Page 1 of 1

Occupied city that doesn't change owner?

Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 9:35 pm
by Heldenkaiser
This is a file from a ARW campaign game. There is an oddity with Savannah - there are no rebels there, the region is 100% under British control, the attacking force breached the defences early this turn and is on assault status, yet the city still shows as rebel-held. None of us (one a really experienced player) has seen this before. Any suggestions? Thanks. :)

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 7:32 pm
by Heldenkaiser
Hm, nobody? Never seen this before? :innocent:

Neither have I. :bonk:

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 7:58 pm
by GShock
I can't help you with that because i haven't got BOA (and so i can't load the save), i happened to find out that CSA indians couldn't conquer towns, only indian villages.

My example fits?

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:21 pm
by lodilefty
The only thing I can see is that the engine may be confused by all the raiders mixed in with the light inf/dragoons

Certainly the Rangers and Natives cannot capture, but I can't recall if light inf or dragoons can.

Try removing the raiders so that only the legions remain..

I have vague recollecon that a unit/stack assumes the 'character' of the majority model, so perhaps the raiders and dragoons are the issue...

Any nearby militia should seal the deal.... :)

Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 3:04 pm
by Heldenkaiser
In my defense, it's not my section of the battlefield. ;)

Thanks for the reply. I suppose we will check out if using regular troops will give us the city. :innocent: