I have started to experiment with the RC9 version and I was delighted to find that I can once again destroy my own pointless size 4 and smaller depots. I was then surprised to find that I can also remove a size 1 town.
So beware of raiders.
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Which part are you referring to Durk? Destroying large depots or small towns.
I see no reason why a depot should not be destroyable if under the control of the player wishing to destroy it. Why should a player want to do this? To remove it from or keep it out of the hands of the enemy. There are also historical precedences for this, Manassas , Corinth, Harper's Ferry.
With regards using the Partisan Raid RGD to attack a depots I would first refer to Forrest's Johnsonville Raid in November '64.
Also note that the chances of the RGD being successful depend entirely on the size of the garrison. A d100 (a 100-sided die) is rolled 3 times. All 3 results must be greater than the number of subunits garrisoning the depot.
One thing which could be amended to this would be to only allow the RGD to be played by a unit in the region itself, which would give the defending player a greater ability to defend his depots. After all, raiders are pretty stealthy, so they would still have a chance at sneaking in to play the card.
It helps the game by making depots above level 1 vulnerable to attack and forcing the defending player to put a more historical effort into defending his lines of communication.
A discussion could be made as to whether the d100 implemented through the 3x 'EvalSubUnitCount = DICE_NOT' parameters in the Partisan Raid event is the right choice, or whether the makeup of the raiding force should not also be considered, but I believe the validity of the principle is correct.
With regards to a level 1 towns being destroyed, I'm not sure why this got into the picture and I don't remember this being discussed anywhere. Unless I'm mistaken, the only way this can happen is randomly during a large battle.
I see no reason why a depot should not be destroyable if under the control of the player wishing to destroy it. Why should a player want to do this? To remove it from or keep it out of the hands of the enemy. There are also historical precedences for this, Manassas , Corinth, Harper's Ferry.
With regards using the Partisan Raid RGD to attack a depots I would first refer to Forrest's Johnsonville Raid in November '64.
Also note that the chances of the RGD being successful depend entirely on the size of the garrison. A d100 (a 100-sided die) is rolled 3 times. All 3 results must be greater than the number of subunits garrisoning the depot.
One thing which could be amended to this would be to only allow the RGD to be played by a unit in the region itself, which would give the defending player a greater ability to defend his depots. After all, raiders are pretty stealthy, so they would still have a chance at sneaking in to play the card.
It helps the game by making depots above level 1 vulnerable to attack and forcing the defending player to put a more historical effort into defending his lines of communication.
A discussion could be made as to whether the d100 implemented through the 3x 'EvalSubUnitCount = DICE_NOT' parameters in the Partisan Raid event is the right choice, or whether the makeup of the raiding force should not also be considered, but I believe the validity of the principle is correct.
With regards to a level 1 towns being destroyed, I'm not sure why this got into the picture and I don't remember this being discussed anywhere. Unless I'm mistaken, the only way this can happen is randomly during a large battle.
In this case, is a subunit basically a regiment? So if I have a brigade of 2 infantry, one cavalry, one artillery, as well as an engineer, a supply wagon, and a general, how many subunits is that? Also, if I have just the brigade (presumable 4 subunits), a 0.96^3 chance of destroying the depot is surprisingly high? Even a division (of 18 subunits) has only a (1-0.82^3)=45% chance of stopping the action. In this case, defending a depot by garrisoning seems useless.
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
True, the way the script is currently written makes it very likely that playing the Partisan Raid RGD will succeed even with a division defending it. I can think of 2 things, which could be done to change this.
1. The event can be change to use a different size with which to compare. In fact you can use any one of these operators (=, <, >, <=, >=) and compare with any integer between 0 and 999.
2. There could be a couple of different RGD for conducting a Partisan Raid selectable depending on the number of partisan subunits present. So there could be one RGD for 1-2 partisans, and one for 3-4 partisans, which would have a greater chance at succeeding.
So, the possibilities are not so black and white as they seem at first.
1. The event can be change to use a different size with which to compare. In fact you can use any one of these operators (=, <, >, <=, >=) and compare with any integer between 0 and 999.
2. There could be a couple of different RGD for conducting a Partisan Raid selectable depending on the number of partisan subunits present. So there could be one RGD for 1-2 partisans, and one for 3-4 partisans, which would have a greater chance at succeeding.
