Thanks Yaab. All of these are inherited data - I did not add any of them. There are vast numbers of ships
with various errors - date of commissioning - date of entering PTO - location - not to mention the ship
data itself. Almost all merchant and auxiliary ships have too much armament in December 1941. Indeed,
most merchants were not armed at all. So the review process is one that never ends. It helps to have
a clue what ships to look at? I will fold these in with a future update. If they start in the wrong place,
this cannot be fixed in any ongoing games or tests. But it can be fixed for new games.
Wright is ship slot 4275. I assigned it to unassigned task force slot 8382. This is bound for Pearl not
far from French Frigate Shoals.
Confirm that there are vast numbers of errors - esp. the entry date. Some ships become available a few weeks too late, but many are available many weeks, several months or in extreme cases over a year too early. I have found ships entering the map on their commissioning date, on the date they have been launched and even some ships coming on-map on the date their keel has been laid IRL! There are also many ships with missing withdrawal dates, most prominent USS Nevada which served in Overlord and Dragoon landings in the ETO. There are also many starting location errors, like Yaab has reported here. There are also duplicate ships, esp. after name changes. What you said - "the review process is one that never ends" - is so true! Unfortunately I have not kept a changelog, but you may want to dig through my mod data and plunder at will. Focus is on US ships and some British as well, a few changes for Japanese ships as well but data is hard to find.
You are also correct about unarmed US warships. Neutrality Acts prevented arming of United States flagged merchant ships until 17 November 1941, so most US ships were still unarmed on Dec 7th. I did not check every individual ship (data hard to find, gigantic task and frankly not really worth the effort) but made a sweeping generalisation by creating new merchant ship classes without armament which upgrades to the existing armed 12/41 classes and assigned the ships starting on-map and early reinforcements to this new class. Upgrade time depends on the armament gained, light AA just a few days for installation and training, deck guns a week or two depending on numbers.
All early war pwhexe.dat files for both strictly historical scenarios
and for Japan Enhanced scenarios were reviewed to insure consistency
and folding in of a couple of eratta.
Axis Allied (mainly German) ships (mainly submarines)reinforcements
were assigned to task forces so they do not consume HI points or
shipyard capacity. This caused removal of a couple of blockade
runners and subs, the redefining of the surface ships (because I
have access to Lloyds register for 1939), and the addition of
commanding officers. This affected class, leader, ship and location
files (the latter containing task forces).
I think one more ship reported as improperly at Pearl Harbor was
corrected. I think a few other eratta were folded in to location files.
Generally, I strip start of game US classes of guns. Note that many merchants were armed with guns stripped from
battleships (ex secondary guns) or with new 40 mm Bofors or 20 mm Orlikon - none of which are available in
December 1941 (for merchants - a handful of 20 mm for battleships were actually at Pearl - but not fitted yet!).
So I allow upgrades starting in early 1942, with the Bofors not until July in strictly historical scenarios, or
April in Japan Enhanced scenarios.
A different issue is that merchant ships almost never are sized properly. As any sailor will tell you, the ONLY
tonnage that matters for damage control is full load displacement. This is NOT the same as gross displacement,
net displacement or deadweight (but is about twice deadweight). This is the amount of water a ship can displace
without danger of sinking. So I have begun to re-calculate these values - will take years. Got a record of 8000
merchant ships to work one (mainly derived from Lloyds Register, 1939 and later).
A still different issue is speeds. For merchants these appear often to be fictional. Using Lloyds data will permit
fixing that. I have begun to do this as well.
ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
ORIGINAL: el cid again
Thanks Yaab. All of these are inherited data - I did not add any of them. There are vast numbers of ships
with various errors - date of commissioning - date of entering PTO - location - not to mention the ship
data itself. Almost all merchant and auxiliary ships have too much armament in December 1941. Indeed,
most merchants were not armed at all. So the review process is one that never ends. It helps to have
a clue what ships to look at? I will fold these in with a future update. If they start in the wrong place,
this cannot be fixed in any ongoing games or tests. But it can be fixed for new games.
Wright is ship slot 4275. I assigned it to unassigned task force slot 8382. This is bound for Pearl not
far from French Frigate Shoals.
Confirm that there are vast numbers of errors - esp. the entry date. Some ships become available a few weeks too late, but many are available many weeks, several months or in extreme cases over a year too early. I have found ships entering the map on their commissioning date, on the date they have been launched and even some ships coming on-map on the date their keel has been laid IRL! There are also many ships with missing withdrawal dates, most prominent USS Nevada which served in Overlord and Dragoon landings in the ETO. There are also many starting location errors, like Yaab has reported here. There are also duplicate ships, esp. after name changes. What you said - "the review process is one that never ends" - is so true! Unfortunately I have not kept a changelog, but you may want to dig through my mod data and plunder at will. Focus is on US ships and some British as well, a few changes for Japanese ships as well but data is hard to find.
You are also correct about unarmed US warships. Neutrality Acts prevented arming of United States flagged merchant ships until 17 November 1941, so most US ships were still unarmed on Dec 7th. I did not check every individual ship (data hard to find, gigantic task and frankly not really worth the effort) but made a sweeping generalisation by creating new merchant ship classes without armament which upgrades to the existing armed 12/41 classes and assigned the ships starting on-map and early reinforcements to this new class. Upgrade time depends on the armament gained, light AA just a few days for installation and training, deck guns a week or two depending on numbers.
