its 50% cost premium per airframe. Like many aircraft presented in RHS, it is probably a mistake to buy it:
just as in my view gliders are. [Everything out-maneuvers a glider. It also has unimpressive range and speed under load. Buying them is expensive - but it is the only way to lift the airmobile "tank unit" - which uses 8 ton vehicles that were substantially ahead of their time. Similar vehicles are in British service today. This is delightful chrome but probably not worth its cost in terms of combat power. Let the tiny tank unit be a normal tank unit - or lift it on big four engine transports which have better speed or range - instead of buying the late war Ku-7 gliders. Flying a small light tank company in 1945 is not going to win the war IMHO.] Many variations on aircraft are presented - more than I really want - because of all the art we have.
If you hunt diligently you can probably find something practical for any mission you have in mind.
The Condors are a special case. Here again, Japan had real interest, and did buy more than one licence. The FW-200 famed as "the scourge of the Atlantic" was in fact developed under contract for the JNAF. But it never reached Japan! A Condor transport also led to intense interest in the type as a transport after it set a record flying to Tokyo. But in RHS, this type actually models several others - in particular two types bought by Mansyu for use on a trans-Siberian air service to Europe that didn't work out. These planes existed - but mainly didn't do anything.
The few FW-200 transports model in fact several different long range transports - and
since there was a licence and plans available - they may be put into production. The Condor is probably much more useful as a transport than as a bomber: all of the bomber options are particularly lousy - expensive (being 4 engine aircraft) with little armament and unimpressive range (most of the load is external which is high drag).
They are presented because we have the art - now we have top turret art for some versions - not because it is a good idea to buy them. We also have been able to create for engine tops for the Condors - although it won't actually appear until I get a corresponding alpha made for them.
A few locations and land units were reworked - mainly for eratta - or because of some new data which became available. In general, each release of RHS slightly decreases economic production and starting stocks of supplies and resources - particularly where downward revised definitions of stocks have not yet been worked in. Larger numbers of locations have been reviewed but not altered - as it turns out they are more or less where they should be. There is almost no ability to add either locations of LCU in RHS due to slot limits. But anything important can be traded for something less important. It just doesn't happen very much any more.
I will be able to rework Allied air art faster than expected because it is in generally better shape and because I have documented precisely what can be copied or moved so it is more a matter of execution than figuring out what to do from now on. However, some apparently "new" types do appear because I could reveal it by simply changing pointers - no actual art required. The 2012 art set I found is richer than the 2014 art in numbers of types. So I have taken the better looking 2014 art and added missing types to it from the more bland 2012 art. Apparently this was mainly from a common air at project - while the 2014 art was a labor of love involving years of work by Mifune. As a rule, if it looks very clear and sharp - it is Mifune's art. And note this disclaimer: no art is drawn by me; I am an engineer, not an artist. I have worked with an artist in a team rather than master it. Only Mifune's severe health issues have driven me to installing and working with graphics software. That I use only to copy and paste, not create. Matrix is blessed with lots of art - all I do is manage some of it. In fact - if you have something better than we use - I will use it if you send it to me.
Shamelessly.
This is similar to comprehensive microupdate 7.321:
It mainly concerns work on Japanese tops, and aircraft and documentation
following from that. However, it turned into something somewhat more extensive.
For one thing, a number of eratta and enhancements were done affecting
aircraft, including Allied aircraft, and air groups, and locations. At one point
I did some work on Scenario 106 - the future Downfall Scenario issued only
for comments - resolving certain technical issues needed to make it work for
a 1945 game start. There also is new air art. Both Japanese tops and sides
are reissued with considerable additions. And the integration of both Allied
and Japanese pointers has permitted more art already present to be revealed
to players. The filmstrips from which I am working had no actual documentation
of what is in them where? So I keep figuring things out. Numbers of "new"
art will be seen - not all of it actually added - because I was able to point at it
properly.
Unfortunately, I have not yet mastered how to make an alpha, and am going to
spend one more day completing the Axis tops before I convert them all to
an alpha in a single act. I have determined that much of the Allied art is
in fact present - and some more of it has been revealed here - in spite of
not working on it per se (only documenting what I will do in detail - which
documentation is included here).
There is nominally one new Allied plane type - a transport variation of the
SB-2 (Soviet) bomber. This because it looks like the bomber sufficiently
that we can present it, and also because I have not presented Aeroflot
in Full RHS scenarios (those with odd numbers). The aircraft is unusual
for a transport in that it has drop tanks - extending its range. It actually
is named for two similar machines - the ANT-35 and the PS-1 (which
is more numerous and the version actually fitted for drop tanks).
Now I am able to move art, I brought over art by Cobra Aus on Japanese
gliders. I also developed the gliders - partly due to information not previously
known to me. The Ku-8 is now presented with an upgrade path (to the Ku-8 II) -
which is slightly more efficient. This in turn can upgrade to the Ku-7 - if players
want to. The Downfall scenario starts with 9 and no planned production. In spite
of its name, the 7 is much bigger than the 8 in capacity - and towed by a somewhat
better armed tug (but actually not very fast). Note that Scenario 105 has NO
gliders at all - and the glider units appear as more light airborne infantry units
instead of the (slightly) more heavily armed glider infantry regiments. [Like
airborne, airmobile "regiments" have only two battalions.]
A small number of other types were added - mainly because art permits it -
and a larger number of types no longer share art - but have art specific to the
model. The former Ki-36 armed for biological warfare is now replaced with
a "Unit 731 Light Aircraft" type - using an obscure light plane otherwise present
anyway. The former Ki-30 armed for biological warfare is now replaced with
a Ki-36 armed with 25 kg Uji BW bombs. Both cases represent a slight
decrease in delivery power for biological weapons. Both cases also lost their
ability to carry GP bombs - the crews do not train for and the planes are not fitted for regular bombs. Uji bombs are simply thrown out the door - not aimed! The BW
capability is pure chrome, and not a particularly effective weapons system - although
they probably do cause increased fatigue and attrition to land units in the target hex. Due to peculiar code mechanics, they also do kill a few squads outright - apparently
"a hit = a squad" (quoting private correspondence with a programmer).
The most significant change lies with how the He-177 based designs are presented.
These exist in several flavors - and only in Full RHS scenarios (odd numbered ones) - not in Simplified RHS scenarios (even numbered ones). These now are all present
in all odd scenarios - instead of having different planes in the same slots in different
scenarios - which was too difficult to manage without errors. These planes have
main bodies that look like an He-177 - but completely different engine concepts - and not one attempted to pretend it was a dive bomber. The flavors are:
1) G7M (original design - with four engines separately mounted - for which I have improvised tops). Because it can use smaller engines, it is available sooner - but there is a penalty in maneuverability for four engines - and they are also slower and less well armed due to design concepts existing before the Pacific War began. There is a torpedo version and a pure bomber version as well as a recon version. The torpedo version is better than any other torpedo plane in the world - to normal range - as it carries a 21 inch submarine type Long Lance torpedo. These are named G7M1a (b for recon). An option late in the war is an upgrade to G7M2 with more powerful engines (the same ones used on the 2 engine version) and armed with Japanese ASMs.
2) G7M (later design - with two engines - but larger in power - replacing two coupled engines in the German version. Because it takes longer to get such engines, this is a later war development. There are torpedo bomber, pure bomber and recon versions.
These are named G7M1c (d for recon). This type retains the heavy torpedo or heavy bombs philosophy of the series - and there is no missile or atomic bombing version.
This is the type IJN elected not to produce in favor of waiting for the G8N1.
3) The G5He1 (and 2) are projects by Hitachi built with an actual licence for the He-177 (for which did not enter production in spite of some of all the plans and some of the tooling arriving in Japan). Dr Hoenkel himself spent three years at Hitachi promoting his aircraft, engines and designs. Similar to the G7M1a series, Hitachi did not like the idea of coupled engines, nor of diesel engines, and elected to use four independent, smaller, available sooner engines. There are bomber and torpedo versions, and a G5He2 version with more powerful engines an IGo ASMs. This series is ONLY present in Japan Enhanced scenarios 105 and the unreleased 99 -
because it requires extraordinary measures to get or make the rest of the tooling.
All three series are modeled using four sets of bitmaps - although I am contemplating a fifth set with missiles visible. I don't like using art without Japanese markings - so I need to learn how to edit the art (instead of just manage it) before I will present that.
Mifune did manage to identify Tojo art with an arrester hook. This was intended by the JAAF for service on Army carriers late in the war - and so is presented in that form in strictly historical scenarios 101 - 104 and 106. Navy versions are only available in Japan Enhanced Scnarios. The Ki-44 III carrier variant did not enter service IRL, but might have. Although the Navy had no similar interceptor, and although the Navy did adopt a few Army aircraft (Ki-46, Ki-67), it did not acquire the Ki-44 at all. So it is an option only in a Japan enhanced scenario. Probably the focus on the Ki-43 series as the main land based fighter type was a mistake - the Ki-44 held its own for a long time due to its superb rate of climb, speed and reasonable armament. Like most early Japanese military aircraft - the I and II had no armor - but this mattered less than for other types because it was large enough to take considerable punishment.