So, the possibilities are not so black and white as they seem at first.
Intersting. As someone else pointed out, it helps to think of a depot as including the warehouses it entails and all of the supply routes it pushes. So while a small group of partisans probably couldn't burn down a depot against a defending brigade, it could certainly render that depot useless for a period. With that in mind, I'm not sure what is ideal.
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
In reality, partisans and cavalry often attacked wagon and railroad trains carrying supplies or through their presence blocked the use of roads and railroads, damaged railroads and destroyed bridges used by both. It is only modeled in the game that unopposed enemy units block the movement of supplies through a region or may damage railroads, but have no other affect. With just a couple of well posted partisans the South could block all supplies to a forward location for a turn or more which could bode disaster for the Union, especially if they are on the offensive.
Partisans and cavalry also raided outposts and cities with depots and industry. Sometimes with minor success and others with much larger to devastating affects on Union communications. West Virgina was often raided and much infrastructure damaged. During and after the Atlanta campaign the South hit Sherman's lines of communications, which were always patrolled, doing great damage. But Sherman had bridges and rail lines repaired and running very quickly. The successful raid on Johnsonville was one of the reasons he decided to cut loose from his untenable lines of communications and march to the sea while living off the land.
The game engine doesn't allow raiding and supply to be models in such great detail. Were it even possible, I think many players would be overwhelmed with the task of managing lines of communication up and down a front reaching from the Atlantic to the Mississippi River and beyond.
What the game should allow is affecting lines of communication which at least resemble the affects of raiding, including forcing the Union to realistically protect those lines of communication, and dealing with losses of infrastructure beyond the occasional damage to railroads. The threat of the loss of a depot forced the Union to invest greatly in protecting their supply lines. Without this threat, the Union can ignore most of the raids the South can undertake, which removes one of the few forms of resistance the South retained until the end of the war.
Partisans and cavalry also raided outposts and cities with depots and industry. Sometimes with minor success and others with much larger to devastating affects on Union communications. West Virgina was often raided and much infrastructure damaged. During and after the Atlanta campaign the South hit Sherman's lines of communications, which were always patrolled, doing great damage. But Sherman had bridges and rail lines repaired and running very quickly. The successful raid on Johnsonville was one of the reasons he decided to cut loose from his untenable lines of communications and march to the sea while living off the land.
The game engine doesn't allow raiding and supply to be models in such great detail. Were it even possible, I think many players would be overwhelmed with the task of managing lines of communication up and down a front reaching from the Atlantic to the Mississippi River and beyond.
What the game should allow is affecting lines of communication which at least resemble the affects of raiding, including forcing the Union to realistically protect those lines of communication, and dealing with losses of infrastructure beyond the occasional damage to railroads. The threat of the loss of a depot forced the Union to invest greatly in protecting their supply lines. Without this threat, the Union can ignore most of the raids the South can undertake, which removes one of the few forms of resistance the South retained until the end of the war.
Here is the evidence for the "Raze City" feature. My unit in the size one town of Salem clearly has the Raze structure icon lit, even though Salem has no remaining structures. In the side by side shot, Salem is then removed from the map. In the bottom pic, the icon message for a size two city is not lit, but is named "Raze City".
[ATTACH]33130[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]33130[/ATTACH]
- Attachments
-
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
I had to chew on that for a while--thanks for pointing it out GF.
The idea leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I had to think about why. I concluded that it has more to do with the idea in general of burning out the homes of civilians than anything else. I'd also not like to see the game develop a strategy which makes it a goal to burnout the frontier between the North and South, but probably more because of my first though than anything else.
The North did burn some towns and cities, which before I went looking I wasn't so ware of, Rome GA was burned to the ground when Sherman started his march to the sea, some town in Tennessee who's name escapes be was burned as retribution for some raid the South undertook--in '64 I think it was. Much has been discussed as to whether Sherman intended to burn Atlanta, whether he wanted to avoid it, or whether he knew that if he didn't aggressively work to prevent it his troops would wind up burning it anyway and he was in agreement with that without having to actually state it. And of course there is also much speculation as to whether he intended to allow Columbia SC to burn too, although there is also evidence against this too.