Apart from minor technical eratta reported or discovered, this update
features the first comprehensive review of SNLF's in years. There is so
much new material on other kinds of Japanese units I decided to study the
SNLF case. Good thing. Significantly more information is available on
this subject, which was known to be incompletely documented.
Japanese SNLFs are not exactly a branch of a military service. They do not
compare well with US Marines or even with Soviet Naval Infantry. That is,
although some units served for many years (until wiped out or the war ended),
most were disbanded. This is because naval units have other uses for their
specialist trained people, so being assigned to naval infantry duty is often
a temporary requirement dictated by immediate mission needs. Worse, consistent
with almost all navies, IJN assigned assets to a mission because they were
available, with no effort to create a standardized order of battle. Indeed,
an SNLF can vary from company size to division size. I thought that the division
case was just pre-War (the original Shanghai SNLF, with 9 battalions - one of
them being artillery). I was wrong. Numbers of large SNLFs form in 1945. I have
ignored these for now, until a book can arrive. These will mainly matter in
Scenario 126 - a 1945 Downfall project that isn't playable yet in any case.
Generally, I created four cases (with some special variations).
1) Company sized SNLF's (called Independent SNLF Companies). These only exist in
strictly historical scenarios. In Japan Enhanced Scenarios, 5 pairs of these are
traded for five "small" SNLFs (since a "Small SNLF" has two companies as its main assets).
2) Small SNLFs based on two companies of infantry, two artillery companies, and minor
elements (mainly an assault engineer platoon).
4) Large SNLFs based on four companies of infantry, two artillery companies, and minor
elements (as above).
5) Combined SNLFs based on two SNLF's plus a bit of support, which changes over time.
The two armored car or tank platoons (of 2 vehicles) upgrades to a 14 vehicle company
of amphibious tanks).
The 8th Combined SNLF, which formed for Guadalcanal (too late, so it fought on Bougainville)
has 3 SNLFs - so it is a special case.
The Shanghai SNLF includes an organic de facto AAA battalion in what is otherwise a small SNLF.
In Japan Enhanced Scenarios, the 5 pairs of independent SNLF companies form into 5 two company
Small SNLF's. Instead of normal names (like Sasebo 1st) they are given a short name in the
form of "base name" followed by composite SNLF. This name should actually include the two former
company SNLFs names in long form. Thus, a Saipan Composite SNLF really includes the Saipan 1st
SNLF Company and the Saipan 2nd SNLF Company.
Most changes are to the location and leader files. A few changes were made to aircraft, class,
device and ship files. For safety sake CAM files were updated.
I did not describe, because I did not alter, the special case of airborne SNLF's.
These used a triangular system and were very small, and extremely lightly equipped
in terms of heavy weapons (to facilitate airlift) - on German advice. They lacked
the traditional artillery elements of an SNLF, and had three companies rather than'
two or four, each of three platoons.
In addition, I eliminated the case of what stock called (wrongly) the Bandisan SNLF.
It was in fact an NLF (Naval Landing Force) - composed of two small platoons from
two ships - with a total of 60 men - which existed only briefly. It should never have
been classified as an SNLF. All other candidates involving NLFs, regardless of size,
were not considered because they are very temporary organizations whose people must
return to their normal duties. We have no good way to detach people from ships for
landing party duty. In the rare cases this is germane (raiders) sometimes there are
special landing parties which may be embarked by the ship. In particular, this applies
to the two German raiders in theater (Ichi Maru and, eventually, Ni Maru) and to the
two Japanese AMC's which attempted German Style raiding (Aikoku Maru and Hokoku Maru).
Hi I’ve been trying your mod again. I started it a few months back and have updated up to 5.22. I am playing scenario 122 as Allied. I seem to have a problem with Allied production. It is not producing some replacement equipment and squads. Some examples would be the Cda Bren section, CMF SMLE section and CW 41 CDoBren+SMG. These are not the only ones.
In addition, some production exceeds the rate by a large margin. An example here: Static BrgBaloon has a build rate of 5 yet the produced this month number is 45.
There are several duplicate entry’s: .303Bren AAMG and USA 03 Rifle squad are two of them. Working as designed?
I also seem to have a problem with heavy industry being flagged as “failed last turn”. I believe limited fuel may be the culprit, however, the HI stockpile is
above a million.
Question on industry/troops/resource Pool availability dates: what does and * next to a date mean? ie 41/12* or 41/12*42/12
Regarding aircraft: there does not seem to be replacement production for the RF-4A Lightning RC and subsequent upgrades. In addition the L-14(C-111)XPT has production of 5 that doesn’t upgrade to anything at the end of the line in May of 42. While I’m thinking about it, there is a blank factory in North Midwest USA (0)x55. Work around for the last two are easy. The RF-4 replacements, not so much😋.
FYI: Typos on tonnage for the Leander and Perth classes and updates. They are listed as weighing 68991.
I enjoy the plethora of different aircraft and varied load outs in your mod. Thanks for sharing!