I found the formula for calculating durability so the Ki-64 (twin engines driving
dual counter-rotating propellers on the nose) instead of guessing - and it picked up 4 points in durability. This makes it slightly more worth its 50% cost premium per airframe. Like many aircraft presented in RHS, it is probably a mistake to buy it:
just as in my view gliders are. [Everything out-maneuvers a glider. It also has unimpressive range and speed under load. Buying them is expensive - but it is the only way to lift the airmobile "tank unit" - which uses 8 ton vehicles that were substantially ahead of their time. Similar vehicles are in British service today. This is delightful chrome but probably not worth its cost in terms of combat power. Let the tiny tank unit be a normal tank unit - or lift it on big four engine transports which have better speed or range - instead of buying the late war Ku-7 gliders. Flying a small light tank company in 1945 is not going to win the war IMHO.] Many variations on aircraft are presented - more than I really want - because of all the art we have.
If you hunt diligently you can probably find something practical for any mission you have in mind.
The Condors are a special case. Here again, Japan had real interest, and did buy more than one licence. The FW-200 famed as "the scourge of the Atlantic" was in fact developed under contract for the JNAF. But it never reached Japan! A Condor transport also led to intense interest in the type as a transport after it set a record flying to Tokyo. But in RHS, this type actually models several others - in particular two types bought by Mansyu for use on a trans-Siberian air service to Europe that didn't work out. These planes existed - but mainly didn't do anything.
The few FW-200 transports model in fact several different long range transports - and
since there was a licence and plans available - they may be put into production. The Condor is probably much more useful as a transport than as a bomber: all of the bomber options are particularly lousy - expensive (being 4 engine aircraft) with little armament and unimpressive range (most of the load is external which is high drag).
They are presented because we have the art - now we have top turret art for some versions - not because it is a good idea to buy them. We also have been able to create for engine tops for the Condors - although it won't actually appear until I get a corresponding alpha made for them.
A few locations and land units were reworked - mainly for eratta - or because of some new data which became available. In general, each release of RHS slightly decreases economic production and starting stocks of supplies and resources - particularly where downward revised definitions of stocks have not yet been worked in. Larger numbers of locations have been reviewed but not altered - as it turns out they are more or less where they should be. There is almost no ability to add either locations of LCU in RHS due to slot limits. But anything important can be traded for something less important. It just doesn't happen very much any more.
I will be able to rework Allied air art faster than expected because it is in generally better shape and because I have documented precisely what can be copied or moved so it is more a matter of execution than figuring out what to do from now on. However, some apparently "new" types do appear because I could reveal it by simply changing pointers - no actual art required. The 2012 art set I found is richer than the 2014 art in numbers of types. So I have taken the better looking 2014 art and added missing types to it from the more bland 2012 art. Apparently this was mainly from a common air at project - while the 2014 art was a labor of love involving years of work by Mifune. As a rule, if it looks very clear and sharp - it is Mifune's art. And note this disclaimer: no art is drawn by me; I am an engineer, not an artist. I have worked with an artist in a team rather than master it. Only Mifune's severe health issues have driven me to installing and working with graphics software. That I use only to copy and paste, not create. Matrix is blessed with lots of art - all I do is manage some of it. In fact - if you have something better than we use - I will use it if you send it to me.
Shamelessly.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
ORIGINAL: Adolf Galland
Hallo
You and your Team build a very nice Mod...[&o] good job.
My Hi question for japan is: Need japan really for his ca.5600 Hi points 44800 tons fuel per day ? ( 1 Hi x 8 Fuel )
Is that correct or you mean per Month....
Sorry for the delay responding - I was in the hospital after unexpected complications from surgery.
While an HI center does require 8 fuel points in - also 24 resource points -
its output is 4 HI points plus 4 supply points. That amounts to a net cost of
4 total input for every point of output. [Everything in AE economics weighs
one ton.] In this case, I assume that the fuel points are petrochemicals and
rubber, and that 12 of the resource points are actually coal - which was the
largest single thing imported by Japan. Actually - industry isn't quite that
inefficient - but I also assume that a major fraction of its output goes to
the civil economy of necessity - and isn't available for military consumption.
We learned over years of testing that Japan needs to generate large numbers of HI
points or aircraft, ship, weapons and vehicle production will not be even a major
fraction of history.
Reading economic data is somewhat confusing in AE because code has two standards
of reporting. The Industry Display shows most things in terms of daily requirements
- but aircraft and engines are shown in terms of monthly demand (30 times daily
requirements). Less obvious are large numbers of hidden "tests" which must be
"passed" before a location will produce - and players have no control over what
industry will elect to not produce at all at a given location. Note that Japan
has entirely different rules than the Allies related to industrial production.
I will post a link explaining economic theory as I understand it in a moment.
This document is also posted several pages back in this thread.
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... ile%2cdocx
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
Level I Update Link 2.51
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg-8ZqLaG9QbsVHAolg
RHS prefers Russian Active Scenarios - but presents half in Russian Passive mode because
1) AI does not understand Active Russians - so the scenarios designed for AI play (102 and the future 106)
must be passive;
2) Some players prefer to play in the way the got used to in stock and do not understand why we find that
so frustrating? Our philosophy (see the WITP Manual Mifune created in WITP days) always was "power to the
players" - or possibly more properly - "choices to the players." For this reason, 101 is IDENTICAL to 103,
except the Russians are passive in 103. 101 is the way I like it - 103 for anyone who prefers the other way.
Similarly, 102 is IDENTICAL to 104. 102 MUST be passive (designed for AI play) - but 104 is the other way
for anyone who wants "simplified RHS" WITH active Russians. 105 has no passive counterpart - and so far no one
has indicated any interest in such a thing. See below for the reasons why the advantages to the Allies are so
great that in a Japan Enhanced Scenario, no one wants a weaker hand to play.
The REASON Mifune and I preferred Russian Active scenarios (except where players cannot play each other and must
use AI or nothing) are listed below:
A) It seems to us completely unfair that Japan may attack the USSR any time it wants to - but the Russians
have no similar decision option - no matter what the circumstances may be? You have no control over air
units so you get little warning of an attack. You cannot pre-emptively attack a detected enemy invasion -
which in fact you are not likely to even detect in the first place. You must watch passively during the
initial invasion - until code releases control to you. Some areas you control don't count as "invasion
areas" - so some incursions may go on for some time - never mind you nominally control them. In an
active scenario, you may move everything all the time - and hostile enemy acts release 100% of your forces
for attacks as you see fit instantly (if indeed you didn't actually attack first to pre-empt) Active
Russians is intended mainly to overcome this structural feature of stock scenarios - and put the Allies
on equal footing with Japan in the North. No - you are not at war in 1941. But why should Japan have
complete power to decide if and when and where that changes? Our conception is that, over time, the
chances of a Russian attack increase - as both Soviet forces increase by reinforcement and the political need
to worry about the War in Europe declines. This general situation should be integrated by the actual
situation on the ground in game terms. Japan is the enemy of Russia, tried to annex Eastern Siberia (and
occupied it) after the Revolution, and has long planned to invade it (with 14 divisions and as much again
in non divisional formations) - all that before wartime expansion of the IJA (which is considerable on
the mainland). Manchuria itself was taken from Russia by force of arms! Before that, Russia lost a contest
to control Korea and the Liaotung Penninsula. If an opportunity came along to hurt this long standing enemy
- particularly if there is no longer a German Army threatening Moscow, Leningrad or Stalingrad - I think
even an invasion might be considered. By opportunity I mean Japan has denuded the area of defensive troops
and air power. Could or would Russia resist? Maybe not. IF you want the power to decide, you need active
Russians.
B) In a passive scenario, the "garrison requirement" ONLY applies to land unit squad totals. There is NO
requirement for aircraft in Manchukuo at all. We prefer a "real world deterrent" in which the Japanese
must worry about a Soviet incursion if they have too few forces in the area. In particular, we believe this
means they will never, ever dare send all the planes to other theaters. Since aircraft and pilots are so
critical to combat power in AE, we believe this is a much more realistic way to operate. Japan isn't "safe"
for years in an active scenario. Since Soviet reinforcements are significant over time, this means the
need for a garrison (air as well as ground) increases over time - even if Japan is hard pressed to do this.
I personally also regard it as unethical to move any of the local (Imperial Manchukuo) troops or air units
out of the country, or any of the many "Kwangtung" divisions and brigades which are raised during the war.
Their title implies to me they are meant for service in the Kwangtung Army.
C) In a passive scenario, IF the Japanese prepare to attack Russia, the Russians are FORCED to be passive -
usually for days. They also cannot run recon and search missions to build a picture of any potential threat.
They also cannot control where fortifications are built or where units are stationed. They have no option
to make a pre-emptive attack. And they are not even allowed to respond to the initial attack until their units
become unfrozen. That depends on a complicated bit of code involving measuring the number specified hexes
which have been invaded - and when they were invaded? These cumulative disadvantages are significant.
D) In a passive scenario, compounding the issues above is the matter of controlling air units. In an active
scenario, the Allies may not only build up airfields where they want to, they can control what air units are
at each one? They can control what type air units upgrade to, and when? They can fly actual air missions
to train pilots or conduct recon or search, or transport supplies to a place that needs them to feed units
or build up industry or infrastructure. Since air power matters, this is a significant advantage of the
Russian active scenario approach
E) In a passive scenario, the Russians may not control the Russian Navy. This is particularly awkward with
respect to distant locations which may only be "fed" (or exploited for resources or oil) by sea. Note also
that in RHS the stock "pipeline" from North Sakhalin Island does not exist per se. It is replaced by
different mechanisms: there is something like it during Winter - when "ice roads" link the mainland to the
area; there is the possibility of using ships in Monsoon and Fall - and a realistic number of tankers to move
oil in. Only during the short, two month long Spring season (called 'breakup' in Northern climates) is both
land and naval unit impossible. But in a passive scenario - no Russian ships can move the oil - nor service
Kamchatka - nor the Komandorskie Islands - nor the settlements on the Sea of Othosk - nor the distant
settlements on the Bering Sea.
