Matrix Games Forums

The "Indian CAs" are unrelated to pwhex.dat.

Instead, they are a result of upgrading of micro AK class ships to Baltimore class CA - a pointer issue that is fixed if you get any of the later releases. For safety I will check now to insure it is right.

Yep. Both Level 5 and Level 6 class files update the micro AK to itself - correctly. So you do not really have the later releases of RHS.

I have a report from an erratta tester he thought Cobra had somehow uploaded incorrect class files.

Anyone needing them can send me an email at trevethans@aol.com

I will send all class files out again tomarrow in a comprehensive - and frozen - update.

The reason I mentioned that PWHEX file was I wondered if the river(?) they are sitting is is attached to the ocean, or if this might be a closed hex?
Thank you.

You know, a huge reason some folks don't like using AI cargo convoys is because the convoys will traverse enemy territory.
A HUGE amount of this problem would be cured if your South Atlantic entry point could be made to generate AI convoys, (instead of just Frisco or Aden/Karachi..)

ORIGINAL: m10bob

The reason I mentioned that PWHEX file was I wondered if the river(?) they are sitting is is attached to the ocean, or if this might be a closed hex?
Thank you.

I myself had several Indian river AKs upgrade to Baltimores - I could tell by the "ship name" - and I then found the upgrade pointer was indeed Baltimore - they upgraded in a repair yard at Dacca! Unrelated to pwhex, this happened because the upgrade code worked right - and it had bad data. My fault.

ORIGINAL: m10bob

You know, a huge reason some folks don't like using AI cargo convoys is because the convoys will traverse enemy territory.
A HUGE amount of this problem would be cured if your South Atlantic entry point could be made to generate AI convoys, (instead of just Frisco or Aden/Karachi..)

AI is amazingly "stupid" - and it hardly can know about closed interior river systems - or other things not part of WITP design. I am pleased it does use exterior river systems properly. But I hate the way it routes even in the open sea in many cases - sending convoys where they cannot go at any speed - and not refueling nearby - routing the wrong way -
stuff like that.

But AI DOES generate convoys at the South Atlantic Entry point - just not as many as I would prefer. It does because I originate ships there. It does not send enough ships back - but it also does do that sometimes. It "thinks" this piont is Bombay because I used that slot.

Cleaning up very nicely. Reports indicate very few error points. After I freeze (one hour) Martin will do some slight enhancements that will fold into the next update - whenever that is. We will make it run more efficiently. We also are opening up slots of several kinds for later or modder use.

I can verify BA 18th Division went to Singapore, fought as a unit, and was captured there. It seems best to leave it as a single unit - more effective - fewer slots required. I have moved its location to Aden from Kerachi - and moved back its date to 8 January - which may be too soon for some elements - but as they must still be moved somewhere - it is not too bad a solution. If we get more data we might break it up - but the Allies hardly need more small units early on - and this will do.

No data on Soviet armor - so it will stay as it. It may be there were no heavy tanks in Far East - but only the 8 older brigades get them - and only 7 tanks per brigade isn't a lot. If they were not there we need to know what was used - and the late 1941 organization specifies them (Aug and Nov organization tables).

We will upload as is. Eratta cleaning up nicely and what remains may be more moot than meaningful.

The debugged versions of both Level 5 and 6 at x.65 level are now in the upload process. Level 6 is posted by Cobra - complete with a reviewed ship art package. [Map art was released some time ago, as were pwhex files corresponding to them] 6.651 was reviewed with software tools. 6.652 was reviewed by hand (independently). 6.653 incorporates some loose ends - and changes US PT boats from respawning to nonrespawning/all present (including a few cancelled units if the war lasts longer than history). It also adds a final 5 LSTs - 2 of them in the early series - 3 in the late series. All identified eratta are corrected - including a starting pool of B-29s (which has been removed before - but keeps sneaking back in!). I prefer to give you the total number of planes = monthly rate times x months plus whatever is left as a pool - but hard code won't let me do that. People could "upgrade" to the B-29 in 1941 - regretfully. [Smart software would not permit planes to be issued before the operational date] Anyway - this sort of thing should be fixed. I asked Cobra to do a final review of art - to make sure we don't have any crash ambushes waiting.

Just loaded RHSRAO 6.653 -- Pearl Harbor, San Diego and Manila have missing ship types in the active ship list with endurance =0.

Pearl Harbor Ship Type (none): ID 33/34/35; 36/37/38; 71/72/73; 74/75/76
San Diego Type (none): ID 77/78/79; 80/81/82;
Manila Type (none): ID 42/43/44; Me Ani;

When I click on one of above, the games crashes to desktop.

Yer me to, bugger!!!!!

Cause ship class is set to none for those pt boats.

there is in fact 20 of these still in the editor with NO classes type, they will cause crashes if appearing in the game i think

Ship Slots:5015 -5034
If this is in deed frozen, can we just amend ourselves to "delayed" in editor or will Sid be doin a mirco update.

Sid Should be:

Slot:
5015-5018 Class -1504
5019-5025 Class -1505
5026-5030 Class -1506
5031-5034 Class -1505 these where in fact Higgins 78 but this is not included in database.

Hope this is of help.
Drew

Yer me to, bugger!!!!!

Cause ship class is set to none for those pt boats.

sorry guys I think this one for Sid to fix when he comes on line

Cobra Aus

PT boats names are just numbers -

these clearly are PT boats.

If you crash - you need the new ship art - as the new art (triple boats) is required or it will crash.

IF you get it right - they are pretty.

ORIGINAL: DrewBlack

Yer me to, bugger!!!!!