Best regards,
There were three virtual sister ships built for the Osaka Mercantile Steamship Co., Ltd (O.S.K. Lines) from 1937. Built under a program providing supplemental funding from the government, they were designed so theycould be modified for military purposes in the event of war. For example, eight points along the deckwere strengthened so a 15 cm gun could be mounted. They were named Hokoku Maru, Aikoku Maru, andKokoku Maru (renamed Gokoku Maru). These were fast "motor-ships" using a new type of marine dieselengines, providing far better fuel efficiency (and for that reason range) than was possible for Japanese steamships of the era. Built as luxury liners, all three were converted into Armed Merchant Cruisers - two in time for the start of the Pacific War and one in August of 1942. All three of them appear in stock, but none of them have the correct armament as built.As with most things Japanese, the details are complicated. In fact, these ships served in the AMC, AS and APA roles, and had slightly different armament at different times. The stock primary armament (8x14 cm guns) in fact only applies to a 1942 conversion for the AS role - a role not allowed in stock. The AMC versions (of which there are two - 1941 and 1942) are armed with 8x15 cm guns instead. And the APA form had 2 15 cm guns to provide fire support and rather better AA protection than the other versions did. I noticed the third ship in the list of ships under construction and feared a duplication, so I researched the class, finally establishing I was misreading the similar names as the same ship. The stock date was not correct, nor was displacement or armament, and only one captain was right. So I reworked the files until the ships canconvert back and forth between all their historical forms, and so they start with the actual armament they hadwhen completed. Because stock does not use full load displacement (as all valid models of ship combat require), I reworked that, resulting in a higher durability. So these ships now are much reworked. I considered a conversion to CVE (and similar AKV) form - but rejected it - as they are a bit too small to carry a proper air group (as Japan fielded them) - which required a hull 50% to 70% larger in size. The only smaller Japanese "carriers" in air groups were Army types that flew rotary wing aircraft and very light planes not needing as much deck to take off as full sized naval aircraft generally do. So I did NOT include the CVE/AKV conversions after all. I could have - but did not - done a fast tanker conversion as well. I think these ships with all their historical variations (which all three served as) are entirely adequate for our purposes.
The cases of overproduction should be fixed. The cases of under production are a mixed bag - it depends on
the case. Some kinds of squads and devices cannot be produced at all (e.g. many cases in NEI). As well,
there is no comprehensive database of devices in the game - never mind at any given period of the game.
So whoever created replacement rates (stock, me, someone else) had to guess. Likely the guesses are often
poor ones. Your posting of the devices permits to look at suspect cases. Corrections will work into the
next update. There are usually duplicated devices. This dates to stock and I am not quite sure why?
I have tried to use only one - but it is hard: one must find every unit and fix it or it will be "locked out"
of getting replacements. Still - I will take notes and review them all, time permitting. No idea why you
get 45 Barrage Balloons when I set the rate at 5. That may be tricky to figure out. But I will run some tests.
I can fix the factory - just have to figure out what it is supposed to be making? Likely it is the B-34
plant at Willow Run. Bet the Leander is 6899 and the 1 is a spurious bit. Fields often pick up a bit when
saving in the editor. Thanks.
So thanks for pointing out what are likely eratta.
Sid
ORIGINAL: Badlandz
El CID,
Hi I’ve been trying your mod again. I started it a few months back and have updated up to 5.22. I am playing scenario 122 as Allied. I seem to have a problem with Allied production. It is not producing some replacement equipment and squads. Some examples would be the Cda Bren section, CMF SMLE section and CW 41 CDoBren+SMG. These are not the only ones.
In addition, some production exceeds the rate by a large margin. An example here: Static BrgBaloon has a build rate of 5 yet the produced this month number is 45.
There are several duplicate entry’s: .303Bren AAMG and USA 03 Rifle squad are two of them. Working as designed?
I also seem to have a problem with heavy industry being flagged as “failed last turn”. I believe limited fuel may be the culprit, however, the HI stockpile is
above a million.
Question on industry/troops/resource Pool availability dates: what does and * next to a date mean? ie 41/12* or 41/12*42/12
Regarding aircraft: there does not seem to be replacement production for the RF-4A Lightning RC and subsequent upgrades. In addition the L-14(C-111)XPT has production of 5 that doesn’t upgrade to anything at the end of the line in May of 42. While I’m thinking about it, there is a blank factory in North Midwest USA (0)x55. Work around for the last two are easy. The RF-4 replacements, not so much😋.
FYI: Typos on tonnage for the Leander and Perth classes and updates. They are listed as weighing 68991.
I enjoy the plethora of different aircraft and varied load outs in your mod. Thanks for sharing!
Best regards,
The factory in North Midwest USA showing as 0 is only used in Japan Enhanced
Scenarios. It is for P-47s used to outfit the Dutch when their forces return
to the PTO in force. It needs to be removed from Scenarios 121, 122, 123 and
124.
The problem with the Lockheed Model 14 transport should be addressed by upgrading
it to the RAF Hudson Transport. To do that, the RAF version needs to be delayed
to the month after Lockheed ends civilian airliner production - which is to say
4/42 in odd numbered scenarios and 5/42 in even numbered scenarios. In turn, the
RAF Hudson should stay in production until the New Zealand Hudson Transport enters
production in 4/44 (odd scenarios) or 5/44 (even scenarios). The number per month
needs to be reduced to 4 for the baseline M14, 2 for the RAF Hudson and 1 for the
NZ Hudson XPT - because the latter two will now be actually 6 and 7 respectively
when the M14 plant upgrades what it is building. In effect, the NZ factory will
become a repair factory to rebuild damaged aircraft - which you see a good deal
in RHS.