F) Compounding D above, RHS features realistic Arctic navigation in the Monsoon and Fall seasons: most of
the supply of the far North - and most exports of resources - occurs during the short Fall period during
which ocean ships may move deep into the interior of Siberia and North America. There are four navigable
rivers in RHS - two on the Bering Sea (one on each side - the Russian one being six times the flow of the
Mississippi)open during Monsoon and Fall seasons and two more in the Arctic Ocean (the mighty Lena in Siberia
and the Mackenzie in Canada). Apart from their utility to their owners to move supplies and units in numbers
for defense, they also are threats - potential invasion routes for Japan. Even in a passive scenario Japan
can invade using them - but only in an active one can Russia do anything about it before code releases units
to function. [Historically the US Army built a base at Barrow to detect an invasion of this sort.] Players
who want to ignore the Arctic in RHS may do so - but it might be a way to score victory points for an auto
victory if Japan is close and needs to get more where the multiple is high but the defense marginal. I believe
that the huge Russian forces in particular benefit greatly from being under active management in several respects,
including this one.
As the above considerations make clear, almost all the effects of active Russians benefit the Allies. Russian
aircraft may track Japanese units and ships at sea - at modest risk of loss - creating a picture otherwise
not available to the Allies until and unless Allied forces operate near Japan itself. Russian armies may move
move freely among different potential front line areas - not only in the USSR but in RHS also in Sinkiang
and another province which are under Soviet control. The Allies can decide what supply/resources (etc) controls
to set so they build stocks where they want them? They may upgrade air units and control their training rates
and areas of expertise assigned to improve by training. They may upgrade ships as well as send them to sea
(although this is risky because code does not know there isn't a war on - and I recommend it be done by agreement
with the Japanese). If Japanese air units attack (which they will do if a player forgets to assign a target when
a mission is ended because some "bandits" were wiped out - we have the Northwest Anti-Japanese Army in RHS to fight)
- the Russians may conduct a reprisal raid. All of these advantages should be welcome to thoughtful Allied players.
And because they get all of them, the Allies should not abuse these powers they have because it is a Russian
Active scenario - and would not have if it was not one.
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ap7XOIkiBuUwg-8ZqLaG9QbsVHAolg
ORIGINAL: darbymcd
Why specifically do you like Russia active for scen 105? What game enhancement does it entail?
Also, engines cost 18 HI not 1 and a planes cost is 18 per engine in addition to the price of the engine. So a 2 engine interceptor is 18x2 for engines and 18x2 for airframe (72 HI) compared to 36 for single engined.
Galland: yes, but it is not as bad as you think. Each Ref produces 16 fuel per day and Japan starts with a deficit of only 20k fuel per day. Which means you only need to capture 1250 ref and the oil to feed them (there are about 3000 or so in the DEI, including 1500 oil just in Balikpapan) so there is really no worry at all about fuel.
and think about this, the Japanese AT START produce 23,000 HI points per day (each factory produces 4 HIpts), and is running a resource surplus, all this is before any conquests. Add in the 58,000 daily supply production, and there is no worry at ALL for the Japanese economy. What it means is, you can just capture Balikpapan and run your economy at about 50% greater output than you can in Scen 2, for the entire war.....
RHS prefers Russian Active Scenarios - but presents half in Russian Passive mode because
1) AI does not understand Active Russians - so the scenarios designed for AI play (102 and the future 106)
must be passive;
2) Some players prefer to play in the way the got used to in stock and do not understand why we find that
so frustrating? Our philosophy (see the WITP Manual Mifune created in WITP days) always was "power to the
players" - or possibly more properly - "choices to the players." For this reason, 101 is IDENTICAL to 103,
except the Russians are passive in 103. 101 is the way I like it - 103 for anyone who prefers the other way.
Similarly, 102 is IDENTICAL to 104. 102 MUST be passive (designed for AI play) - but 104 is the other way
for anyone who wants "simplified RHS" WITH active Russians. 105 has no passive counterpart - and so far no one
has indicated any interest in such a thing. See below for the reasons why the advantages to the Allies are so
great that in a Japan Enhanced Scenario, no one wants a weaker hand to play.
The REASON Mifune and I preferred Russian Active scenarios (except where players cannot play each other and must
use AI or nothing) are listed below:
A) It seems to us completely unfair that Japan may attack the USSR any time it wants to - but the Russians
have no similar decision option - no matter what the circumstances may be? You have no control over air
units so you get little warning of an attack. You cannot pre-emptively attack a detected enemy invasion -
which in fact you are not likely to even detect in the first place. You must watch passively during the
initial invasion - until code releases control to you. Some areas you control don't count as "invasion
areas" - so some incursions may go on for some time - never mind you nominally control them. In an
active scenario, you may move everything all the time - and hostile enemy acts release 100% of your forces
for attacks as you see fit instantly (if indeed you didn't actually attack first to pre-empt) Active
Russians is intended mainly to overcome this structural feature of stock scenarios - and put the Allies
on equal footing with Japan in the North. No - you are not at war in 1941. But why should Japan have
complete power to decide if and when and where that changes? Our conception is that, over time, the
chances of a Russian attack increase - as both Soviet forces increase by reinforcement and the political need
to worry about the War in Europe declines. This general situation should be integrated by the actual
situation on the ground in game terms. Japan is the enemy of Russia, tried to annex Eastern Siberia (and
occupied it) after the Revolution, and has long planned to invade it (with 14 divisions and as much again
in non divisional formations) - all that before wartime expansion of the IJA (which is considerable on
the mainland). Manchuria itself was taken from Russia by force of arms! Before that, Russia lost a contest
to control Korea and the Liaotung Penninsula. If an opportunity came along to hurt this long standing enemy
- particularly if there is no longer a German Army threatening Moscow, Leningrad or Stalingrad - I think
even an invasion might be considered. By opportunity I mean Japan has denuded the area of defensive troops
and air power. Could or would Russia resist? Maybe not. IF you want the power to decide, you need active
Russians.
B) In a passive scenario, the "garrison requirement" ONLY applies to land unit squad totals. There is NO
requirement for aircraft in Manchukuo at all. We prefer a "real world deterrent" in which the Japanese
must worry about a Soviet incursion if they have too few forces in the area. In particular, we believe this
means they will never, ever dare send all the planes to other theaters. Since aircraft and pilots are so
critical to combat power in AE, we believe this is a much more realistic way to operate. Japan isn't "safe"
for years in an active scenario. Since Soviet reinforcements are significant over time, this means the
need for a garrison (air as well as ground) increases over time - even if Japan is hard pressed to do this.
I personally also regard it as unethical to move any of the local (Imperial Manchukuo) troops or air units
out of the country, or any of the many "Kwangtung" divisions and brigades which are raised during the war.
Their title implies to me they are meant for service in the Kwangtung Army.
C) In a passive scenario, IF the Japanese prepare to attack Russia, the Russians are FORCED to be passive -
usually for days. They also cannot run recon and search missions to build a picture of any potential threat.
They also cannot control where fortifications are built or where units are stationed. They have no option
to make a pre-emptive attack. And they are not even allowed to respond to the initial attack until their units
become unfrozen. That depends on a complicated bit of code involving measuring the number specified hexes
which have been invaded - and when they were invaded? These cumulative disadvantages are significant.
D) In a passive scenario, compounding the issues above is the matter of controlling air units. In an active
scenario, the Allies may not only build up airfields where they want to, they can control what air units are
at each one? They can control what type air units upgrade to, and when? They can fly actual air missions
to train pilots or conduct recon or search, or transport supplies to a place that needs them to feed units
or build up industry or infrastructure. Since air power matters, this is a significant advantage of the
Russian active scenario approach
E) In a passive scenario, the Russians may not control the Russian Navy. This is particularly awkward with
respect to distant locations which may only be "fed" (or exploited for resources or oil) by sea. Note also
that in RHS the stock "pipeline" from North Sakhalin Island does not exist per se. It is replaced by
different mechanisms: there is something like it during Winter - when "ice roads" link the mainland to the
area; there is the possibility of using ships in Monsoon and Fall - and a realistic number of tankers to move
oil in. Only during the short, two month long Spring season (called 'breakup' in Northern climates) is both
land and naval unit impossible. But in a passive scenario - no Russian ships can move the oil - nor service
Kamchatka - nor the Komandorskie Islands - nor the settlements on the Sea of Othosk - nor the distant
settlements on the Bering Sea.
F) Compounding D above, RHS features realistic Arctic navigation in the Monsoon and Fall seasons: most of
the supply of the far North - and most exports of resources - occurs during the short Fall period during
which ocean ships may move deep into the interior of Siberia and North America. There are four navigable
rivers in RHS - two on the Bering Sea (one on each side - the Russian one being six times the flow of the
Mississippi)open during Monsoon and Fall seasons and two more in the Arctic Ocean (the mighty Lena in Siberia
and the Mackenzie in Canada). Apart from their utility to their owners to move supplies and units in numbers
for defense, they also are threats - potential invasion routes for Japan. Even in a passive scenario Japan
can invade using them - but only in an active one can Russia do anything about it before code releases units
to function. [Historically the US Army built a base at Barrow to detect an invasion of this sort.] Players
who want to ignore the Arctic in RHS may do so - but it might be a way to score victory points for an auto
victory if Japan is close and needs to get more where the multiple is high but the defense marginal. I believe
that the huge Russian forces in particular benefit greatly from being under active management in several respects,
including this one.
