Matrix Games Forums

World in Flames: Tutorial Videos Playlist #3Order of Battle: Pacific First Screens!Panzer Corps gets a GreenlightThe Slitherine Group Strikes Stratego License DealWeb Server Maintenance Unity of Command and Operation Barbarossa!World in Flames gets Updated!Close Combat: Wacht am Rhein Let's Play VideoWorld in Flames: Tutorial Videos Playlist #2The Drums of War are Approaching!		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/26/2007 5:39:42 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		The city of Harbin, in these two scenarios only, is not a port - in spite of being the main base of the most important of the interior river systems. It should be a Level 3 port with a Level 10 repair shipyard.

These location files make it so.

If you are hopelessly into a game already - I may be able to fix it.
Post #: 1
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 12:59:08 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		In RHSCAIO 7.788 as Allies versus Japanese AI - I am seeing that the PB2Y-3 Coronado is not manufacturing, in spite of having 10 repaired factories in San Diego. Has anybody else noticed this?

Update:

Also the Catalina PBY/PBV is not producing (total of 22 factories in 2 locations), and the Anson I is not producing (30 factories).

I realize the Anson I probably should not be producing, I am listing it only for completeness because it has factories.

< Message edited by witpqs -- 12/28/2007 1:52:00 AM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 2
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 4:37:51 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Also have noticed that the (level 7) Pwhex file differs with the art - the river that passes hexes 36,28 and 36,27 is in different places in art than in Pwhex file (as shown by F6 key).

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 3
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 4:45:29 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		There is no production for the SOC 1/3 Seagull (there was in older versions of RHS).

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 4
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 2:09:51 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

In RHSCAIO 7.788 as Allies versus Japanese AI - I am seeing that the PB2Y-3 Coronado is not manufacturing, in spite of having 10 repaired factories in San Diego. Has anybody else noticed this?

Update:

Also the Catalina PBY/PBV is not producing (total of 22 factories in 2 locations), and the Anson I is not producing (30 factories).

I realize the Anson I probably should not be producing, I am listing it only for completeness because it has factories.


See follow on about "don't believe reports" as well as this:

I notice this all the time - and on both sides. But more on the Japanese side than the Allies. I intend to do some turn by turn inventories during human testing to track ACTUAL production. I can rationalize what happens. But we do not know - no human anywhere knows - exactly how code works re production. There are undoubtedly "tests" - and I don't know what is happening for sure in any given case. But I DO know:

some locations NEVER produce aircraft (or engines) - no matter how many factories are there

some locations are FAR more efficient than others

even efficient locations have limits - above which production does not occur - de facto rather than formal limits

code seems to give preference to slot order: that is

a) it will produce lower slot factories before higher slot factories (in the location file)

b) for Japan - it is more likely to get production with aircraft that have lower slot engines than higher slot engines

c) it may also be that lower aircraft slots produce better than higher aircraft slots - in the same location

I found it is generally better to spread aircraft production around - and to concentrate it at locations which will get lots of same hex HI points - and probably also supply points.



< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/28/2007 2:30:42 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 5
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 2:15:41 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Also have noticed that the (level 7) Pwhex file differs with the art - the river that passes hexes 36,28 and 36,27 is in different places in art than in Pwhex file (as shown by F6 key).


It looks close to correct. If hex sides are on you can see it better. The river art itself (as opposed to the hex sides) could be on the other sides of 36,28 and 36,27 - but I don't do art - and Cobra (a) out of communications mostly and (b) reported he lost his art and tools when he was in communications. Anyway - the pwhex is right - and there are lots of problems on this scale inherently. I have a list of minor tweeks for art - if anyone every does art for WITP I again - and wants to redo RHS panels. All of them trivial.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/28/2007 2:19:57 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 6
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 2:26:25 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

There is no production for the SOC 1/3 Seagull (there was in older versions of RHS).


First ordered in 1933 and flown a year later, the SOC entered service in late 1935 and had superseded the Fleet's earlier shipboard floatplanes by the end of the decade. With production completed in 1938, its ageing design was then nearly ready for replacement by newer medium-powered monoplane types. By late 1941, battleships generally carried the Vought OS2U, whose non-folding wings were not required on the hangarless "battlewagons". It was expected that cruisers would soon get the Curtiss SO3C, which had folding wings. However, the latter aircraft was never quite satisfactory, requiring the SOC to serve on board first-line cruisers until quite late in World War II, when the high-performance Curtiss SC became available.