Now the F-4 and F-5 recon versions of the P-38 are a bit more complicated. I can
improve these - by making the RP-38 upgrade to the F-4. But the F-5 end of production
WITHOUT a replacement is correct. By the late war era MANY factories will be ending
production. It is not "wrong" to have this. The US was both running out of money
and also didn't need nearly as many aircraft late in the war. Production peaks in 1944,
not 1945, and probably had to in any circumstances. It is difficult to upgrade production
if one wants to be reasonable: the upgrade type must begin production the month after the
old type ends production - which I call date syncing. As well, the new type is going to
start at the very same rate of production - which often is not the case - which the old
type was at. I see no candidate for that in this case. As well, if I did, I would then
end up with a factory for that upgrade type needing to change or be eliminated. I will
entertain proposals, ideally for a two engine recon plane that might reasonably substitute
on the line, or some other form of P-38. But I don't expect to change this. Even if we
do change it - you will find MANY types will end production late in the war without production.
I am going to have to update in stages. A number of important things have been addressed and
I want to get them out there. But more research is needed on some things.
I do not know the device slot numbers for the devices whose rates of production you wish to have
reviewed. It will speed up the process if you can tell me the slot numbers for any of them,
e.g. the Allied barrage balloon device. In fact, that one appears to need evaluation - if production
is happening at a higher rate than is stated in the database.
This update includes only scenario files and documentation updates.
Aircraft, class, device, leader (h), location and ship files were updated,
mainly for eratta. The RHS Ship Class Bind List was updated, as were
several aircraft documentation files.
Leander and the Improved Leander (aka Sydney) class CLs were updated because
of eratta in the displacement fields in the latter - leading to the discovery
of other issues.
Aikoku Maru Class ships may now expand to the AS and APA forms they historically
assumed, in addition to their AMC form. Their starting armament was corrected,
having been inherited in incorrect form from stock.
A factory in North Midwest USA which had no aircraft was fixed in strictly
historical scenarios. It is used only in Japan Enhanced Scenarios to make P-47s
for the LVA (Dutch NEI Air Force).
Some leaders were added - in particular for the Aikoku Maru class - one had no
captain assigned - one had the wrong captain assigned - and the two captains that
were assigned had the wrong data in some fields.
A problem with Japanese JAAF air base forces was corrected. It seems that a
static device - even if zero are present - prevents a unit from ever moving. I had
to leave the slot blank in the formation - only putting it in the few units which
got it - which units indeed do become static. This device - FYI - is the longest
ranged of the Type A Radars. I only learned how it works in this spring. While
it indeed does not display range or bearing - it DOES reveal where a target is in a
way that can be plotted on a map! In fact, it is the longest range electronic detection
system in the world (although not a very accurate one). Japan never failed to issue
a warning of a major raid two hours before it happened (according to diplomats and
prisoners in Japanese cities during the war). This is the main reason why?
A number of technical issues were fixed - see the RHS thread for more details. A number
of others remain to be fixed. But some of the issues here are important enough to justify
issuing an update now. Most of these files will work either at once (e.g. device) or
eventually (when a unit upgrades). And any new game start will benefit from them all.
These eratta are at least irritating. Having been addressed, we may as well get them into
service.
ORIGINAL: el cid again
Now the F-4 and F-5 recon versions of the P-38 are a bit more complicated. I can
improve these - by making the RP-38 upgrade to the F-4. But the F-5 end of production
WITHOUT a replacement is correct. By the late war era MANY factories will be ending
production. It is not "wrong" to have this. The US was both running out of money
and also didn't need nearly as many aircraft late in the war. Production peaks in 1944,
not 1945, and probably had to in any circumstances.
You are quite correct that total production peaked in 1944 - but up until mid-1945 the PTO wasn't getting all US production.
To note one example, the AAF Statistical Digest shows 9,607 AAF aircraft arrived between the various PTO sub-theaters in 1944. In 1945 there were 9,408 - which looks like less until you realize that's only for January through August; the *monthly* rate actually went up almost 50%.
Specific to F-4's and F-5's, the digest shows that in August 1945 there were 323 on hand in the Pacific.
I set up latest (i hope) RHS 5.24 and immideately found issue that i remember from many years ago: ships "axis motor junk class" had 4 fuel with 1200end (very bad but "normal" fuel effectiveness for such type of vessels) but after refuel they eat 40! fuel for the same 1200end (1/10 from very bad, it takes more fuel than their tonnage).
Is this intended feature or longest overlooked glitch?
//
Also. AI version of RHS is mostly historical? Is there any AI-capable but heavily allied-buffed version to play Japan vs AI?
Primary House Rule: A player should never do anything which, in his view, would not have been done by a historical commander in the WW2 era.
Active Russians: In scenarios with Active Russians (121, 124, 125 & 129) the Allied player may not attack Japanese positions or units (except by mistake or in reasonable and proportionate reprisal) before the expiration of the non-aggression pact with Japan (1 July 1945). It is easy for either side, due to a settings error, to run an air raid – and a reprisal in kind is fair play. It is also permitted to overfly enemy territory for recon or search missions - at the risk of being shot down by fighters or flak. But a true invasion of Japanese territory, or a major, organized attack on Japanese bases before the treaty expires is forfeiture of the game. The Russians gave proper, 90 day notice they would not renew the treaty. It is assumed they honor the treaty as well as give such official notice in every game. RHS has active Russians to give the Allies several benefits: a) they can control deployment of units; b) they can control upgrading of units; c) they can supply remote locations and recover resources or oil from them; d) they can run recon and search to learn of enemy invasion deployments; e) they can respond to an enemy invasion, or pre-empt one, instead of waiting helplessly as the enemy invasion unfolds until the computer concludes enough hexes have been occupied to “release” Russian units to player control (this is a major problem). These boons may not be abused to permit operations which Stalin would never have authorized, because he was dead set against a two front war.