As the above considerations make clear, almost all the effects of active Russians benefit the Allies. Russian
aircraft may track Japanese units and ships at sea - at modest risk of loss - creating a picture otherwise
not available to the Allies until and unless Allied forces operate near Japan itself. Russian armies may move
move freely among different potential front line areas - not only in the USSR but in RHS also in Sinkiang
and another province which are under Soviet control. The Allies can decide what supply/resources (etc) controls
to set so they build stocks where they want them? They may upgrade air units and control their training rates
and areas of expertise assigned to improve by training. They may upgrade ships as well as send them to sea
(although this is risky because code does not know there isn't a war on - and I recommend it be done by agreement
with the Japanese). If Japanese air units attack (which they will do if a player forgets to assign a target when
a mission is ended because some "bandits" were wiped out - we have the Northwest Anti-Japanese Army in RHS to fight)
- the Russians may conduct a reprisal raid. All of these advantages should be welcome to thoughtful Allied players.
And because they get all of them, the Allies should not abuse these powers they have because it is a Russian
Active scenario - and would not have if it was not one.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive update 7.23 (air art plus)
ORIGINAL: Adolf Galland
ORIGINAL:
Galland: yes, but it is not as bad as you think. Each Ref produces 16 fuel per day and Japan starts with a deficit of only 20k fuel per day. Which means you only need to capture 1250 ref and the oil to feed them (there are about 3000 or so in the DEI, including 1500 oil just in Balikpapan) so there is really no worry at all about fuel.
and think about this, the Japanese AT START produce 23,000 HI points per day (each factory produces 4 HIpts), and is running a resource surplus, all this is before any conquests. Add in the 58,000 daily supply production, and there is no worry at ALL for the Japanese economy. What it means is, you can just capture Balikpapan and run your economy at about 50% greater output than you can in Scen 2, for the entire war.....
Hi
In Dei is enough oil for Japan HI but enough for the navy ?
I hope the IJN Navy Fleet have enough Fuel to operate in late game...
In RHS Test game have Val DB,Betty TB,Nell TB, (Greif HB/DB) 1 x 60 GP Bomb for Ground Attack not many ???
This latter is a bit of a display - it is part of 1 x 60 kg Ground Support Package - which in theory models
four 60 kg bombs. Note that RHS exploits AE code changes permitting weapons by target type. So we have
addressed the problem of air power vs ground units by using special "ground support packages" instead of individual
bombs. There is a code problem in that one bomb - regardless of size - may kill one squad or vehicle or gun if it
hits it? Pretty much without regard for the data about the bomb or the AFV. We put in the data in case the code
is modified as it should be. But the basic model is 1 bomb = one possible destroyed target squad - which is
preposterous. So we reduce the chances of troops losses by pretending 4 bombs are one and by giving that 4 bomb
device a fairly low hit probability. Ground troops are spread out and sometimes fortified or armored - and not
nice clear targets like ships, airfields or even factories are. I am not clear about how this display issue
occurs - but if you look in the editor you can see the actual loads.
Now as for production, things are somewhat more complicated than they seem, and simplistic analysis is in important
ways misleading. Production sometimes does not occur. In Japan's case, once start of game stocks run out -
if the player has not imported more - industry will shut down until that changes (which may be never but often
is every few days it turns on for a day). Stock has fictional resource centers of gigantic size in the Home
Islands - RHS does not: import or die. In RHS Test Nine Alpha, the Japanese tag team (of professional soldiers
and airmen) failed to allocate enough shipping to moving resources and managed to shut down aircraft production
(and ships and AFVs and armaments, etc) almost completely - in Spring 1942! Another complication is that HI
points in the pools alone does not permit them to be used by industry which demands them. The details of how
that works is not understood by anyone (after 14 generations of programmers none of whom documented anything
until the current generation began to do so). But it is normal to have factories with no output in spite of
large numbers in the pools. [It appears that HI in the same hex helps - the local HI points are more likely
to result in local production for some reason.] It took years of testing, analysis and tweeking to get
the economy to function fairly well - in particular for the sake of AI games (because AI is an idiot). We at
last seem to have reasonable (if less than historical) production and growth.
Now as for fuel, we follow Parillo in the main (The Japanese Merchant Marine in World War II), apart from diligent
research location by location. There is MUCH MORE oil than Japan needs in the area. It also has significant
stocks in major ports - as much as 180 days in Japan itself - often 90 days - other cases 60 days - and every
location normally has 10 days of demand (or 20 days if an export center) of everything (unless there is a reason
why not?) The cumulative total of these stores mean Japan has time to capture oilfields (and refineries) and
to move their products IF it is wise enough to do that. The problem is not (and was not historically) related
to supply - it was instead moving the oil and fuel from where it is to where it is needed? This is a subset
of the general issue of moving resources and supplies from where they accumulate to where they are needed? In RHS
Japan must allocate significant amounts of shipping to these things or its industry will suffer. Most of the
"free supplies" (oil, fuel or resources) enters at the map edge - and is Allied controlled. What amounts there is
near Japan are severely limited and tied to some particular industry (often noted by words after the location
name in RHS - words like "fish" or "coalgas" or whatever. This helps players understand the important industry of
a location and why it may have a bit of "free stuff" not produced by industry that is visible (unless the enemy
enters the hex).
Instead of being worried about feeding the Japanese navy - our design focus was on feeding the vastly larger
Allied navies - and air forces - and armies - which enter the map by 1944. We found far too little of these -
and went to some trouble to insure that the Allies would have enough - and the shipping to move them. Near
the center of the map there IS considerable on map supply and fuel generation. This is substantially (99%)
industrial production. It makes capturing of locations because of what they produce, as well as for their
port and airfield potential, major strategic planning considerations. The Pacific is a logistical desert -
by and large - making the few points that produce things particularly valuable (New Zealand, New Caledonia,
Hawaii, etc). Australia is peculiar - only the SE has significant industry and road/rail networks. These
are also not sufficient to move enough to the major industrial centers - so just as in real life in that era -
ships are needed to move things from distant coastal points to the major cities. A major force can be supported
in SE, but elsewhere you need to send supplies and fuel by ship to support a major operation. Early in the game,
both sides are far more constrained by lack of shipping than by lack of things to move by ship. Later on, this
eases for the Allies - but even a Japanese player wise enough to focus on cargo ship and tanker production will
probably never expand effective shipping in service. The fleet - as in real life - is always shrinking - so at
some point expansion becomes impossible to support - and the economy impossible to build up unless players make
efficient shipping management decisions. The critical resource is the shipping - not the oil, fuel, resources
or supplies the shipping needs to move. The more efficiently you station units where they can get a significant
fraction of what they need locally the less you will be plagued by this problem.
RHS is deliberately a logistical management simulation. In strategic terms, Japan attempted to set up an autarky -
a self contained economic area. As Parillo points out - the SRA and China offer vastly more than is required to
that end. But the devil is in the details - can you make it work under the pressure of enemy combat operations?
Nevertheless, the enemy has his own problems: generally must longer distances to transit through areas with
almost no local production. One of the few great strategic advantages of Japan is interior lines. Another is
that the area has several times as much oil and resources as Japan needs - so it can exploit only a minority of it
and still build up stocks - provided it actually allocates the shipping required to that end. Players usually
allocate too much shipping to military operations and too few to moving oil and resources and fuel and supplies.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.24 (Axis Air Art)
7.264 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
Thanks to a bit of help from our new map artist, we have an alpha
which corresponds to a revised (and "complete") tops file for the Axis.
The process of review and completion of the tops also caused me
to add some art to the sides file. Both tops and alphas will probably
be reissued after Mifune cleans them up in some respects - at least
that is the plan. But what we have here for the first time is a set
of three flilmstrips which are all in sync and which also include
all the available art I have been able to collect. Also changed
here are the aircraft data files - which are also in sync - because
I changed a half dozen pointers - permitting us to see both new
art and some old art we were not exploiting.
I have no play to add more aircraft types. Full RHS scenarios
(101,103, 105 and the almost complete 99) have a huge selection.
Simplified RHS (102, 104 and the long way to go yet Downfall
scenario 106) have significantly fewer, but still a very large number.
The intent with simplified was to reduce the need for players to
manage: it lacks trainers (except 10% where large numbers exist
and they have non-training mission potential) and obscure types
and types that had no realistic chance of wartime service.
I do plan to issue updates of the art panels - and possibly to re- point
aircraft records if new art becomes available for cases where we share
art because the exact art isn't available. This mainly will involve
cleanup and similar things beyond my ken, if and when Mifune is able
to get it done - or if some other art becomes available. But this is at least
completely functional in terms of displaying Axis tops.
My focus will now shift to dealing with the Allied air art. While there is
almost twice as much, it was revised by Mifune later in time than the
Axis was, and needs relatively fewer tops to be added. It will take
a few days probably - but it might take only one.
Apart from three Japanese filmstrips and the aircraft data files,
four documentation files are updated (Plane Lists 1, 3, 1 (JAAF)
and 1 (JNAF).
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
Thanks to a bit of help from our new map artist, we have an alpha
which corresponds to a revised (and "complete") tops file for the Axis.