Comment: because "production completed in 1938" - it should not be in production during 1941-1945.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/28/2007 2:27:40 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 7
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 2:32:01 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

In RHSCAIO 7.788 as Allies versus Japanese AI - I am seeing that the PB2Y-3 Coronado is not manufacturing, in spite of having 10 repaired factories in San Diego. Has anybody else noticed this?

Update:

Also the Catalina PBY/PBV is not producing (total of 22 factories in 2 locations), and the Anson I is not producing (30 factories).

I realize the Anson I probably should not be producing, I am listing it only for completeness because it has factories.


The reports are bogus. I have 636 Catalinas in the pool in Oct 1943, plus 123 nominally "used" - this latter value seems to "lose count" all the time - so you never have a valid "issued" count. But humor me - and lets for a second assume these are valid data: HOW did I get 636 in a pool, plus 123 more to issue to units, when there was always ZERO production AND ZERO replacements - and only 6 in the pool to begin with?????? [They divide like cells do in biology? Maybe you don't need production because there is reproduction?]

The reports are bogus.

I think production is working much of the time but not reported for some obscure reason.

PBY-5s should phase out on 1 March 1943 - in favor of the PBV/PBN. When that happens, production suddenly is reported at 48.

18 Anson have shown up somehow - possibly due to upgrading.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/28/2007 2:43:44 PM >

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 8
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 10:48:45 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Sid,

I don't know about the game you're running, but in the game I'm running the pools of the aircraft in question are 0, the number used is staying the same, and the squadrons are shrinking. Those planes are not being produced.

You explained the SOC1/3 Seagull (although I am curious just what did the USN use as ops losses caused squadrons to shrink?). However, the Catalina PBY/PBV and the Coronado are absolutely not producing.

If you like I can send you a save file and you can verify that for yourself.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 9
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 11:07:16 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		All I need is to know the scenario - a general problem will exist at source and be repeatable - and I can trap it.

PBY and PBV are not the same aircrft - so one wonders what you are looking at? We have several versions of the PBY in RHS - the first US one being PBY-5. It upgrades to PBN/PBY/GST - and until 1943 that variation MUST BE ZERO - it is not allowed to produce sooner. There is also a RN version - Catalina. PBYs produce on the map at Vancouver BC in Catalina/PBY/PBV form. They also produce off the map at Canada. They don't show up for US use - but for Commonwealth use - but they are PBYs as well.

EDIT: A 12/25/41 test shows a production rate of 40 for PBY-5 - and 38 already produced and all issued to units. [Only 6 start in the pool and you cannot have replaced any yet - the replacement is not yet on stream - so 32 of that 38 are new aircraft]

The SOC-3 can be replaced by the other observation plane. OS2U-3 Kingfisher.

EDIT: Confirmed: OS2U-3 Kingfisher is listed as an upgrade IN THE GAME ON BOARD A US cruiser.

It is ironic - as the article on SOC-3 says - that with vast production capability the US was chronically short of float observation planes (because of a technical failure of the intended replacement type). Since they decided NOT to carry them as a fire hazzard by midwar - priority to solve this was probably not very high.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/28/2007 11:17:06 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 10
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/28/2007 11:26:05 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

There is also a RN version - Catalina. PBYs produce on the map at Vancouver BC in Catalina/PBY/PBV form. They also produce off the map at Canada.


That's why I specifically referenced:

"Catalina PBY/PBV is not producing (total of 22 factories in 2 locations)"

That plane is not producing.

Also the "PB2Y-3 Coronado is not manufacturing, in spite of having 10 repaired factories in San Diego."

Regarding the Seagull, I remembered someone posting long ago that the Kingfisher was too big too replace the Seagull on ships smaller than battleships, so I was reluctant to use it. If it's fine I'll just use that (or let them go without).

Regarding the Anson I, I assume my comments are correct and it should not be producing (in spite of having factories that look like they ought to be working)?

PS:

quote:

In RHSCAIO 7.788 as Allies versus Japanese AI

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 11
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 6:49:55 AM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1141
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline 		Sid-

There seems to be no midget equipped Japanese submarine off Pearl on 7 Dec.  I am playing RHS EOS 7.788

I am not sure if this should have been a new thread?

Mac


_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 12
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 6:57:20 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

There is also a RN version - Catalina. PBYs produce on the map at Vancouver BC in Catalina/PBY/PBV form. They also produce off the map at Canada.