Whitehorse House Rule: In RHS scenarios 121, 122, 123, 123 & 126 the Allies may not repair the oil wells and refinery at Whitehorse, Yukon until May, 1944. These model the CANOL pipeline and a refinery moved from Texas and it took until May, 1944 to get them fully operational. In JES Scenarios 125 & 129, players have options to repair the oilfields and oil refinery at Kenai, Alaska and/or at Norman Wells, Northwest Territories from May, 1942. This is probably not feasible in Winter or Spring Breakup (how could you move enough supplies to even begin?) - but these are known options not taken IRL. Both are more practical than the CANOL project, which barely worked at all - thick NWT oil in a small pipe in a cold climate was not easy to keep moving. Historical scenarios (121-124 & 126) have the suffix CANOL after Whitehorse and Whitehorse has a base victory point value of 3 (= important minor location for any reason). In these scenarios Norman Wells may not expand oil or refinery production (forcing the historical choices). JES scenarios (125 & 129) have the suffix AKOIL after Kenai and Kenai has a base victory point value of 3. In these scenarios Norman Wells MAY expand oil and/or refinery production (reflecting greater Allied priority in the greater threat context present) but hauling in the supplies required will be very difficult. Kenai is much easier to supply but also much more at risk to capture or damage by the enemy (which is why it was not developed during the war).
Whittier Tunnel: The RR tunnel to Whittier Alaska is considered completed if you repair the port (it starts at zero). Because there is no way to have the rail line incomplete and still run its route (from Anchorage to Seward) we simply have the Whittier hex not function as a port unless you build the port in it. This act is considered to complete the tunnel. There is an engineer unit in the hex to do that.  
Copper Ricer Railroad: The Copper River RR is present in ALL versions of the pwhex files. It runs from Cordova, Alaska to Kennicot, a wholly undeveloped dot location. This RR was abandoned in 1938 when the copper mines were closed due to low copper prices. Other copper mines were reopened in WWII (for example in Michigan and in Montana). This copper mine can be reopened IF an Allied player moves an engineer unit to the dot location along with lots of supplies AND IF repair of resources is turned ON – in which case the RR will function. The Million Dollar Bridge remained in-tact until the 1964 earthquake. This location and RR may be ignored by any player who does not want to use them – and NOTHING will happen in that case – since there will be no production unless the damaged resources are repaired. Tailings at this mine are of economic value, but it is cost prohibitive to fly them out (even if an airfield is built). Today the track has now been turned into road.
Railroad Units: In ODD numbered scenarios, railroad units must move along rail lines. All such units have the word “train” or “RR” in the unit name. If such a unit retreats off a railroad, it may only move back to a rail line by the shortest possible route, even if that forces movement into an enemy occupied or controlled hex. Railroad units do not exist in “simplified RHS” (even numbered scenarios). [The “Off Road RR Patrol Unit MAY leave a RR – it has both tracks and RR wheels].
Amsterdam Island: Location 497, Hex 6,173, near the “West” edge of the map, is functionally the Axis Entry Point. Its game function is to permit Axis raiders and submarines from Europe to enter the map near where they historically entered the Indian Ocean. This island is strictly off limits to the Allies. It is worth zero victory points to the Allies. It is forbidden to invade this island. This is because Axis shipping did not enter at one fixed point at all and because AE has no mechanism to permit entry by Axis vessels using an Entry Zone. Allied naval units are not permitted within three hexes of this hex. Allied aircraft may not recon this island nor search hexes adjacent to this island. The “Axis” (Japanese) Player may not build facilities on Amsterdam, nor land troops. [Landing parties, considered on the ships, may be picked up from the island. This unique “base” serves ONLY as an entry point for Axis naval unit reinforcements.
Axis Off Map Entry Track: Axis naval units entering at Amsterdam Island may now move DUE WEST into the Axis Off Map Entry Track. Allied naval units may never enter this track. It allows movement of Axis units to simulate a course SW from the Cape of Good Hope, past the Crozet Islands, coming up on the Southern map edge near the one ice shelf feature present on (all, stock, extended and RHS) maps. The little green cross at the end of this track is the Alternate Axis Entry Point. No Allied ships or searches are allowed within three hexes of this point. It permits Axis vessels to enter the map over a range of hexes and is a compromise intended not to limit the Allies much at all but to give the entering vessels some chance of survival (instead of automatic interception).
Viscount Melville Island: This island, at hex 191,7 near the NE map corner, is functionally the Canadian Entry Point. Only RCM Police St Roche uses this point. Its game function is to permit Allied ships that transited the NW Passage to appear at its western end. [Player controlled ships may attempt the NW Passage only in the Fall season, and only from Eastern Canada (Quebec and the Maritimes) or from the U.K.] It may be built up as a base and it may be attacked, captured and exploited by the enemy.  