The process of review and completion of the tops also caused me
to add some art to the sides file. Both tops and alphas will probably
be reissued after Mifune cleans them up in some respects - at least
that is the plan. But what we have here for the first time is a set
of three flilmstrips which are all in sync and which also include
all the available art I have been able to collect. Also changed
here are the aircraft data files - which are also in sync - because
I changed a half dozen pointers - permitting us to see both new
art and some old art we were not exploiting.
I have no play to add more aircraft types. Full RHS scenarios
(101,103, 105 and the almost complete 99) have a huge selection.
Simplified RHS (102, 104 and the long way to go yet Downfall
scenario 106) have significantly fewer, but still a very large number.
The intent with simplified was to reduce the need for players to
manage: it lacks trainers (except 10% where large numbers exist
and they have non-training mission potential) and obscure types
and types that had no realistic chance of wartime service.
I do plan to issue updates of the art panels - and possibly to re- point
aircraft records if new art becomes available for cases where we share
art because the exact art isn't available. This mainly will involve
cleanup and similar things beyond my ken, if and when Mifune is able
to get it done - or if some other art becomes available. But this is at least
completely functional in terms of displaying Axis tops.
My focus will now shift to dealing with the Allied air art. While there is
almost twice as much, it was revised by Mifune later in time than the
Axis was, and needs relatively fewer tops to be added. It will take
a few days probably - but it might take only one.
Apart from three Japanese filmstrips and the aircraft data files,
four documentation files are updated (Plane Lists 1, 3, 1 (JAAF)
and 1 (JNAF).
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.241 (Alled Air Art )
7.264 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
I have developed a process under which I issue simultaneous sets of
filmstrips in sync with each other - side, top and alpha. Further, the
alpha is "clean" - so the new Allied alpha does not need "cleanup"
as the Japanese one does. [Mifune is working on cleaning up the
Japanese one]. Here we have the already nice Allied one with additional
plane art added - but it is "clean" - because I started with source art
and found a mechanism that permits adding it to the older filmstrip
so a new one does not have to be created.
This is a pure air art update:
only three Allied air art files
and the aircraft data files
and the supporting air art documentation files
have changed.
Types added or modified include:
The Fleet Air Arm Swordfish has a new side WITHOUT a torpedo. By 1941
this aircraft has been fitted with (heavy) radar, rocket launchers, and hard
points for depth charges - and cannot carry a torpedo. So we have two
different kinds of Swordfish now - FAA and RAF - with the FAA one not
showing a torpedo in art it does not have in the data either. Only the side
changed. It is new, done this year by Mifune.
The ALLIED Ju-52s had top art and an alpha added so it can be seen.
Originally done for Eurasia Airlines, by 1941 nationalized by the ROC,
it is also used by Guinea Airways - and is shared by a different
trimotor as "the nearest art available."
A number of larger aircraft already defined had dedicated art added -
and the aircraft files merely repoint at it. This includes the JRM-1 Mars,
the RAF Lincoln (art also shared by RCAF and RAAF), the FAA Seafox
observation floatplane, and Whitley in both land bomber and patrol bomber
variations. [Never serving in PTO during WW2, this aircraft only appears
in Japan enhanced scenarios - on a date after they were scrapped - on
the theory that they would be useful in India pending production of more
advanced aircraft.]
A larger number of existing air art panels are now pointed at by
aircraft types - in particular the Lancaster's have been identified and
all of this art is now used - while none of it pretends to be a Lincoln
(which, indeed, is essentially a renamed, developed Lancaster).
Having devised this new way to make filmstrips - and collected an art library -
and documented what needs to be done - this process now should speed up.
Allied art is in pretty good shape - but needs to have some large planes
added - including the B-36 and other possible late aircraft that might
appear in a campaign extended into 1946. [RHS ends at the end of
Monsoon 1946 except for the not yet completed Downfall Scenario - which
ends at the end of Monsoon 1945 and is a somewhat simplified scenario.]
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
I have developed a process under which I issue simultaneous sets of
filmstrips in sync with each other - side, top and alpha. Further, the
alpha is "clean" - so the new Allied alpha does not need "cleanup"
as the Japanese one does. [Mifune is working on cleaning up the
Japanese one]. Here we have the already nice Allied one with additional
plane art added - but it is "clean" - because I started with source art
and found a mechanism that permits adding it to the older filmstrip
so a new one does not have to be created.
This is a pure air art update:
only three Allied air art files
and the aircraft data files
and the supporting air art documentation files
have changed.
Types added or modified include:
The Fleet Air Arm Swordfish has a new side WITHOUT a torpedo. By 1941
this aircraft has been fitted with (heavy) radar, rocket launchers, and hard
points for depth charges - and cannot carry a torpedo. So we have two
different kinds of Swordfish now - FAA and RAF - with the FAA one not
showing a torpedo in art it does not have in the data either. Only the side
changed. It is new, done this year by Mifune.
The ALLIED Ju-52s had top art and an alpha added so it can be seen.
Originally done for Eurasia Airlines, by 1941 nationalized by the ROC,
it is also used by Guinea Airways - and is shared by a different
trimotor as "the nearest art available."
A number of larger aircraft already defined had dedicated art added -
and the aircraft files merely repoint at it. This includes the JRM-1 Mars,
the RAF Lincoln (art also shared by RCAF and RAAF), the FAA Seafox
observation floatplane, and Whitley in both land bomber and patrol bomber
variations. [Never serving in PTO during WW2, this aircraft only appears
in Japan enhanced scenarios - on a date after they were scrapped - on
the theory that they would be useful in India pending production of more
advanced aircraft.]
A larger number of existing air art panels are now pointed at by
aircraft types - in particular the Lancaster's have been identified and
all of this art is now used - while none of it pretends to be a Lincoln
(which, indeed, is essentially a renamed, developed Lancaster).
Having devised this new way to make filmstrips - and collected an art library -
and documented what needs to be done - this process now should speed up.
Allied art is in pretty good shape - but needs to have some large planes
added - including the B-36 and other possible late aircraft that might
appear in a campaign extended into 1946. [RHS ends at the end of
Monsoon 1946 except for the not yet completed Downfall Scenario - which
ends at the end of Monsoon 1945 and is a somewhat simplified scenario.]
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Micro Update 7.25 (Air Art )
7.264 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
First, this update contains cleaned up versions of the 3 Axis aircraft filmstrips.
This was done by Mifune (which is to say properly, by an artist). I made the
sides and tops, and our map artist made the alpha.
Second, this update contains the "final" Allied filmstrips - insofar as they
are completed and in sync with each other. This time I made all three -
and this time the alpha is "clean" instead of "dirty." However, there are
things that are inherited less than ideal - and one photo I used since
I don't draw art (look up the Boeing 314 flying boat - the side works even
if not art). Mifune will clean this up in due course.
Third - there are new aircraft files. Mainly changing pointers. The P-50 has
reworked data (scenarios 99 & 105 only). Two new types - a land plane
version of a Navy float search plane - which had art in the panel already
and which was at Pearl Harbor - so I put it in. And we got art for the US
glider and C-47 tow plane combination (made by Cobra for RHS/WITP)
because I can now copy the art and paste it at will.
Fourth - the RTAF Hawk II and III art from the Axis is now also used by
the Allies - both for RTAF and for ROCAF - moved from the Axis filmstrip.
Major planes added include C-99, B-36, B-30, B-32, C-54, C-82. Several
minor types now also have correct art.
I did a comprehensive review of gliders and AE. No other mod is using them
(as far as Mifune or I know). I worried that they might not work in the model -
in particular because they are "one way airplanes." This turns out not to
be very germane to the particular gliders actually used in PTO. The Waco
glider was in fact used for two way operations - in particular to rescue
downed fliers where no airstrip was available. It had a small mechanism (the
biggest part was a barrel) permitting snatching. I was aware of this because
of my father's role in supporting partisans in Yugoslavia - from North Africa -
which also included "pick ups" - both by the use of glider and by "trapese"
into the bomb bay of a B-17. USAF used this glider last - well into the Cold
War era - in the arctic - to pick up researcher dropped on the smaller
ice research stations. For its part, Japan only used gliders as transport
aircraft. Wether they use them historically - between airfields - or copy the
US technique - I leave to players in strictly historical scenarios. [There are
NO gliders in Japan Enhanced Scenarios. Not because they will not work.
Because Japan must win fast and cannot wait for gliders to be perfected,
and then glider troops to train on them. They go with lighter pure airborne
units instead.] Also, I expected to need to add US air units - and maybe
British ones - to use the new glider aircraft. Not so - the Brits - in spite of
having a unique "airborne division" which you would expect needed gliders -
used US transport assets instead. And the US assets are in the game -
you simply must re-equip a transport squadron with the tug and glider
combination if you want it. You essentially exchange payload for range -
and better own the sky if you want the gliders to arrive safely.
After a round to polish the aircraft - I will focus on maps and pwhexe files.
Then I will review and tie up loose ends in Scenario 99 (Mifune's radical
Japan Enhanced Scenario - one in which Japan builds with standardized
engine plants for about a decade before the war among other things -
and one in which there was no London Naval Treaty - so both sides
get some things not in strictly historical games).
Then I will review and try to complete the Downfall Scenario 105 - which
will be a mini scenario (Feb - September 1945) but full map. It starts with
the battle for Iwo Jima which permits doing the OB well.
Then we will think about if we want to attempt an extended map version of RHS/AE -
if the mapmaker is interested.