That's why I specifically referenced:

"Catalina PBY/PBV is not producing (total of 22 factories in 2 locations)"

That plane is not producing.



But it is producing. SO your problem is likely related to supply points. You must turn off enough construction - etc - that there are reasonable totals at Vancouver - to get the 6 there - or Canada. I am producing them - at both locations - without any effort at all - but I NEVER run with everything turned on.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 13
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 7:01:39 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

There is also a RN version - Catalina. PBYs produce on the map at Vancouver BC in Catalina/PBY/PBV form. They also produce off the map at Canada.


That's why I specifically referenced:


Also the "PB2Y-3 Coronado is not manufacturing, in spite of having 10 repaired factories in San Diego."



I confirm this. The aircraft eventually is replaced by another - but none ever appear to have been made by the end of the run. Four engine planes see this problem more often than twin engine planes do. If it was the ONLY plane at San Diego it would work fine. It may work well in games other than AI vs AI - but I don't know that it doess.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/29/2007 7:03:11 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 14
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 7:02:56 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan

Sid-

There seems to be no midget equipped Japanese submarine off Pearl on 7 Dec.  I am playing RHS EOS 7.788

I am not sure if this should have been a new thread?

Mac



There are only 5 - I 16, 18, 20, 22 and 24 - and only one is near there I think - in EOS.

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 15
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 8:52:01 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: el cid again
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
quote:

There is also a RN version - Catalina. PBYs produce on the map at Vancouver BC in Catalina/PBY/PBV form. They also produce off the map at Canada.


That's why I specifically referenced:

"Catalina PBY/PBV is not producing (total of 22 factories in 2 locations)"

That plane is not producing.



But it is producing. SO your problem is likely related to supply points. You must turn off enough construction - etc - that there are reasonable totals at Vancouver - to get the 6 there - or Canada. I am producing them - at both locations - without any effort at all - but I NEVER run with everything turned on.


You are really losing me here - are you saying that the scenario is set up so that it can not produce all historically produced aircraft?

When you say "everything turned on" - the only thing I have control over is repairing factories. Does doing that use up HI or something that prevents other factories from running? Remember the Allied player does not have control over production the way the Japanese player does.

My offer of sending a save game to you stands - you can turn off a few things and demonstrate that the plane starts producing. Frankly, I don't know what to turn off that will affect that.

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 16
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 11:51:14 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline 		You are really losing me here - are you saying that the scenario is set up so that it can not produce all historically produced aircraft?


[/quote]

Certainly not. I am saying that you cannot do everything at the same time. As time passes, the Allies get closer and closer to being able to afford anything and everything. It is NOTHING like that in 1941, and it GRADUALLY changes over time. The mechanism for this change was suggested either by you or Andrew - unrepaired industry - and within the crude limits of this ultra-simplistic model - it was a brilliant concept that works well. But there ARE consequences: these are complex and are not identical at every point - so it is very hard to know (or say) exactly what will work - and what not - and what works at point A may well differ from what works at point B.

The general principle is that you cannot, early in the war, set all forms of construction and repair to "on" or "yes" -
and not run your critical production centers below values they require for various things. To the extent you do not get this right, you will tend to see aircraft production in particular fall off: four engine planes most of all, and two engine planes more than single engine ones. Also - I suspect the higher the slot No the plane is, the less likely it will produce at any PARTICULAR base (relative to slot numbers of other planes at the SAME base).

Nothing about this is under modder control - except where you put the production and how high you set it. Nothing about this is the way it should be or what I prefer. It is not a modder's settings that are wrong - even if they are wrong. It is the undocumented way this program works.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/29/2007 11:53:26 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 17
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 11:55:03 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


When you say "everything turned on" - the only thing I have control over is repairing factories. Does doing that use up HI or something that prevents other factories from running? Remember the Allied player does not have control over production the way the Japanese player does.




Not so. You ALSO control building up port levels, airfield levels, and fortification levels of EVERY location. Each of these things upgraded 1 level costs 1000 supply points. This is a serious drain on the supplies of any location - often also of nearby locations. IF you leave ALL these set to "on" - you are CERTAIN to have little aircrat production.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 18
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 11:56:20 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


My offer of sending a save game to you stands - you can turn off a few things and demonstrate that the plane starts producing. Frankly, I don't know what to turn off that will affect that.



You must turn off EVERYTHING NECESSARY to insure good supply levels at production centers. That also includes not loading too much cargo onto ships.