Atomic Bomb Air Units: RHS does not use the stock atomic bomb at all. This weapon is not destructive enough and has political effects which are unrealistic (more related to post war views about atomic weapons use). In fact, Gen Marshall planned to use at least 9 atom bombs as part of Operations Olympic and Coronet. In its place RHS has created two atomic bombs - a "Uranium Bomb" and an "Implosion Bomb." These bombs are modeled by 24 devices: one 1% of yield dud device which is almost certain to work; one 33% of yield device which is only about 20% likely to work; and twenty two 3% of yield which are each about 90% likely to work. Typically, about 20 of the non-dud devices will reach their full yield, but it barely matters. The dud devices are themselves very powerful HE bombs with significant ability to penetrate armor. [If the 23 non dud devices fail, they will turn into dud devices themselves, each of which STILL usually destroys a target!] On the other hand, code will have some or many devices fail to “hit the target” at all, depending on altitude. Another problem is players have somewhat too much control over what type of target is hit, although IRL that can be done to some degree by surface bursts at the correct location. Generally, this model works better simulating ground or water bursts than it does high altitude bursts. Because these are not atom bombs in game terms, there is no penalty on victory level no matter how many the Allies use.
Silverplate IB & UB Bombers: The USAAF gets 1 Silverplate UB aircraft per month starting in July, 1945. It also gets two Silverplate IB aircraft per month starting in August 1945. Silverplate UB aircraft may only be assigned to the 393rd Bomb Squadron 3rd Detachment. Silverplate IB aircraft may ONLY be assigned to the 393rd Bomb Squadron 1st and 2nd Detachments. Note the detachments may never attach to the main body of the squadron, but they may (and should) fly together with it (to minimize the risk the atomic bombers may be shot down). Historically, in fact, two one plane detachments flew together – one with the bomb and one on what might be considered a recon mission. It is not required (and not recommended) to bomb at high altitude (unless evading flak) – because at high altitude code will have large numbers of the bomb devices “miss” the target, reducing the effectiveness of the mission. The USAAF always gets atomic bombers at a statistically average rate of 1 UB (Little Boy, gun type, uranium fueled per month (from July 1945) and 2 IB (Fat Man, implosion type, plutonium fueled) per month (from August 1945).
Sliverplate PB Bombers: The US gets three Silverplate PB conventional bombers from May, 1945. The B-29 Silverplate PB aircraft carries a large conventional “Pumpkin Bomb” and is used to give the air crews experience flying missions over enemy territory with the same aircraft. Silverplate PB aircraft may be assigned to any element of the 393rd Bomb Squadron, including the main body. ALL B-29 Silverplate aircraft are stripped of defensive weapons to increase range. The B-29 Silverplate PB is the normal bomber assigned to the main body of the 393rd Bomb Squadron, although that unit could in theory operate any bomber. All elements of the 393rd appear at Tinian on 30 May, 1945 and initially may ONLY operate the B-29 Silverplate PB. Later, when Silverplate IB and Silverplate UB aircraft appear, the detachments may operate aircraft with the same suffix (UB or IB) as the detachment has, OR with the PB suffix.
 
Japanese UB Bombers: In some circumstances, IF industry in Japan is functional late in 1945, Japan may USE 1 G8N1 UB with an atom bomb every four months (from August 1945) and/or may USE 1 Ki-91 UB every four months (from October 1945). [A factory builds 1 per month, but a special house rule causes the air units allowed to use them to appearing only every 1 months. See below.] RHS assumes that, had the war lasted longer, and if the Allies do not destroy Japanese industry – or deprive it of resources to produce HI points if undamaged – it might be possible for Japan to produce a few atom bombs. IF there are HI points sufficient, AND IF there is a specific engine plant actually producing Ha-45 engines, AND IF there is a specific aircraft factory dedicated to the G8N1 UB aircraft, THEN Japan may produce ONE such AIRCRAFT per month. Also, if it dedicates a second aircraft factory to the Ha-42 engine, and a second factory to making the Ki-91 UB variant, it may also produce ONE of these AIRCRAFT per month. Factories producing Japanese UB MUST be limited to 1 per month. These may ONLY be operated by tiny one plane air units (the G8N1 UB by the JNAF Special Chutai UB, and the 67th Independent Bomber Detachment UB by the JAAF). These units appear with non UB aircraft. They may convert to the UB aircraft of their service when available. They may conduct Recon, search, transfer or transport missions at will. But once (and every time) they convert to UB suffix aircraft, they MUST disband after use. The UNIT will reappear 4 months later. NO OTHER Japanese air unit may use bombers with a UB suffix and these two units are restricted to the UB of their respective service. There may, however, eventually be several UB aircraft of a given type in the pools: there are simply no bombs available unless the one unit that can fly them is available. The idea is to simulate the limited atomic fuel supply on top of draconian production restrictions making plane production hard to achieve so late in the war. Note that Japanese atomic bombers do have defensive armament, unlike the Silverplate B-29s, which fly combat missions unarmed. These features model the actual design philosophy of both nations.