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
First, this update contains cleaned up versions of the 3 Axis aircraft filmstrips.
This was done by Mifune (which is to say properly, by an artist). I made the
sides and tops, and our map artist made the alpha.
Second, this update contains the "final" Allied filmstrips - insofar as they
are completed and in sync with each other. This time I made all three -
and this time the alpha is "clean" instead of "dirty." However, there are
things that are inherited less than ideal - and one photo I used since
I don't draw art (look up the Boeing 314 flying boat - the side works even
if not art). Mifune will clean this up in due course.
Third - there are new aircraft files. Mainly changing pointers. The P-50 has
reworked data (scenarios 99 & 105 only). Two new types - a land plane
version of a Navy float search plane - which had art in the panel already
and which was at Pearl Harbor - so I put it in. And we got art for the US
glider and C-47 tow plane combination (made by Cobra for RHS/WITP)
because I can now copy the art and paste it at will.
Fourth - the RTAF Hawk II and III art from the Axis is now also used by
the Allies - both for RTAF and for ROCAF - moved from the Axis filmstrip.
Major planes added include C-99, B-36, B-30, B-32, C-54, C-82. Several
minor types now also have correct art.
I did a comprehensive review of gliders and AE. No other mod is using them
(as far as Mifune or I know). I worried that they might not work in the model -
in particular because they are "one way airplanes." This turns out not to
be very germane to the particular gliders actually used in PTO. The Waco
glider was in fact used for two way operations - in particular to rescue
downed fliers where no airstrip was available. It had a small mechanism (the
biggest part was a barrel) permitting snatching. I was aware of this because
of my father's role in supporting partisans in Yugoslavia - from North Africa -
which also included "pick ups" - both by the use of glider and by "trapese"
into the bomb bay of a B-17. USAF used this glider last - well into the Cold
War era - in the arctic - to pick up researcher dropped on the smaller
ice research stations. For its part, Japan only used gliders as transport
aircraft. Wether they use them historically - between airfields - or copy the
US technique - I leave to players in strictly historical scenarios. [There are
NO gliders in Japan Enhanced Scenarios. Not because they will not work.
Because Japan must win fast and cannot wait for gliders to be perfected,
and then glider troops to train on them. They go with lighter pure airborne
units instead.] Also, I expected to need to add US air units - and maybe
British ones - to use the new glider aircraft. Not so - the Brits - in spite of
having a unique "airborne division" which you would expect needed gliders -
used US transport assets instead. And the US assets are in the game -
you simply must re-equip a transport squadron with the tug and glider
combination if you want it. You essentially exchange payload for range -
and better own the sky if you want the gliders to arrive safely.
After a round to polish the aircraft - I will focus on maps and pwhexe files.
Then I will review and tie up loose ends in Scenario 99 (Mifune's radical
Japan Enhanced Scenario - one in which Japan builds with standardized
engine plants for about a decade before the war among other things -
and one in which there was no London Naval Treaty - so both sides
get some things not in strictly historical games).
Then I will review and try to complete the Downfall Scenario 105 - which
will be a mini scenario (Feb - September 1945) but full map. It starts with
the battle for Iwo Jima which permits doing the OB well.
Then we will think about if we want to attempt an extended map version of RHS/AE -
if the mapmaker is interested.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive Update 7.26
7.264 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
First, this update contains all six aircraft filmstrips. All filmstrips have some new art in them. I found that side art existed for the Wild Catfish (F4F-3S) float version of the Wildcat. Not put into production historically, it IS used in Japan Enhanced Senarios (and may be put on US CS type ships - all US AV were designed to be CS - all had catapults - but only USS Langley mounted them. I found some art of the BT-32 Condor which was used by Chiang Kai Shek and also by CNAC. I had to modify the art (removing text) - but was able to do that. I also had to solve the problem of a top - but I found a reasonable solution. Mifune made a Ki-10 - so this was added to the Axis Filmstrips. I also found A4N1 (I call it A4N1-K to indicate it is a trainer now) art on the altwars site - so this was also added. As well, all primary trainers began the process of removal from RHS Axis filmstrips (see attached document and text below).
To permit a graceful transition - I have removed all pools and replacements for primary trainers - but left the planes defined. Next time they will be deleted. Ongoing games in scenarios 101, 103 or 105 need to change the aircraft assigned to any Japanese group using them. There will be probably two more updates to air art. Mifune is making some. I have a bit more to integrate. And Mifune probably will clean up my Allied tops and alpha soon (but not just now - his eyes have a problem).
At least he is productive for the first time in a long time.
Aircraft file updates also include changes to pointers (for better or new art), new plane data for added types, and recalculated data in a couple of cases. There will be one more round of this.
Air group files were extensively modified for Full RHS Scenarios 101, 103 and 105, and slightly modified for simplified scenarios 102 and 104. This because Japanese trainer organization was revised to reflect lessons learned, and to simplify player management. Most significantly, the vast majority of trainer units were 9999ed out - including all small ones - in favor of larger ones that work better with code. The old RHS trainer OB was literal - my favorite way - but now it is semi-abstract because that will work better. See attached essay or the text below.
All Winter pwhexe.dat files were revised with eratta fixing the Tsugaru Strait, a hexside change preventing walking between two islands by an improper route in the Visayas,
and upgrading a secondary road at Canton which was somehow recoded as a trail. To this standard all other files will be updated, Fall season first (because it is the most out of sync, except for the Fall 1942 file, which was the last file updated. There will be more of these pwhexe updates until all are revised - mostly so the map art maker has a reliable standard to work with.
The Royal Thai Phayap Army (controlling most of the nations ground forces for the invasion of Burma) was added. A few technical OB corrections were made to the RTA units.
The most extensive work was done related to training air units (for Japan) - reducing the number of such units needing to be managed - and reassigning aircraft for some (where primary trainers had been used - these are now gone - and the art for them is dropped from the request list. For details see below.
AE Aircraft Trainers and Training Units
Nominally, there are no trainers nor training units in AE. De facto, both side have trainers in line air units when these were historically used for search, reconnaissance, or emergency fighters or bombers. As well, the Japanese have training air units with trainers when these served in the Kamakaze role – this usually only in Downfall scenarios. RHS is no exception in all these respects – and Kamakaze units are only present in the (not completed full map) Downfall scenario (106). I was not aware until this week that in beta test form, AE experimented with using training units for Japan – but the code didn’t work as required and it was more or less abandoned.
Experimentally, RHS re-introduced training air units in “Full RHS Scenarios” (those with odd numbers, 101, 103, 105 and the not quite completed 99 – which is issued for comments only). This is because the AE design more or less needs them, and because only if they exist do players have historical options (e.g. the decision in the Spring of 1945 to disband training units and dump their pilots into the pilot pools). Testing indicates there are several other functions of training air units. They are a good place to “store” aircraft which might be needed for combat later, but which will otherwise be scrapped if left in the pools. They provide a way to gain some control over the experience of pilots released into the pools and with specific skills. [The “release x pilots” mechanism in code works IF the pilots are above a certain experience level.] That said, if a historical order of battle is used, there is a lot of player management involved to achieve full benefit from these functions. As well, there are real problems with the way training units function which prevent a full simulation of the trainer order of battle. And it was found necessary to make training aircraft – and its supporting industry – automatic: otherwise players will divert trainer production to front line types and build no trainers at all. In “Simplified RHS Scenarios” (those with even numbers, 102, 104 and the future 106) – there are no training units and only 10% of trainer pools and production occurs (unless a player wants to spend engines and aircraft production capacity to build a model for some reason). This simulates the ability of the military to use training aircraft for military missions in an emergency – if they are useful. [Scenario 106 also will have trainers as modified for kamikaze missions and some trainer units on the dates they went over to kamikaze operations.]
Two years of testing and analysis has demonstrated it is possible to both simplify the training organizations (and the player time needed to manage them) while better modeling the real world within the limits permitted by code. This simplification involves a few changes in the direction of what stock did: all primary trainers are being eliminated (losing pools and replacements for new game starts, and converting the primary trainer slots for other types over time), losing all but one civil training organization (the large scale DNKKK program for transport pilots is retained, as is its 1944 expansion to feed military pilots), and losing all training units of squadron size in favor of group size. The result is fewer types of aircraft to manage, dropping requirements for primary trainer art, and significantly less than half (possibly around a third) of the number of trainer units to manage. “Management” here means checking the air units to see if pilots are ready to “graduate” – a function which IMHO should be both automatic and controllable (by setting the experience level for graduation) – but code does not do that. Pilots should ideally train as a class, and graduate together. In game terms, they mainly do so as individuals or very small groups. Also, training units should operate at different levels of experience: one should go from basic trainer to intermediate trainer to advanced trainer or crew trainer and then to type trainer (although this latter may be considered to be operational units of second string). But in practice a single training unit works until pilots are “ready” to go into the general pools.
