AACW {public beta} patch 1.16 Release Candidate 13c - February 29, 2012

[Leibst]

One question about sea supplies.
If i have a union stack in a city with harbor but not sea coastal, just river adjacent. Do i have sea supplies? if not, but i have a transport in the river zone adjacent to the harbor (and the city) my stack is river supplied?

[bigus]

I tried to generate a scenario and the scenario generates fine but... The focus to start the scenario after a restart is in the top left hand corner of the map instead of where I saved. Setting the map offsets in the excel sheet does not work. I think this has happened before.

Edit: The turns seem off. For instance. The Red River scenario is 7 turns long which is correct. On the first turn it states that it's turn 1 and 7 turns remain, which is O.K. But the scenario ends on the sixth turn.


I would still like to see the following: this is just my personnal preference. I can, have and will modify these to suit me.
-Ocean transports be classified as $OceanMv. ie: Can not move in shallow waters.
-Force levels brought back to 1000 man regiments, 750 for militia and Cav.
-"Victory Points" in the english version which bleeds into the AGEOD symbol.
Can it be changed to "Victory"?
-Same goes for the stalemate screen? which bleeds out of the message box.

[Captain_Orso]

One question about sea supplies.
If i have a union stack in a city with harbor but not sea coastal, just river adjacent. Do i have sea supplies? if not, but i have a transport in the river zone adjacent to the harbor (and the city) my stack is river supplied?

Naval supply only goes to harbors with exit points in coastal regions. Transports out of harbor do not draw supply. They can however give their supply to units in adjacent land regions--I'm not certain if those MUST have supply units, but it will help greatly. If you have a harbor with a river exit point, put your transports into the harbor, for they will help draw supply to the harbor.

Remember though, your supply line along a river can be interdicted by naval units on that supply line or artillery that could bombard--bombardment rules-- shipping on that supply line. So deep raiding along a river will not do much for you if you do not also provide for a secure supply line.

[Captain_Orso]

I tried to generate a scenario and the scenario generates fine but... The focus to start the scenario after a restart is in the top left hand corner of the map instead of where I saved. Setting the map offsets in the excel sheet does not work. I think this has happened before.
8<

I've seen this too, but I thought it was WAD. From my experience, setting the focus for the CSA works, but for the USA you have to set the focus manually while in Edit Mode and then hit Save Game.

[Stauffenberg]

13c is looking very good.

I particularly like the collating of leader characteristics for Lee: a stroke of genius that.

[shi4stone823]

Naval supply only goes to harbors with exit points in coastal regions. Transports out of harbor do not draw supply. They can however give their supply to units in adjacent land regions--I'm not certain if those MUST have supply units, but it will help greatly. If you have a harbor with a river exit point, put your transports into the harbor, for they will help draw supply to the harbor.

Remember though, your supply line along a river can be interdicted by naval units on that supply line or artillery that could bombard--bombardment rules-- shipping on that supply line. So deep raiding along a river will not do much for you if you do not also provide for a secure supply line.

I think once I saw in the discussion that the river supply is only blockaded by ships and (maybe) forts. Entrenched unit with bombardment order only helps to reduce the number needed for blocking the river, but can't cut the supply by itself. Is it still like this in the new patch? And does union unit adjacent to river still receive supply from sea supply pool ?

[Captain_Orso]

I really need to update this in the Wiki, because every time, it takes me for ever to find this info again

The Great Master with the ping-pong ball eyes says: For riverine supply distribution, which use the riverine pool, movement are blocked in regions which have either an enemy naval unit, or are under the guns of a fort (with artilleries) or a troops with positionned artillery (lvl 5+ entrenchments).
A Tricky Riverine Supply Situation

This was before the entrenchment level for bombardment was dropped to level 3+.

The issue with oceanic naval supply being distributed to non-coastal harbors should be fixed in the current beta RC

[lodilefty]

I really need to update this in the Wiki, because every time, it takes me for ever to find this info again

The Great Master with the ping-pong ball eyes says: For riverine supply distribution, which use the riverine pool, movement are blocked in regions which have either an enemy naval unit, or are under the guns of a fort (with artilleries) or a troops with positionned artillery (lvl 5+ entrenchments).
A Tricky Riverine Supply Situation

This was before the entrenchment level for bombardment was dropped to level 3+.

The issue with oceanic naval supply being distributed to non-coastal harbors should be fixed in the current beta RC

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Supply#Supply_Distribution

[Captain_Orso]

Jedi aren't that fast, I though only vampires are that fast

[Stauffenberg]

The spice must flow.