You also must consider your HI situation. EACH airframe costs 18 pp. EACH engine costs 18 pp (well - for Japan it does anyway). HI is used to produce other things - and IF you try to produce ALL ships (which is more than history - you are SUPPOSED to turn off those you don't want - just as they did IRL - land units need HI points - etc. IF you try to have everything at max level - you will not let the Allies produce everything very well.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 12/29/2007 11:59:22 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 19
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 12:49:05 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		I have plenty of supply at the locations in question. In fact, I have poured supplies into the rest of North America from New Orleans.

Heavy Industry is 1,781,423 In Pool Now, and 726,942 Used From Pool.

There is no control for the Allied player to turn off production at factories.



(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 20
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/29/2007 1:23:01 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Sid,

I figured out the production problem and it's pretty ugly.

Looking at the database I noticed that all Japanese planes have their engine types in weapon slot #10. Allied planes have nothing in weapon slot #10, because the Allied production model is abstracted - they don't explicitly require engines.

However - those Allied planes that are not producing do have something defined in weapon slot #10, namely a radar.

As a test I modified the Anson I. You will recall I have verified that the Anson I is not producing in my game even though it has 30 factories. I modified the record for the Anson I to zero out weapon slot #10. Then I ran a test - and the Anson I started production on the very first day.

By the way, in the game I have running (where the Anson I has a radar defined in weapon slot #10), the radar does not show up on the aircraft details display.

There are many Allied aircraft with weapon #10 defined as radar, but because I am early in the game (now May '42) only those few types I noticed and mentioned are yet supposed to be producing, but of course are not. No Allied planes with a weapon #10 defined (as other than zeroed out) will ever be manufactured.

I suppose the radars have to be moved to a different weapon slot.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 21
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/29/2007 5:11:51 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1902
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I figured out the production problem and it's pretty ugly.

Looking at the database I noticed that all Japanese planes have their engine types in weapon slot #10. Allied planes have nothing in weapon slot #10, because the Allied production model is abstracted - they don't explicitly require engines.

However - those Allied planes that are not producing do have something defined in weapon slot #10, namely a radar.

As a test I modified the Anson I. You will recall I have verified that the Anson I is not producing in my game even though it has 30 factories. I modified the record for the Anson I to zero out weapon slot #10. Then I ran a test - and the Anson I started production on the very first day.

By the way, in the game I have running (where the Anson I has a radar defined in weapon slot #10), the radar does not show up on the aircraft details display.

There are many Allied aircraft with weapon #10 defined as radar, but because I am early in the game (now May '42) only those few types I noticed and mentioned are yet supposed to be producing, but of course are not. No Allied planes with a weapon #10 defined (as other than zeroed out) will ever be manufactured.

I suppose the radars have to be moved to a different weapon slot.


Edit: Redundant question.

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 12/29/2007 5:14:01 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 22
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/29/2007 5:18:07 PM   
drw61


Posts: 725
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: Newport, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I figured out the production problem and it's pretty ugly.

Looking at the database I noticed that all Japanese planes have their engine types in weapon slot #10. Allied planes have nothing in weapon slot #10, because the Allied production model is abstracted - they don't explicitly require engines.

However - those Allied planes that are not producing do have something defined in weapon slot #10, namely a radar.

As a test I modified the Anson I. You will recall I have verified that the Anson I is not producing in my game even though it has 30 factories. I modified the record for the Anson I to zero out weapon slot #10. Then I ran a test - and the Anson I started production on the very first day.

By the way, in the game I have running (where the Anson I has a radar defined in weapon slot #10), the radar does not show up on the aircraft details display.

There are many Allied aircraft with weapon #10 defined as radar, but because I am early in the game (now May '42) only those few types I noticed and mentioned are yet supposed to be producing, but of course are not. No Allied planes with a weapon #10 defined (as other than zeroed out) will ever be manufactured.

I suppose the radars have to be moved to a different weapon slot.


I just did a test by putting the start date to June 45 and confirmed this. There is no production that I can see for any aricraft with a radar in slot 10. (As a side note slot 156 PBN/PBY/GST is producing and the radar is in slot 9)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 23
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/29/2007 5:31:14 PM   
drw61


Posts: 725
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: Newport, Washington
Status: offline 		El Cid,
Using AIO 7.788
Slot 3101 38th Infantry Div is showing up at hex 147 / 101,  it should be in New Orleans Hex 148 / 104.