AE Aircraft Trainers and Training Units Page 2
What is possible is to create a semi-abstract training organization. Basic trainers may be assumed to be present in all schools for various reasons, and in practice this is often the case. Schools that are pure training units all end up operating on a similar basis. Keeping them with “appropriate” aircraft is not really required, but good for flavor. Still – if you need to “hide” some planes from the pools (lest they be scrapped) but don’t want them in line units just now – you may convert a training unit to use them – and either let it fly (gaining pilot experience but losing a few to attrition) or suspend training (so there is no attrition loss). As well, if you assign an appropriate type, you will be able to control the kind of training you give pilots in the unit – if you want to focus on some particular skill (e.g. ASW or airfield attack) for medium term benefit of your air forces. Initial aircraft assignments will generally be intermediate trainers, crew trainers or obsolete or specialized combat trainers (indicated by the suffix K in naval services). The initial experience levels really only determine how long it will take before code begins to release pilots – all units end up the same in that respect. But at game start, it is the specialist advanced training units (with the most experience) that will begin to release pilots “soon” – while the least experienced (those with intermediate trainers) will take the longest to start dumping into the pools. Because trainers are “free” (unless you want more than history), you also will tend to keep intermediate trainers in use – since there may not be enough other aircraft to fill all the training units. But it isn’t actually required by the code to use a particular plane in a particular unit. Except for the name and service of a unit, it may be hard to know what the function of the unit really was? If you want to keep it strictly historical, respect the initial type assignment – and replace it appropriately. But it is all semi-abstract – and it will work to train pilots regardless of what planes are assigned.
Because the “graduation” rate is determined on a divide by 30 basis, and because the “get 10 new pilots” is the only way to get new pilots into a training unit, RHS now has all training units set as a multiple of 10, often 30. Larger units may be 50 or 60. Many start at 30 (group) and expand to 60 at a squadrons (now not in the OB) may have notes indicating what group they were assigned to? By not having a lot of small units, player management is simplified. And the chances you will have graduates when you look at a unit are much better if it has 30 pilots.
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
First, this update contains all six aircraft filmstrips. All filmstrips have some new art in them. I found that side art existed for the Wild Catfish (F4F-3S) float version of the Wildcat. Not put into production historically, it IS used in Japan Enhanced Senarios (and may be put on US CS type ships - all US AV were designed to be CS - all had catapults - but only USS Langley mounted them. I found some art of the BT-32 Condor which was used by Chiang Kai Shek and also by CNAC. I had to modify the art (removing text) - but was able to do that. I also had to solve the problem of a top - but I found a reasonable solution. Mifune made a Ki-10 - so this was added to the Axis Filmstrips. I also found A4N1 (I call it A4N1-K to indicate it is a trainer now) art on the altwars site - so this was also added. As well, all primary trainers began the process of removal from RHS Axis filmstrips (see attached document and text below).
To permit a graceful transition - I have removed all pools and replacements for primary trainers - but left the planes defined. Next time they will be deleted. Ongoing games in scenarios 101, 103 or 105 need to change the aircraft assigned to any Japanese group using them. There will be probably two more updates to air art. Mifune is making some. I have a bit more to integrate. And Mifune probably will clean up my Allied tops and alpha soon (but not just now - his eyes have a problem).
At least he is productive for the first time in a long time.
Aircraft file updates also include changes to pointers (for better or new art), new plane data for added types, and recalculated data in a couple of cases. There will be one more round of this.
Air group files were extensively modified for Full RHS Scenarios 101, 103 and 105, and slightly modified for simplified scenarios 102 and 104. This because Japanese trainer organization was revised to reflect lessons learned, and to simplify player management. Most significantly, the vast majority of trainer units were 9999ed out - including all small ones - in favor of larger ones that work better with code. The old RHS trainer OB was literal - my favorite way - but now it is semi-abstract because that will work better. See attached essay or the text below.
All Winter pwhexe.dat files were revised with eratta fixing the Tsugaru Strait, a hexside change preventing walking between two islands by an improper route in the Visayas,
and upgrading a secondary road at Canton which was somehow recoded as a trail. To this standard all other files will be updated, Fall season first (because it is the most out of sync, except for the Fall 1942 file, which was the last file updated. There will be more of these pwhexe updates until all are revised - mostly so the map art maker has a reliable standard to work with.
The Royal Thai Phayap Army (controlling most of the nations ground forces for the invasion of Burma) was added. A few technical OB corrections were made to the RTA units.
The most extensive work was done related to training air units (for Japan) - reducing the number of such units needing to be managed - and reassigning aircraft for some (where primary trainers had been used - these are now gone - and the art for them is dropped from the request list. For details see below.
AE Aircraft Trainers and Training Units
Nominally, there are no trainers nor training units in AE. De facto, both side have trainers in line air units when these were historically used for search, reconnaissance, or emergency fighters or bombers. As well, the Japanese have training air units with trainers when these served in the Kamakaze role – this usually only in Downfall scenarios. RHS is no exception in all these respects – and Kamakaze units are only present in the (not completed full map) Downfall scenario (106). I was not aware until this week that in beta test form, AE experimented with using training units for Japan – but the code didn’t work as required and it was more or less abandoned.
Experimentally, RHS re-introduced training air units in “Full RHS Scenarios” (those with odd numbers, 101, 103, 105 and the not quite completed 99 – which is issued for comments only). This is because the AE design more or less needs them, and because only if they exist do players have historical options (e.g. the decision in the Spring of 1945 to disband training units and dump their pilots into the pilot pools). Testing indicates there are several other functions of training air units. They are a good place to “store” aircraft which might be needed for combat later, but which will otherwise be scrapped if left in the pools. They provide a way to gain some control over the experience of pilots released into the pools and with specific skills. [The “release x pilots” mechanism in code works IF the pilots are above a certain experience level.] That said, if a historical order of battle is used, there is a lot of player management involved to achieve full benefit from these functions. As well, there are real problems with the way training units function which prevent a full simulation of the trainer order of battle. And it was found necessary to make training aircraft – and its supporting industry – automatic: otherwise players will divert trainer production to front line types and build no trainers at all. In “Simplified RHS Scenarios” (those with even numbers, 102, 104 and the future 106) – there are no training units and only 10% of trainer pools and production occurs (unless a player wants to spend engines and aircraft production capacity to build a model for some reason). This simulates the ability of the military to use training aircraft for military missions in an emergency – if they are useful. [Scenario 106 also will have trainers as modified for kamikaze missions and some trainer units on the dates they went over to kamikaze operations.]
Two years of testing and analysis has demonstrated it is possible to both simplify the training organizations (and the player time needed to manage them) while better modeling the real world within the limits permitted by code. This simplification involves a few changes in the direction of what stock did: all primary trainers are being eliminated (losing pools and replacements for new game starts, and converting the primary trainer slots for other types over time), losing all but one civil training organization (the large scale DNKKK program for transport pilots is retained, as is its 1944 expansion to feed military pilots), and losing all training units of squadron size in favor of group size. The result is fewer types of aircraft to manage, dropping requirements for primary trainer art, and significantly less than half (possibly around a third) of the number of trainer units to manage. “Management” here means checking the air units to see if pilots are ready to “graduate” – a function which IMHO should be both automatic and controllable (by setting the experience level for graduation) – but code does not do that. Pilots should ideally train as a class, and graduate together. In game terms, they mainly do so as individuals or very small groups. Also, training units should operate at different levels of experience: one should go from basic trainer to intermediate trainer to advanced trainer or crew trainer and then to type trainer (although this latter may be considered to be operational units of second string). But in practice a single training unit works until pilots are “ready” to go into the general pools.
AE Aircraft Trainers and Training Units Page 2
What is possible is to create a semi-abstract training organization. Basic trainers may be assumed to be present in all schools for various reasons, and in practice this is often the case. Schools that are pure training units all end up operating on a similar basis. Keeping them with “appropriate” aircraft is not really required, but good for flavor. Still – if you need to “hide” some planes from the pools (lest they be scrapped) but don’t want them in line units just now – you may convert a training unit to use them – and either let it fly (gaining pilot experience but losing a few to attrition) or suspend training (so there is no attrition loss). As well, if you assign an appropriate type, you will be able to control the kind of training you give pilots in the unit – if you want to focus on some particular skill (e.g. ASW or airfield attack) for medium term benefit of your air forces. Initial aircraft assignments will generally be intermediate trainers, crew trainers or obsolete or specialized combat trainers (indicated by the suffix K in naval services). The initial experience levels really only determine how long it will take before code begins to release pilots – all units end up the same in that respect. But at game start, it is the specialist advanced training units (with the most experience) that will begin to release pilots “soon” – while the least experienced (those with intermediate trainers) will take the longest to start dumping into the pools. Because trainers are “free” (unless you want more than history), you also will tend to keep intermediate trainers in use – since there may not be enough other aircraft to fill all the training units. But it isn’t actually required by the code to use a particular plane in a particular unit. Except for the name and service of a unit, it may be hard to know what the function of the unit really was? If you want to keep it strictly historical, respect the initial type assignment – and replace it appropriately. But it is all semi-abstract – and it will work to train pilots regardless of what planes are assigned.
Because the “graduation” rate is determined on a divide by 30 basis, and because the “get 10 new pilots” is the only way to get new pilots into a training unit, RHS now has all training units set as a multiple of 10, often 30. Larger units may be 50 or 60. Many start at 30 (group) and expand to 60 at a squadrons (now not in the OB) may have notes indicating what group they were assigned to? By not having a lot of small units, player management is simplified. And the chances you will have graduates when you look at a unit are much better if it has 30 pilots.
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive Update 7.26
Greetings El Cid and congrats for such awesome mode!
