AGEOD Forums

I remember someone posting some interesting links to video's from the civil war.
I don't have the vids anymore because I bought a new computer since.

Anyway, I started to download some video's from Youtube again.
And I read a comment on Longstreet on Picket's charge somewhere.
Without knowing the full extension of the battle in order to judge the validity of the comment, I wondered if the current game model, has somewhere a roll before battle to determine if one
of the generals involved had an off day, performed under his level, ignored orders or what so ever.
To be really fair, there should be a roll then where a general achieves above his normal doing.

Is this modeled in the game?

Near as I can tell, during a battle there are no rolls which affect a general's performance for the entire day. The activation roll is the closest there is. The drunkard ability is similar, though, in that it makes the activation roll even more important and can give a general a very off day.

Harder activation makes for a lot of off days then
Would be kind of fun if this would be modeled, as long as it doesn't happen often.

It seems like it's already in the mix. Battle results can vary widely and, though I'm a new player, it feels like the algorithm accounts for good days and bad days.

Isn't that the nature of randomized results?

I think that's why we rolled so many dice before computers came to the fore.

tripax wrote:Near as I can tell, during a battle there are no rolls which affect a general's performance for the entire day. The activation roll is the closest there is. The drunkard ability is similar, though, in that it makes the activation roll even more important and can give a general a very off day.

I think the drunkard ability is an awesome example of how an ability mod could work.

You could literally have an ability called "Inconsistent" or somesuch tied to activation roll, which is based on strat value. When failed, leader had a bad day and suffers movement speed, offensive fire, defensive fire and frontage restrictions. When activation succeeds, leader gets bonuses to the previously described modifiers.

I like the idea of Stonewall. Sounds doable within the limits of the game...

minipol wrote:I like the idea of Stonewall. Sounds doable within the limits of the game...

Not only is it doable in theory, I put it in my game last evening and it fires just as expected.

New ability collection called "Inconsistent" which includes two new battle abilities "Shrinking_Violet" and "Clutch_Performer" and 2 new movement abilities "ShirkMov" and "ClutchMov".

"Shirker" results from an inactive roll and results in a 25% malus to offensive frontage and offensive fire. It has a 10% malus to defensive frontage and defensive fire.
"Clutch" results from an active roll and results in a 10% bonus to offensive frontage and offensive fire. It has a 15% bonus to defensive frontage and defensive fire.
The movement abilities result in a 10% bonus/malus to movement based on activation.

Balance wise, I'm not sure how I like it, but in terms of functionality, it works perfectly.

Digging deeper in the ability files and exploring the possibilities, there are really some excellent ways to mimic ACW traits. For example, I've got one called "McClellan." I think modelling this guy with a Strategic rating of "1" misses the point with this guy. He wasn't an inactive general. When he moved, he moved swiftly and with great purpose. Most of the time he had his army in good position, both offensively and defensively. He was overcautious and reluctant/unable to commit his reserves or respond to a success/weakness at a given part of his line. So, in my game, McClellan is a 3-2-2 general with the McClellan ability collection. It has two new battle abilities. One is "Paralyzed" which results from an inactive roll and has 50% malus to his offensive and frontage and a 35% malus to defensive frontage. The second is "Noncommittal" which results from an active roll and results in a 30% malus to offensive frontage and a 15% malus to defensive frontage. The frontage restrictions are meant to simulate his inability to exploit weaknesses and get more than half his army into a fight at any given point.

The ability group also has the skirmisher ability that allows him to retreat in good order and a new cohesion ability that gives a +7 max cohesion and a +15 cohesion recovery rate to troops he commands. This reflects that hsi failures were not a result of his soldiers running or being routed, but due to his own failures to manage them properly.

It needs tweaking, but I love modding the game and seeing how much I can push the engine.

I like the mods you've talked about so far. It really depens the strategic part of the game.
You have to be more cautious when using certain generals.
The way you handle Mac seems better than the 1 for strategic rating. As you said, he was able, just uncertain in certain situations.
That's typical more an ability then a strategic rating/