Ghost Submarines: Both sides get a small number of “ghost submarines” (both at start and as reinforcements). These subs are ONLY present in Full RHS Scenarios (those with odd numbers). They are normally set to computer control and left to do whatever the computer wants. If damaged, out of fuel, or out of torpedoes however, players need to return them to a base and fix/refuel/rearm them. As well, Ghost submarines may be in an area that the war has “passed by” – in which case a player may take momentary control to direct them to a more active area. At start, after repairs or refueling/rearming, or to send to a more active area – a player simply assigns a new patrol zone and then returns the sub to “computer control.” Ghosts are NOT possible to identify in enemy reports. An owner, however, can see they have “too much range, too many shots, and no guns.” Their torpedoes miss 99% of the time and do NO damage if they do hit. They cause ASW escorts and aircraft to waste shots – but gain experience in the process. They also simulate rumors and false interpretations of various phenomena. This device works very well but may be present in insufficient numbers. In 1982, the Royal Navy faced a single modern submarine (a second was too noisy to risk use and a very old WW2 type was used as a surface transport – which does not count as a submarine). It made 200 AS attacks “expending almost every piece of ASW ordnance in inventory” but only two of these were valid attacks on an actual submarine. And RN was the NATO navy most focused on ASW proficiency at the time with far better sonar than WW2 ships had.
Chinese Deployment Restriction (Burma and India): Normally, units that are restricted (permanent) may not go very far. They are confined to the land body they are on, or to adjacent land bodies with “ferries” between them. This was added so there was no restriction moving between Japanese Home Islands, or among many islands in the same territory (e.g. the Philippines or NEI). To see quickly if there is a road ferry, press the R key. To see quickly if there is a railroad ferry, press the Y key. The USSR has other restrictions in code: it simply cannot enter non Soviet Allied territory. But China is different. It is connected by road to Burma and, by trail (at start) to India. [Eventually better roads are built]. More than that, some Chinese units appear where they form in India. In game mechanics terms, Chinese units can move all the way to Ceylon (which is connected by Railroad and RR ferry to Ceylon), in unlimited numbers. To prevent the use of Chinese troops where they would not be sent – ROC China has its hands full in China and fears other Chinese factions nominally “allied” with it – Chinese units may not enter hexes in Burma more than eight hexes from the Chinese border UNLESS they are in transit from where they formed (in India) to China. Chinese units in Burma within eight hexes of China MAY engage in combat operations. Chinese units more than eight hexes from China in either Burma or India may never attack or be used to defend a location from a nearby Japanese force.
Note that in JES scenarios, the Tea and Horse Caravan Road is upgraded very early in the war to a primary road. In JES, UK and US units may use the upgraded primary road for strategic movement. This road exists in strictly historical scenarios as well, but it is mostly a secondary road and, near the China-India-Burma border, it seasonally turns into a trail during monsoon. The road was a significant supply line historically, and there WAS an attempt to upgrade it. Tibet – a separate country in 1941 – refused to permit Chinese engineers cross the border. Tibet – treated as a Commonwealth nation because it is armed by the British – has a tiny army of three static battalions – each tied to a strategic place it had to stay: the political capital, the religious capital (keeping an eye on the former “army” of monks), and at Chamdo, capital of a region just won by invading China, an “army of occupation.” [These battalions have precisely two heavy weapons – two Vickers machine guns – almost the weakest heavy weapons outfit of any battalions in the game]. No Chinese unit with RED or Warlord in its name may use this road. ROC Chinese units may use it to transit from India to China (but not vice versa). They will not be able to use strategic movement due to code restrictions.
 
Chinese Deployment Restriction (Inside China): Allied Chinese units come in several flavors. Russian allied ones are code restricted may not enter ROC Chinese territory. They are treated as Russian units and may enter Japanese controlled territory. Japanese Chinese units which are in the service of the Kwangtung Army may not leave Manchukuo’s borders. Japanese Chinese units designated NCPC – and also Japanese Army units assigned to any command subordinate to Kwangtung Army – may never cross the Yangtze River (or be South of it). Similarly, Allied Chinese units with the prefix RED may never cross the Yangtze River. Similarly, Japanese Chinese units designated RGC, and also Japanese Army units assigned to any command subordinate to the Chinese Expeditionary Army (South China Area Army in JES) may not cross the Yellow River (or be North of it). There is a zone between the Yellow River and the Yangtze River in which these restrictions overlap (for both sides). Note RED and ROC Chinese units may never cooperate in an attack – only one or the other may attack. Warlord troops are treated as if they were ROC troops. ROC and RED Chinese units may never cooperate in an attack, but may cooperate in defense if in the same hex when the enemy attacks.
 
Re your first item - about "production peaking" - is somewhat misleading. Depending on the
sources, there may be considerable slop in the data, but "arriving in theater" ought to
include all aircraft, however assigned, however they come. In RHS, we cover vast numbers of
these by transferring units from ETO, particularly when this was officially contemplated.
They certainly DO arrive in theater, but they do NOT represent increases (or even maintenance
of) production. Numbers of types actually END production in 1944 and 1945. RHS is not
one scenario - it is a set of seven (of which one is restricted to use as a 1945 test bed
for late war devices - it needs more or less a million field changes). So we offer
different late war assumptions: strictly historical ones and the presumably more difficult
Japan Enhanced ones - in which US production is sustained rather longer than the strictly
historical ones. Regardless, vast numbers of aircraft (and ships and ground units) transfer
into theater rather than show up as new production. The larger problem in game terms is
that this much larger set of Allied units must be "fed" with supplies and fuel. And we don't want
late war levels of both to the same as 1941 levels. So we went to the trouble of insuring both
are correct: much more supply is available late in the war.
Where specific data is available for a type in inventory in early 1945, this data is used by
the Downfall Scenario (which begins just before Iwo Jima). This data cannot apply to a 1941
start of game scenario - a host of factors will determine the early 1945 inventories of aircraft.