On another tack, I have been experimenting with creating industry in states like Arkansas, MO, and Texas. The factory, as such, can actually randomly appear in any town, even on the Rio Grande, after which any and all Texan artillery will perforce appear there. Once you have the factory appear somewhere, you can remove all industry from the state (it seems) and your factory will stay for the duration of the war.

Even so, sometimes ordered equipment will appear one state over; e.g. for Texan cannon ordered with no factory on-hand in the state, they will often (always?) appear in New Orleans. Whereas, order guns for MO or KY with no factory on the map, and you are SOL.

Would it not be a good idea (and simple to effect) to have factories appear in your larger cities first, outlying or much smaller towns second? Ideally, of course, being able to choose the exact town in advance would be the best.

[Captain_Orso]

The spice must flow.

You called?

On another tack, I have been experimenting with creating industry in states like Arkansas, MO, and Texas. The factory, as such, can actually randomly appear in any town, even on the Rio Grande, after which any and all Texan artillery will perforce appear there. Once you have the factory appear somewhere, you can remove all industry from the state (it seems) and your factory will stay for the duration of the war.

Well, the distribution of factories is .. random, but I think it is still weighted toward larger cities. Being that the towns in Texas are mostly small, there's no metropolis to which industrialization can gravitate. That can leave room for some odd coincidences; like having a factory in Laredo.

Even so, sometimes ordered equipment will appear one state over; e.g. for Texan cannon ordered with no factory on-hand in the state, they will often (always?) appear in New Orleans. Whereas, order guns for MO or KY with no factory on the map, and you are SOL.

Artillery being built out of state still has the 'State of Origin' listed correctly, so you can confirm this the turn of their build.

It's been a while since I've played around with this, but I don't remember having anything other than militia not building, and that too is apparently also already fixed.

I'm not sure if artillery MUST build in the city/town where WS is produced, and you are certainly not restricted to building only as much as can be purchased with the WS produced in said state.

From my understanding it's an either or proposition, so AFAIK artillery should only build out-of-state if they cannot build in-state at all; but otherwise in-state--no exceptions. But my understanding lacks on a certain vigor sometimes

Would it not be a good idea (and simple to effect) to have factories appear in your larger cities first, outlying or much smaller towns second? Ideally, of course, being able to choose the exact town in advance would be the best.

It would be a good idea. Unfortunately, not something that can be controlled in this game.

[lodilefty]

See your Read Me for a review of the build rules.... first page: Raise Rule...

Inn fact, see your ReadMe for a lot of info....

[Captain_Orso]

Yes, yes, if you can read, you have an advantage

Answer to the non-Quiz question: If the unit requires WS to be built in said state, it can only be built in one of the regions in that state producing WS

Now off to bed with me

[jennison]

It would be nice if the stalemate bug could be fixed. I just finished a grand campaign, dominating the Rebels, controlling all objective locations (eh erm.. except for Charleston) and it ended in a stalemate. I think I had over 6,000 victory points more than the Rebs. The game ended in a Stalemate.

[Stauffenberg]

Yes, yes, if you can read, you have an advantage

Yes yes point taken, and I shall slog through the acronyms there, and your emoticons here. Far be it for me to suggest an emoticon-test with the likes of you.

[Stauffenberg]

Inn fact, see your ReadMe for a lot of info....

See above

[Franciscus]

It would be nice if the stalemate bug could be fixed. I just finished a grand campaign, dominating the Rebels, controlling all objective locations (eh erm.. except for Charleston) and it ended in a stalemate. I think I had over 6,000 victory points more than the Rebs. The game ended in a Stalemate.

Hi, jennison

At what turn did the game ended ? What was your (and CSA's) nation morale ?
What exactly was the text on the end screen ? (pic ?)

Regards

[Captain_Orso]

Yes yes point taken, and I shall slog through the acronyms there, and your emoticons here. Far be it for me to suggest an emoticon-test with the likes of you.

Actually, I was referring to myself with the above

To our inspirational leader, Lodilefty


You must think you're living in the Muppet Show at times.
[SIZE="1"]If not, I must be doing something wrong[/size]

GROUP HUG

[jennison]

Hi, jennison

At what turn did the game ended ? What was your (and CSA's) nation morale ?
What exactly was the text on the end screen ? (pic ?)

Regards

This was the 1863 Full Campaign, ended on the last turn (68).

Here's the exact text:

"Stalemate
None of the contenders managed to reach their territorial objectives. This is a stalemate, but you managed to score more than your opponent. Your score: 5360, Opponent score: 2444"

My morale: 141
CSA Morale: 59

The manual states:

"However, if the game ends without reaching an Automatic Victory, the “Victory Points” (VP’s) of each side determines the
winner. The side with more VP’s wins the war"

I held every territorial objective (except for Charleston), and had the most victory points. According to the manual I should have won the war, yet it was a stalemate.