Cause ship class is set to none for those pt boats.

there is in fact 20 of these still in the editor with NO classes type, they will cause crashes if appearing in the game i think

Ship Slots:5015 -5034
If this is in deed frozen, can we just amend ourselves to "delayed" in editor or will Sid be doin a mirco update.

Sid Should be:

Slot:
5015-5018 Class -1504
5019-5025 Class -1505
5026-5030 Class -1506
5031-5034 Class -1505 these where in fact Higgins 78 but this is not included in database.

Hope this is of help.
Drew

There is no Higgans 78 because there is no Higgans 78! It is renamed Higgans 80 ft.


Elco 77 ft are 1683 class

Higgans 80 ft are 1684 class

Elco 80 ft are 1685 class

All data from RHSEOS 6.653 - and it is all correct. Looking at it. Running it.

Reloaded, went to PH - they look lovely. If you have the right art - the ship display comes up with

PT a space and then the numbers -aa/bb/cc

The art has moving wakes for all three vessels - looks wonderful.

Bet you need the "river ships art update" package installed with

side art in Allied Side Art

shills in Allied Transportation Art

sub folders of Art Folder -

and you will need same for Japan too - except Japan at least puts "shil" in the folder name!

El Cid,
 
I follow your postings almost every day and I want to thank you for all of the fine work that you and the other RHS members have done for the game.   I want to play Scenario 061 RHSRAOv6.653 and I have a problem with PT boats showing up as "none " type class on turn #1 as noted in my post above.   I copied the art components found in the Allied/Axis sub-folders of the "River Ships" folder to the correct allied/axis ships shils and sides folders.  When I look at the Alliedship_Transport and Alliedship_Back folders I can see the PT art images --- 0148, 0319, 0320, 0321 all contain 3 ships.  I may have installed something wrong.  if you have time I would appreciate you taking a look at the editor for this scenario. 
 
Thanks,

for those having problems with PT class CTD I have just uploaded 2 fix sets for the Frozen scenarios - see My download link thread for details

Cobra Aus

Somehow along the way, the ship class files in the Upload subfolder failed to have at least three records related to PT boats. The correct files have been uploaded as a microupdate. These are not changed from my point of view - and the version numbers remain 5.653 or 6.653. But these class files are NOT the same as was in the x.653 file sets. Those file sets will be updated in due course - but this microupdate fixes the problem in the meanwhile for anyone on the primary distribution list.

Because the "fix sets" I sent out before I went to work also contained the bad files, they will not work. This set - containing both Level 5 and 6 files, will work. Mifune ran tests on the fix set files while I was at work and established the problem remained, so I ran file compares and found the problems.

ORIGINAL: Fixin2

El Cid,

I follow your postings almost every day and I want to thank you for all of the fine work that you and the other RHS members have done for the game.   I want to play Scenario 061 RHSRAOv6.653 and I have a problem with PT boats showing up as "none " type class on turn #1 as noted in my post above.   I copied the art components found in the Allied/Axis sub-folders of the "River Ships" folder to the correct allied/axis ships shils and sides folders.  When I look at the Alliedship_Transport and Alliedship_Back folders I can see the PT art images --- 0148, 0319, 0320, 0321 all contain 3 ships.  I may have installed something wrong.  if you have time I would appreciate you taking a look at the editor for this scenario. 

Thanks,

Before I had a chance - I was working for six hours - Mifune identified the offending records were missing. I simply had to send out files with them. I make so many copies that it is very hard not to have some good ones.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: DrewBlack

Yer me to, bugger!!!!!

Cause ship class is set to none for those pt boats.

there is in fact 20 of these still in the editor with NO classes type, they will cause crashes if appearing in the game i think

Ship Slots:5015 -5034
If this is in deed frozen, can we just amend ourselves to "delayed" in editor or will Sid be doin a mirco update.

Sid Should be:

Slot:
5015-5018 Class -1504
5019-5025 Class -1505
5026-5030 Class -1506
5031-5034 Class -1505 these where in fact Higgins 78 but this is not included in database.

Hope this is of help.
Drew

There is no Higgans 78 because there is no Higgans 78! It is renamed Higgans 80 ft.


Elco 77 ft are 1683 class

Higgans 80 ft are 1684 class

Elco 80 ft are 1685 class

All data from RHSEOS 6.653 - and it is all correct. Looking at it. Running it.

Reloaded, went to PH - they look lovely. If you have the right art - the ship display comes up with

PT a space and then the numbers -aa/bb/cc

The art has moving wakes for all three vessels - looks wonderful.

Bet you need the "river ships art update" package installed with

side art in Allied Side Art

shills in Allied Transportation Art

sub folders of Art Folder -

and you will need same for Japan too - except Japan at least puts "shil" in the folder name!

Hi

Here is my proof that Higgans 78's existed, its from a web page
http://www.ptboats.org/20-01-05-ptboat-006.html

As its from the PT BOAT ARCHIVE, I thought it may be fact...

Thanks for the quick update....great work.

Drew

Sid ,

Re the 6.653 PT fix posted on Cobra Aus site. You state that this fix is for those on the primary distribution list. Am I right therefore in assuming that there will be a further fix for the general gaming public. I say this as I am still getting CTD's after downloading the fix from Cobra.

DavidR

I am following materials from Conway's Maritime Press staff:
what is called the "78 foot Higgans" is classified as "80 foot Higgans"
by them. This may reflect a technical terminology thing - such as LWL
vs LOA - and I have not measured the vessels in question with a measuring
tape. Since they provided a comprehensive and standardized listing of all
classes, it met the test of a reputable and standard data set. There are
often differences between UK and US ideas of this sort - particularly about
ships. UK regarded US loadings of CVEs as "irresponsible" in a stabilty sense,
and they carried a lot less fuel than we did as a result.