Thanks

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 24
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/29/2007 5:59:34 PM   
drw61


Posts: 725
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: Newport, Washington
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: drw61


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I figured out the production problem and it's pretty ugly.

Looking at the database I noticed that all Japanese planes have their engine types in weapon slot #10. Allied planes have nothing in weapon slot #10, because the Allied production model is abstracted - they don't explicitly require engines.

However - those Allied planes that are not producing do have something defined in weapon slot #10, namely a radar.

As a test I modified the Anson I. You will recall I have verified that the Anson I is not producing in my game even though it has 30 factories. I modified the record for the Anson I to zero out weapon slot #10. Then I ran a test - and the Anson I started production on the very first day.

By the way, in the game I have running (where the Anson I has a radar defined in weapon slot #10), the radar does not show up on the aircraft details display.

There are many Allied aircraft with weapon #10 defined as radar, but because I am early in the game (now May '42) only those few types I noticed and mentioned are yet supposed to be producing, but of course are not. No Allied planes with a weapon #10 defined (as other than zeroed out) will ever be manufactured.

I suppose the radars have to be moved to a different weapon slot.


I just did a test by putting the start date to June 45 and confirmed this. There is no production that I can see for any aricraft with a radar in slot 10. (As a side note slot 156 PBN/PBY/GST is producing and the radar is in slot 9)


using AIO 7.788

Did a second test (June 45) this time with slot 10 radars cleared, I'm now getting production on the aircraft.

witpqs is correct, the radars will need to be moved.

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 25
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/29/2007 6:19:11 PM   
Buck Beach

 

Posts: 1902
Joined: 6/25/2000
From: Covina,CA,USA
Status: offline 		Sid, this isn't related to the subject scenarios, but, the USN VT-17 squadron, with TBFs, is still showing up at San Francisco in CAIO 7.7883 at the begining of the game.  I verified that it had not yet been 9999'd out.


Edit. I have also found that the 49th Pursuit Squadron at Los Angeles, erroneously reflects P-63A Kingcobra a/c, when I think it should be P-40Es (at least that looks like the a/c that arrived in Australia in Feb 42 ).

< Message edited by Buck Beach -- 12/29/2007 9:26:57 PM >

(in reply to drw61)
Post #: 26
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 9:20:04 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1141
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline 		Midgets found - I was looking in the wrong place - thank you.

Mac

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to el cid again)
Post #: 27
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/29/2007 11:02:30 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 13496
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		I just realized that maybe it's because the radars are not available to build the planes.

I do not have time now to test this (I will later). Be advised to test before changing all the plane records!

(in reply to Mac Linehan)
Post #: 28
RE: RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate - 12/30/2007 1:26:01 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I have plenty of supply at the locations in question. In fact, I have poured supplies into the rest of North America from New Orleans.

Heavy Industry is 1,781,423 In Pool Now, and 726,942 Used From Pool.

There is no control for the Allied player to turn off production at factories.





Actually - there is. You don't turn off PRODUCTION - you turn off REPAIR. Some locations repair factories for up to three years - at 1000 points per day per type.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 29
RE: Production Problem - All Types with Radar - 12/30/2007 1:28:07 AM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 14794
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Sid,

I figured out the production problem and it's pretty ugly.

Looking at the database I noticed that all Japanese planes have their engine types in weapon slot #10. Allied planes have nothing in weapon slot #10, because the Allied production model is abstracted - they don't explicitly require engines.

However - those Allied planes that are not producing do have something defined in weapon slot #10, namely a radar.

As a test I modified the Anson I. You will recall I have verified that the Anson I is not producing in my game even though it has 30 factories. I modified the record for the Anson I to zero out weapon slot #10. Then I ran a test - and the Anson I started production on the very first day.

By the way, in the game I have running (where the Anson I has a radar defined in weapon slot #10), the radar does not show up on the aircraft details display.

There are many Allied aircraft with weapon #10 defined as radar, but because I am early in the game (now May '42) only those few types I noticed and mentioned are yet supposed to be producing, but of course are not. No Allied planes with a weapon #10 defined (as other than zeroed out) will ever be manufactured.

I suppose the radars have to be moved to a different weapon slot.



OK - I will confirm - and fix. This is good work. It isn't that ugly - it is just undocumented. Like almost everything. I would PAY for a tech manual - but they cannot sell one - it does not exist.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> RHS EOS & EEO 7.78831 erattum and microupdate Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.107