Matrix Games Forums

I intend to reissue RHS scenarios with a few eratta - and reworked carrier deck armor. It has been possible to increase durability in such a small way that no changes are required to production (for Japan). In the RHS system - which has a lot more durability for auxiliaries and tankers - carriers with a few more durability points and vp are not a bad idea anyway. There was some armored deck erratta - at least for Japan - still need to check the Illustrious class. I will publish the values in an expanded thread where I already posted the big Japanese carriers.

If there are any eratta - post them here in the next couple of days - and we will work them into the update.

Someone sent me the old distribution list - and I have a few more addresses to add to it.

RHSCVO, 7.796:

US Army 31st Regiment (USAFFE, no unit number at hand) has the TOE of a russian tank division.

Axis Hawk Fighter needs a different picture.

Nisshan and Mizuho convert to A6M3 and B5N in August 1942, whether or not they have flight decks.

Northampton class CA's loose their radar in the 2/42 upgrade. Apparantly this is the same as in Nemos and eventually other mods (info from GBLs AAR).
I'm not sure if this is from a wrong initial database or just an oddity that happened in real life.
Also the increase in AA firepower might still be worth the loss of the radar equipment.

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

RHSCVO, 7.796:

US Army 31st Regiment (USAFFE, no unit number at hand) has the TOE of a russian tank division.

slot = 2643 points at 2107 = Soviet Tank Corps
should be 2007 = US Infantry Regiment

a classical editor induced error - one number in a field incriments or decriments one level

ORIGINAL: Mistmatz

Northampton class CA's loose their radar in the 2/42 upgrade. Apparantly this is the same as in Nemos and eventually other mods (info from GBLs AAR).
I'm not sure if this is from a wrong initial database or just an oddity that happened in real life.
Also the increase in AA firepower might still be worth the loss of the radar equipment.

It should have a CXAM radar - that is device 138 - and for some reason it is skipped. The upgrade to SK a few months later is correct.

A RTN heavy gunboat - the Sry Aythuia - had an improper radar on page 2 - not sure how? It will be corrected.

Royal Thai Naval Air Service operated 18 E8Ns obtained in 1938 in addition to 6 WS-103S (the second S = Siam) - a variation of the E9W which was the predecessor for the Glen as a submarine floatplane. [IJN went on to buy some of the Thai variant for its service] The two PCEs or frigates Meklong and Tachsin were designed to operate these aircraft. I am representing them with the Glen in WITP in its present form - except they have 7.9 mm MGs - in the case of the WS there are 3 forward and 1 top rear - the Glen 1 and 1. I also added two land flights of E8Ns and converted the existing land flight to the WS-103. I also added detachments for the PCEs - but they probably won't work from ships at sea (although they may be able to be transported by them). Since these ships really had the ability to operate aircraft - and so did a few destroyers - I hope some future version of WITP allows planes to operate from any ship.

Works fine now as far as I know.

I've noticed the Mizuho and Nissan have Zeros and Kates in their WitP airgroups in late 1942.

It depends on the scenario. In EOS family scenarios the seaplane carriers are built to Chitose (CVL if fast or CVE if slow) standards. All of these ships had different plans and could have been completed in various ways - and some converted from one form to another. If you used the destroyer propulsion sets instead of diesels you get a CVL form, if you use the Mizuho diesels instead of steam destroyer sets, you can get a CVE or CVS form. Different scenarios of RHS give you options to try these vessels in different forms - or sometimes to convert them as well.

In order to actually get the air groups to convert for the stock Chitose's it appears hard code was used. This is preserved in some RHS scenarios - CVO and BBO families. In EOS family it is not used at all - the slots are not used and the ships start in CVL format - so conversion of air groups is not an issue. A similar case exists for the semi-carriers. Actually ALL the battleships had plans for conversion to semicarriers - in two different forms (1/3 and 2/3 gun removal) as well as a full (3/3???) conversion to CVs done post Midway. But here we retain the stock system for CVO and BBO families - and give you the full conversion for some ships in some EOS scenarios. Again - the air groups are a bit of a problem. It was long believed that you cannot use carrier planes from BB in WITP - but you can. And the air groups were MIXED - and oddly not the same way on both ships. Something like 13 seaplanes and 9 carrier planes on one and the reverse on the other. Anyway - the problem is not that it does not work - but that the game should not let you recover the carrier planes on the ship - while the seaplanes COULD do that (using a Hein Mat recovery system - or indeed more than one of them). [Maybe you could recover a carrier plane on a Hein Mat - but I don't think anyone ever considered that] Anyway- to deal with some of these conversions - I gave you different air groups for the same ship - or air groups which indeed convert to a different type of plane. Since I found a way to make carrier qualified air units appear on land (using dummy carriers that never appear and a start date they appear at the default location - Tokyo or San Francisco - and they never resize either) I could give you carrier air groups that appear on land. There are both historical and game technical reason to do that - and you do have these on both sides.

RHSRAO.