But we do try to model that in more sophisticated ways than stock did. The Allies have a number
of "repair shops" which seem to be aircraft factories. These rebuild damaged machines. Important
types get additional production over transfers to the theater, modeling the significant rebuild
activities in theater. As well, for a major production type, there is always a 1% "free replacement"
factor built in for the duration of production for that type. These are machines rebuilt off map.
ORIGINAL: Gridley380
ORIGINAL: el cid again
Now the F-4 and F-5 recon versions of the P-38 are a bit more complicated. I can
improve these - by making the RP-38 upgrade to the F-4. But the F-5 end of production
WITHOUT a replacement is correct. By the late war era MANY factories will be ending
production. It is not "wrong" to have this. The US was both running out of money
and also didn't need nearly as many aircraft late in the war. Production peaks in 1944,
not 1945, and probably had to in any circumstances.
You are quite correct that total production peaked in 1944 - but up until mid-1945 the PTO wasn't getting all US production.
To note one example, the AAF Statistical Digest shows 9,607 AAF aircraft arrived between the various PTO sub-theaters in 1944. In 1945 there were 9,408 - which looks like less until you realize that's only for January through August; the *monthly* rate actually went up almost 50%.
Specific to F-4's and F-5's, the digest shows that in August 1945 there were 323 on hand in the Pacific.
I was unable to confirm any aspect of this report. None of the stated data is correct. Nor can I show that
the data gets changed in game. Vast numbers of small vessels appear in RHS, and all of them appear to be
functioning properly. I will (as always) review, and if possible fix, any reported issue - but only if it
can be reproduced at source. I cannot explain the reported data. But it isn't happening on any of my several
computers.
I set up latest (i hope) RHS 5.24 and immideately found issue that i remember from many years ago: ships "axis motor junk class" had 4 fuel with 1200end (very bad but "normal" fuel effectiveness for such type of vessels) but after refuel they eat 40! fuel for the same 1200end (1/10 from very bad, it takes more fuel than their tonnage). Is this intended feature or longest overlooked glitch? // Also. AI version of RHS is mostly historical? Is there any AI-capable but heavily allied-buffed version to play Japan vs AI? Thank you.
According to the last chief programmer of AE, there is no version of AI that is suitable for use
by the Allies. One of the RHS team (Mifune) was a Matrix tester for AI in economic matters: he says
that AI was only tested for six months (which, indeed, covers most games). There is no evidence
that the game was designed to deal with late war levels of forces (or the supplies needed to feed
them well) - which in principle ought to be much higher than early war levels. RHS DID address this
issue in several ways, and Allied production will grow by vast amounts if properly managed.
AI only works reasonably well as Japan, and only for a brief, early period of time. This is because
AI is misnamed - it is not "intelligent" in any sense. It is a fixed script. It does not change ANYTHING
because of events in game. An offensive can be planned for a while. When this inevitably ends, or when
forces it is ordering around are lost, it becomes irrelevant to the situation. It never works even that
well for the Allies, whatever we do. AI is needed for validation testing, but it is never realistic
Players may like it, however, if they want to win "great victories" and don't care how stupid the enemy is!
RHS did NOT revise AI. ONLY ONE RHS scenario is designed to work with it - 122 (named RHSAIO = AI Oriented).
ALL OTHER RHS versions have features that MUST have humans or the computer will to unreasonable things. And
- except for a couple of technical tweeks in the last two updates - RHS has never modified AI at all. Someday -
years from now - if I live long enough and finish Scenario 126 (Downfall) - I may try to write an RHS specific
version for 122 and 126. 126 (Downfall) may not be fun for humans as Japan and it may be the most suitable
for AI - many units are de facto static anyway. The air force must commit suicide and cannot fly most missions
(which happens if you activate Kamakazies). But that is a big maybe.
ORIGINAL: demol
I set up latest (i hope) RHS 5.24 and immideately found issue that i remember from many years ago: ships "axis motor junk class" had 4 fuel with 1200end (very bad but "normal" fuel effectiveness for such type of vessels) but after refuel they eat 40! fuel for the same 1200end (1/10 from very bad, it takes more fuel than their tonnage).
Is this intended feature or longest overlooked glitch?
//
Also. AI version of RHS is mostly historical? Is there any AI-capable but heavily allied-buffed version to play Japan vs AI?
This comprehensive update is almost exclusively dedicated to class
and ship files, although eratta related to aircraft, devices, groups,
leaders and locations (including task forces) was also worked in.
There are tens or hundreds of thousands of field changes to ship files.
The update was intended to implement the new ship durability standard,
but it has digressed to fixing gross eratta re ship displacement (which
seems rarely to have been entered at full load values for minor vessels)
and armament errors. It is part of a systematic update and more than
half way through the class list. When completed, the new version will
be 5.3. However, so many things are corrected I would hate for a new
game to miss them, nor an ongoing game not to fold them in.
Many types have gained the ability to upgrade or convert to other types.
Ships with more than one mission able to perform either without actually
converting in real life now convert in 1 day (making this consistent with
other RHS types having the same feature). Several new devices were added
so the AA and radar modeling for the Allies is more accurate. Numbers of
radars that seem to never have been used, or were used on the wrong classes,
are now in use. In particular, USN DE's use the SU radar nearly universal
for their classes.
The reported issue with junks (which would, if it existed, apply to large numbers of
classes) is not present at source. I cannot fix what I cannot confirm exists.