[GraniteStater]

Back in 1.09 or so, I had taken every CSA Objective; it was Jan 1866 and the End screen came on - Stalemate. The South had been really mauled, they probably just had a cranky Cub Scout left, but...

Just ignore it - AI games are your own self-imposed Victory conditions.

[Franciscus]

This was the 1863 Full Campaign, ended on the last turn (68).

Here's the exact text:

"Stalemate
None of the contenders managed to reach their territorial objectives. This is a stalemate, but you managed to score more than your opponent. Your score: 5360, Opponent score: 2444"

My morale: 141
CSA Morale: 59

The manual states:

"However, if the game ends without reaching an Automatic Victory, the “Victory Points” (VP’s) of each side determines the
winner. The side with more VP’s wins the war"

I held every territorial objective (except for Charleston), and had the most victory points. According to the manual I should have won the war, yet it was a stalemate.

Away from gaming computer, but in fact, and IIRC, only a victory by NM is considered a "victory" in the end screen. If you do not gain a NM victory, or a "sudden death" one, the game considers it a "stalemate", although in the text it refers to the score of VP - so, to me I always have interpreted it as a kind of "minor" victory (vs a NM victory, that would be a "major").

Nevertheless, as Granite said, vs AI you can declare yourself the winner
I understand that in MP games, a VP "victory" is considered a victory nonetheless, but that's why house-rules were created

Regards

[jennison]

Thanks for the replies gentlemen. You mention self-imposed victory, that's pretty much the way I felt after that campaign. Even though the screen says stalemate, I dominated the map, defeated all of the major rebel armies, and basically had them cornered in South Carolina. That is a victory in my book.

It would be ideal if text could be altered to have a Victory headline when you outnumber the enemy in VP's (so it doesn't contradict the manual), but it's not really a show stopper.

[lodilefty]

Thanks for the replies gentlemen. You mention self-imposed victory, that's pretty much the way I felt after that campaign. Even though the screen says stalemate, I dominated the map, defeated all of the major rebel armies, and basically had them cornered in South Carolina. That is a victory in my book.

It would be ideal if text could be altered to have a Victory headline when you outnumber the enemy in VP's (so it doesn't contradict the manual), but it's not really a show stopper.

We did an 'override' of these messages in WIA, and will update them for AACW next patch!

Thank you!

[jennison]

We did an 'override' of these messages in WIA, and will update them for AACW next patch!

Thank you!

Great, thank you sir.

[Stauffenberg]

Actually, I was referring to myself with the above

To our inspirational leader, Lodilefty


You must think you're living in the Muppet Show at times.
[SIZE="1"]If not, I must be doing something wrong[/size]

GROUP HUG

In fact you're an emoticon poster-bot for AGEOD ACW, boosting up total hits here daily. Du spinnst oder? Really, it's ok, I'm impressed!

Perhaps they could add you like the paperclip icon Office Assistant drop-down in Word? I've found your elucidations on the occult (meaning, simply, "hidden") in ACW to be outstanding (seriously now)... as opposed to my own hair-pulling efforts in "mastering" the combat dynamics which could, at times, be rendered thus:

[Longshanks]

I agree. When you really REALLY want to know the nuts and bolts behind a AACW function, Captain Orso is one of the main go-to dudes. Be prepared for a thorough answer!

[Captain_Orso]

Awww shucks guys

My head is going to swell so much that I'll have to walk stooped over

When I started playing AACW ran into a lot of frustration not being able to readily find answers to questions or get an overview of how some things work.

It can still be a bit of a challenge at times, but I've learned and still learn an immense amount from contributers to these forums .

I'm glad to be able to give back a bit to the community that made this game not just playable, but one of the greatest playing-challenges and pleasures I know. My hat off to YOU.

[bigus]

Sorry guys, I made a mistake in my post above. See below.

Edit: The turns seem off. For instance. The Red River scenario is 7 turns long which is correct. On the first turn it states that it's turn 1 and 7 turns remain, which is O.K. But the scenario ends on the sixth turn.

I have edited the post. Sorry for the confusion.
I've got to quit posting after I've had a few beers.

[GraniteStater]

Yeah, a few beers aren't enough. It's just like shooting pool - enough lager to get you relaxed; not too many, or your game gets sloppy.

[moni kerr]

According to the Wiki;

Units entering a region with less than 6% military control will automatically be switched to offensive posture, unless the stack consists entirely of irregulars.

But during two consecutive turns I've had stacks moving into 100% Union MC regions not switch to offensive mode. They started in passive mode to recover cohesion, but they were not on evade and they were all regulars.