Mizuho had the wrong upgrade listing for CVO, RAO and MRAO - but curiously right for similar BBO and RPO scenarios. Instead it had the upgrade for the EOS family air groups. Nisshin was wrong in CVO and BBO families. This is not too serious for human players - just don't upgrade to the wrong plane type. For AI - you must turn off the air unit upgrade option or they will get (and use) the wrong planes. I have fixed Nisshin air groups. Nisshin - 1 Squadron should upgrade to Type 9 (A6M2-N) - this is slot 458. Nisshin - 2 Squadron should upgrade to Type 44 (E16) - this is slot 459. Mizuho -1 Squadron should upgrade to Type 9 - this is slot 569. Mizuho - 2 Squadron should upgrade to Type 44 - this is slot 570.

Per RHS SOP I checked all the seaplane carriers - the rest are right.

All the reported eratta have been investigated and addressed.
All incidental erratta found processing data have been addressed.
All carriers and related platforms have had armor and durability recalculated. Originally this was to address the deck armor issue,
but it was found that durability and some basic armor data also needed revision. The new system should give better relative ratings between carriers, seaplane carriers, and related ships.
HMS Victorius had it class changed in all scenarios - from the first pair data to the second pair data - and gained air capacity = 9 planes.
In EEO and EBO HMS Unicorn was built as an additional member of the third pair series of the Illustrious class.
Also in EEO and EBO the lead ship of the follow on series to the Illustrious - was added. As always in RHS, she has her original name - HMS Audacious. But IRL she was renamed.


I will not issue the updated file series until any other eratta have had a chance to be folded in. THIS is the place to post it if you want it addressed.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

All the reported eratta have been investigated and addressed.
All incidental erratta found processing data have been addressed.
All carriers and related platforms have had armor and durability recalculated. Originally this was to address the deck armor issue,
but it was found that durability and some basic armor data also needed revision. The new system should give better relative ratings between carriers, seaplane carriers, and related ships.
HMS Victorius had it class changed in all scenarios - from the first pair data to the second pair data - and gained air capacity = 9 planes.
In EEO and EBO HMS Unicorn was built as an additional member of the third pair series of the Illustrious class.
Also in EEO and EBO the lead ship of the follow on series to the Illustrious - was added. As always in RHS, she has her original name - HMS Audacious. But IRL she was renamed HMS Eagle - Eagle was originally a different member of the same class - and she served most of the Cold War era as one of the two major RN carriers in a much revised form with angled flight deck. Here we have the original strait deck form of the ship - it is a modified Illustrious concept vessel very similar to the ships that came before her - with more deck protection and less belt - and the full air capacity of the double hanger version.


I will not issue the updated file series until any other eratta have had a chance to be folded in. THIS is the place to post it if you want it addressed.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: el cid again

All the reported eratta have been investigated and addressed.
All incidental erratta found processing data have been addressed.
All carriers and related platforms have had armor and durability recalculated. Originally this was to address the deck armor issue,
but it was found that durability and some basic armor data also needed revision. The new system should give better relative ratings between carriers, seaplane carriers, and related ships.
HMS Victorius had it class changed in all scenarios - from the first pair data to the second pair data - and gained air capacity = 9 planes.
In EEO and EBO HMS Unicorn was built as an additional member of the third pair series of the Illustrious class.
Also in EEO and EBO the lead ship of the follow on series to the Illustrious - was added. As always in RHS, she has her original name - HMS Audacious. But IRL she was renamed HMS Eagle - Eagle was originally a different member of the same class - and she served most of the Cold War era as one of the two major RN carriers in a much revised form with angled flight deck. Here we have the original strait deck form of the ship - it is a modified Illustrious concept vessel very similar to the ships that came before her - with more deck protection and less belt - and the full air capacity of the double hanger version.


I will not issue the updated file series until any other eratta have had a chance to be folded in. THIS is the place to post it if you want it addressed.

I quit playing a couple of months ago, but as I remember there was inconsistency with the ASW weapons within the Wickes and the DMS related classes. Sorry, not set up to give you further details.

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

ORIGINAL: el cid again

ORIGINAL: el cid again

All the reported eratta have been investigated and addressed.
All incidental erratta found processing data have been addressed.
All carriers and related platforms have had armor and durability recalculated. Originally this was to address the deck armor issue,
but it was found that durability and some basic armor data also needed revision. The new system should give better relative ratings between carriers, seaplane carriers, and related ships.
HMS Victorius had it class changed in all scenarios - from the first pair data to the second pair data - and gained air capacity = 9 planes.
In EEO and EBO HMS Unicorn was built as an additional member of the third pair series of the Illustrious class.
Also in EEO and EBO the lead ship of the follow on series to the Illustrious - was added. As always in RHS, she has her original name - HMS Audacious. But IRL she was renamed HMS Eagle - Eagle was originally a different member of the same class - and she served most of the Cold War era as one of the two major RN carriers in a much revised form with angled flight deck. Here we have the original strait deck form of the ship - it is a modified Illustrious concept vessel very similar to the ships that came before her - with more deck protection and less belt - and the full air capacity of the double hanger version.


I will not issue the updated file series until any other eratta have had a chance to be folded in. THIS is the place to post it if you want it addressed.

I quit playing a couple of months ago, but as I remember there was inconsistency with the ASW weapons within the Wickes and the DMS related classes. Sorry, not set up to give you further details.

It appears that Wickes DD (1315) upgrades to Manley APD (1319) - and in that case does lost its ASW suite.