One feature a day series #4 : Units and Generals

[Pocus]

[ATTACH]24267[/ATTACH]


Units in CW2 are greatly varying in their role and size. When we developed ACW1, some years ago, we really asked ourselves if this was not an error to propose to players units ranging from a few dozen men to large brigades nearing the thousand troopers. We can definitively give the answer now: it works!


[ATTACH]24266[/ATTACH]



But why does it works? Because units are not the smallest entity handled by the game. Units are made of another smaller echelon named elements. These elements are really what matters when you command troops or fight a battle. Elements are much closer in size between each other and this by itself solves a lot of issues in a very natural way. For example takes the concept of frontage or battlefield width to put it in a more understandable way. You don't expect the game to allow an infinity of soldiers fighting at the same time against each other, particularly in cramped places like a fort, a wild and thick forest or in a mountain pass. CW2 handles that pretty well and automatically, because the number of elements allowed to fight is what matters, and not the number of units (imagine 3 divisions against 3 bands of partisans, that would be a short and bloody affair for the partisans in this case!). Command works the same, with bigger units needing more 'command points', so a general will often not be able to command more than 3 divisions worth or alternatively a lot more of smaller units.


Talking about generals, these fellows are very diverse in CW2. Some are Army generals and can command a lot of troops, some are more humble brigadier-generals. They all have three important statistics though: strategic rating, offensive rating, defensive rating. A few also have some special abilities, providing various exceptional effects, like Training Officer, Blockade Runner, Artillery specialist, etc. One of the particularity of CW2 (and the AGE engine series of games in general, pun intended) is that bad generals can't be disposed easily by the player, so that good (but still unknown historically) generals get the best soldiers. If you do so, by removing from command the most senior generals, prepare yourself for a bit of turmoil, as their grumbling will translate in lost victory points and national morale!


There would be much more to say about units and generals. They are one of the pillar of the game and handling them with care and attention, nurturing them even, is one of the joy of CW2. At first you may want to grab troops in huge stacks and throw them at the enemy, to satisfy some hunger for blood... but we really advise you to look at these virtual men in more details, so you get to learn of their strengths and weaknesses. They are definitively worthy of your attention, if only to remember that they are the electronic avatars of people who gave their life for their country, a long time ago.



[ATTACH]24263[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]24264[/ATTACH]

[Quirk]

I like what I have read and seen so far. Looking forward to the next diaries.
What I never got though, is the variety of the units. In none of the AGE games
I always recruited (or tried to) the "strongest" unit (eg. Line infantry, Roman Cohorts etc) of a given type (Inf, Cav, Art) as I never found out why I should use weaker units, even if they were "special" (for example sharpshooters). I hope ACW2 is going to be a bit more explanatory. Maybe there will even be a new battle routine?

[Narwhal]

I like what I have read and seen so far. Looking forward to the next diaries.
What I never got though, is the variety of the units. In none of the AGE games
I always recruited (or tried to) the "strongest" unit (eg. Line infantry, Roman Cohorts etc) of a given type (Inf, Cav, Art) as I never found out why I should use weaker units, even if they were "special" (for example sharpshooters). I hope ACW2 is going to be a bit more explanatory. Maybe there will even be a new battle routine?

It depends on the game, really.

In AJE, the choices are in general obvious [though less so for the fleets], but in ROP you ll go for the most "bang for your short ressources [MP for Prussia, money for Austria] - though it is the same problem - most units are never bought.

In RUS though, I find that choosing the adequate gun (defensive or offensive, mounted or not) is an interesting part of the game, as is division creation. I suspect AACW2 will be the same.

[loki100]

I like what I have read and seen so far. Looking forward to the next diaries.
What I never got though, is the variety of the units. In none of the AGE games
I always recruited (or tried to) the "strongest" unit (eg. Line infantry, Roman Cohorts etc) of a given type (Inf, Cav, Art) as I never found out why I should use weaker units, even if they were "special" (for example sharpshooters). I hope ACW2 is going to be a bit more explanatory. Maybe there will even be a new battle routine?

Wars in America is probably the AGE game where the value of units shifts according to terrain and role. A large army of regulars is pretty useless in certain situations where a small force of irregular or light infantry would rule the battlefield. Pride of Nations does this as well, you really do not want to use the regular army in certain campaigns - or, more accurately, you need to deploy colonial and native units with it, to offset the weaknesses of regular line formations.

agree with Narwhal, RoP, reflecting the clash of large well trained armies, is the one where unit type has the least importance compared to raw power.

I'd guess that this one will sit somewhere between the two in terms of allowing the 'weaker' units their real value in particular situations.

[Quirk]

What I would like is, for all future AGE games, that there are fewer different units with a stronger emphasis on their different roles. For example, a few units of a certain type would give an initiative bonus in wooden terrain or a higher chance to kill enemy generals and so on. So you have to look at the unit setup even more, if you want to gain the upperhand especially vs. armies with more manpower. Or another example: Special skills for desert terrain (like Saladin's light troops against the heavy armored knights of King Guido etc). Well, I think you get what I want to convey

Which reminds me of another feature I would love to see, maybe already for ACW2, that one is getting a notice if the leading general of the enemy army has died or is wounded. I am certain that the generals of the adversary were often quite prominent (by name and uniforms, features), so the news of a special fate would get to own commanders real quick.

[Kensai]

Did this really exist!? Cool!