It becomes even better after each update![&o]
Since some German types of aircraft are already representend at Jap OOB I wonder if there would be a chance to see the FW190 added but of course with the same limitions regarding production as the other types like the He100 and Me 109..it would be IHMO a very interesting option for IJAF;
Cheers
Vipersp
It becomes even better after each update![&o]
Since some German types of aircraft are already representend at Jap OOB I wonder if there would be a chance to see the FW190 added but of course with the same limitions regarding production as the other types like the He100 and Me 109..it would be IHMO a very interesting option for IJAF;
Cheers
Vipersp
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: MicroUpdate 7.261 (air art plus)
7.263 update
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
This micro-update mainly concerns air art and related pointers. That is, the six filmstrips and the aircraft data files were changed. There also were changes to
pwhexe files (ten are now fully current and one more has made progress toward
that end).
This is almost the end (it never really ends) of the process of updating air art.
Mostly I have cleaned up air art - tops in particular. Also I build a composite B-36B
from Mifune's post war test model and the common art project's B-36D - so as to
get more pleasing colors but no jet engines. Also I was able to kill the jet engines on the B-36D top and alpha - making a B-36B. [It may be the A was never going to be operational - and it never was for bombing work] I cleaned up some art for the C-69
Constellation - and used in instead of the Constellation bomber side we were using. I managed to kill the jet engines on a propeller top used with the jet engine side version of the P1Y3 - so now we have probably the world's best 1946 vintage jet bomber with the correct top for its side. Mifune found a TBD-1A - which is a floatplane - and so I added it to the art mix - and changed pointers so we no longer have a landplane pretending to be a floatplane. This is called the Sea Devastator. To that add we added the F4F-3S Wildcatfish last time. All of these projects only apply to JES scenarios 105 and the future 99 (which will be the next release).
FYI Japan Enhanced Scenarios have two functions: first is simply to let player play with planes and ship types not available in a strictly historical scenario. A lot of work went into adding these types - and if one wants something slightly different - it is one way to get it. second - it is really to achieve play balance. Scenario designers - if not players - realize how much the Allies will get in due course - and the war won't be very balanced for long. The first part is the Japanese onslaught - followed by relative parity by summer 1942. The more Japan has taken by then, and the more it can anti-up then and later, the longer it will remain a contest. From sometime in 1943, it becomes a hopeless affair - and I doubt an auto-victory is possible except in the first year. Besides alternate equipment, JES scenarios also feature alternate construction programs - using plans not implemented for various reasons. The vast majority - and the larger - of these are Allied projects not done because the war was not going as badly as it might have done. On the other hand, the Japanese, having interior lines, benefit from minor projects more - mainly connecting existing roads and rail lines into better networks. Finally, JES scenarios feature better planning. Japan had its own Albert Speer - its own plans for standard escorts (developed pre war) - and proposals exploiting existing organizations and equipment to form an armored corps in 1941 (by its best commander who had witnessed the German side of the Eastern Front) - but failed to implement them until after the fall of Malaya. It need not have taken as long to implement these plans. [Mifune's scenario 99 goes farther - going back a decade - scrapping the London Naval Treaty - permitting some interesting ships that never were for both sides. This I will do when my work on pwhexe is completed - it is now my focus - having whipped air art into shape.]
There will be changes to air art - but only substitutions generally - or adding missing art - but probably no types. The plane lists therefore are complete (except for possible changes to pointers).
https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3 ... file%2cmsi
This micro-update mainly concerns air art and related pointers. That is, the six filmstrips and the aircraft data files were changed. There also were changes to
pwhexe files (ten are now fully current and one more has made progress toward
that end).
This is almost the end (it never really ends) of the process of updating air art.
Mostly I have cleaned up air art - tops in particular. Also I build a composite B-36B
from Mifune's post war test model and the common art project's B-36D - so as to
get more pleasing colors but no jet engines. Also I was able to kill the jet engines on the B-36D top and alpha - making a B-36B. [It may be the A was never going to be operational - and it never was for bombing work] I cleaned up some art for the C-69
Constellation - and used in instead of the Constellation bomber side we were using. I managed to kill the jet engines on a propeller top used with the jet engine side version of the P1Y3 - so now we have probably the world's best 1946 vintage jet bomber with the correct top for its side. Mifune found a TBD-1A - which is a floatplane - and so I added it to the art mix - and changed pointers so we no longer have a landplane pretending to be a floatplane. This is called the Sea Devastator. To that add we added the F4F-3S Wildcatfish last time. All of these projects only apply to JES scenarios 105 and the future 99 (which will be the next release).
FYI Japan Enhanced Scenarios have two functions: first is simply to let player play with planes and ship types not available in a strictly historical scenario. A lot of work went into adding these types - and if one wants something slightly different - it is one way to get it. second - it is really to achieve play balance. Scenario designers - if not players - realize how much the Allies will get in due course - and the war won't be very balanced for long. The first part is the Japanese onslaught - followed by relative parity by summer 1942. The more Japan has taken by then, and the more it can anti-up then and later, the longer it will remain a contest. From sometime in 1943, it becomes a hopeless affair - and I doubt an auto-victory is possible except in the first year. Besides alternate equipment, JES scenarios also feature alternate construction programs - using plans not implemented for various reasons. The vast majority - and the larger - of these are Allied projects not done because the war was not going as badly as it might have done. On the other hand, the Japanese, having interior lines, benefit from minor projects more - mainly connecting existing roads and rail lines into better networks. Finally, JES scenarios feature better planning. Japan had its own Albert Speer - its own plans for standard escorts (developed pre war) - and proposals exploiting existing organizations and equipment to form an armored corps in 1941 (by its best commander who had witnessed the German side of the Eastern Front) - but failed to implement them until after the fall of Malaya. It need not have taken as long to implement these plans. [Mifune's scenario 99 goes farther - going back a decade - scrapping the London Naval Treaty - permitting some interesting ships that never were for both sides. This I will do when my work on pwhexe is completed - it is now my focus - having whipped air art into shape.]
There will be changes to air art - but only substitutions generally - or adding missing art - but probably no types. The plane lists therefore are complete (except for possible changes to pointers).
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: Comprehensive Update 7.26
ORIGINAL: Vipersp
Greetings El Cid and congrats for such awesome mode!
It becomes even better after each update![&o]
Since some German types of aircraft are already representend at Jap OOB I wonder if there would be a chance to see the FW190 added but of course with the same limitions regarding production as the other types like the He100 and Me 109..it would be IHMO a very interesting option for IJAF;
Cheers
Vipersp
Art isn't a problem per se. The Altwars site AE art (which was done for all AE mods and much of which we
use already) has it. RHS has multiple threads: this would not be appropriate for a 'strictly historical'
scenario (101 to 104 and the future 106 Downfall scenario already issued for comments but not yet usable);
it CAN be used in a Japan Enhanced scenario (105 and/or the future 99 - which is dramatically enhanced).
Now I can modify insignia - I did a lot of that in the strips released today - I could make them Japanese.
The main work would be in terms of data - but that is my forte.
The reason we don't do that is it was not done historically. But over time I have come to appreciate the
many connections between German and Japanese aircraft and aircraft engine manufacturers. I now can look up
the details of the FW-190 - so let me do that and report.
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16983
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: RHS Thread: MicroUpdate 7.261 & FW-190 Report
ORIGINAL: Vipersp
Greetings El Cid and congrats for such awesome mode!
It becomes even better after each update![&o]
Since some German types of aircraft are already representend at Jap OOB I wonder if there would be a chance to see the FW190 added but of course with the same limitions regarding production as the other types like the He100 and Me 109..it would be IHMO a very interesting option for IJAF;
Cheers
Vipersp
Art isn't a problem per se. The Altwars site AE art (which was done for all AE mods and much of which we
use already) has it. RHS has multiple threads: this would not be appropriate for a 'strictly historical'
scenario (101 to 104 and the future 106 Downfall scenario already issued for comments but not yet usable);
it CAN be used in a Japan Enhanced scenario (105 and/or the future 99 - which is dramatically enhanced).
Now I can modify insignia - I did a lot of that in the strips released today - I could make them Japanese.
The main work would be in terms of data - but that is my forte.
The reason we don't do that is it was not done historically. But over time I have come to appreciate the
many connections between German and Japanese aircraft and aircraft engine manufacturers. I now can look up
the details of the FW-190 - so let me do that and report.
REPORT: Japan actually imported (the details of how must be interesting) a FW-190 A5 in 1943! They considered
putting it into production and tested it against their designs. The Allies became aware of this and assigned
the code name Fred to the type. So it IS possible to rationalize the 190 in Japanese service. I also have
no objection in principle because I believe most players will make the decision not to produce it vs domestic
for the same reasons Japan did: it lacks the range required for PTO operations. This is generally true for
fighters of German design origin or inspiration (e.g. the Ki-61). Earlier the Me-109 was rejected in favor of
the Ki-44 even though it would take a good deal longer to get the Ki-44 into production and the Ki-44 lacked
armor. It was so superior in speed, rate of climb and range there was almost no reason to consider the Me.
The He-100 was not only licensed for production in Japan, its engine was put into production and a factory was
built to make it in. But problems with delivery of the rest of the jigs - or the time needed to make them from
pattern aircraft already in Japan - ended up cancelling that plan. But RHS permits Me-109s and He-100s - because
they were licensed and because it was (eventually) possible to put them into production. It rejected the FW-190
because I was not aware it was licensed or that a pattern aircraft reached Japan. It could have been produced -
with a time delay. I will investigate adding it in the final round of air art updates (which is next). Further,
it can be added to all scenarios - it is a historical option. I let players have the chance to do what could have
been done - even if it is a mistake (which is mostly a matter of opinion - but I note few players put German
planes into production as Japan even when it is an option).