For the game it will be greatly inconsequential other than perhaps harbors which I believe will also be destroyed if a city is burned, which might have had some use for one faction or the other. Aside from that if one faction was using a level 1 city as a depot and the other faction burned the town and depot in a raid for example, there is nothing preventing another depot from being erected in the vary same spot. So the city itself has little importance to game play.
The idea leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I had to think about why. I concluded that it has more to do with the idea in general of burning out the homes of civilians than anything else. I'd also not like to see the game develop a strategy which makes it a goal to burnout the frontier between the North and South, but probably more because of my first though than anything else.
The North did burn some towns and cities, which before I went looking I wasn't so ware of, Rome GA was burned to the ground when Sherman started his march to the sea, some town in Tennessee who's name escapes be was burned as retribution for some raid the South undertook--in '64 I think it was. Much has been discussed as to whether Sherman intended to burn Atlanta, whether he wanted to avoid it, or whether he knew that if he didn't aggressively work to prevent it his troops would wind up burning it anyway and he was in agreement with that without having to actually state it. And of course there is also much speculation as to whether he intended to allow Columbia SC to burn too, although there is also evidence against this too.
For the game it will be greatly inconsequential other than perhaps harbors which I believe will also be destroyed if a city is burned, which might have had some use for one faction or the other. Aside from that if one faction was using a level 1 city as a depot and the other faction burned the town and depot in a raid for example, there is nothing preventing another depot from being erected in the vary same spot. So the city itself has little importance to game play.
-
Cardinal Ape
- General of the Army
- Posts: 619
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:59 am
Captain_Orso wrote:For the game it will be greatly inconsequential other than perhaps harbors which I believe will also be destroyed if a city is burned, which might have had some use for one faction or the other. Aside from that if one faction was using a level 1 city as a depot and the other faction burned the town and depot in a raid for example, there is nothing preventing another depot from being erected in the vary same spot. So the city itself has little importance to game play.
That pretty well sums up why I haven't used the feature when I had the opportunity.
-
DrPostman
- Posts: 3005
- Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:39 pm
- Location: Memphis, TN
- Contact: Website Facebook Twitter YouTube
Captain_Orso wrote:For the game it will be greatly inconsequential other than perhaps harbors which I believe will also be destroyed if a city is burned, which might have had some use for one faction or the other.
I just saw a town be razed in IT but the anchorage remained. I suppose that
represents a landing which would be difficult if not impossible to destroy. If
by 'harbor' you mean the structure in a city I'm sure it will be destroyed along
with the city.
"Ludus non nisi sanguineus"
Bitte schoen, Herr Hauptmann!
A size one town can only hold a garrison of 10 elements before overcrowding happens. A stockade cannot be built in a region with a town, but can hold 25 elements before overcrowding. So one might raze a size one town and put the inhabits in a stockade (so to speak) and garrison the region with a Division plus.
A question I still have is whether a town in a region with a plantation can be razed and the plantation still produce extra GS?
I'm no where near finished with my RC9 experiments, but I have completed the first year of an actual long campaign. Athena did all right in 1861. I used the following settings for AI: Colonel, "Use all Behaviors" on, Normal activation bonus, the recommended low detection with normal aggressiveness and "Give AI more time" on. Here's how things stack up in January 1862:
[ATTACH]33139[/ATTACH]
In the summer of 1861, Colonel Athena laid siege to Fredericktown. MD, with a 1600 power stack under Beauregard. I kept a strong defense of D.C. , but the defenders of Fredericktown held fast and the siege was eventually lifted. Next, a force of about 1400 crossed the Missouri river and besieged Cairo. They assaulted the very next turn before my defenses had been set, but were beaten back. I sent the reserves to Cairo and Athena reinforced her stack to 2000 power. Lyons' Division arrived and engaged the more numerous rebels before the city gates. The battle went to day 2 while I watched in eager anticipation. Both sides lost about 6k men. Lyons withdrew into Cairo and the siege was lifted, as the Confederates were totally exhausted. A really epic scrap! Currently, a smaller force has crossed WV and is besieging Parkersburg. I have cut off their supply route and the gray coats got a blizzard for Christmas.
[ATTACH]33140[/ATTACH]
I did have to load up the CSA side in late May '61 to send a rebel militia regiment to take Norfolk, which Athena did not seem to notice was still flying the Stars and Stripes. However, this was a minor glitch in an otherwise lively game. I only experienced one crash during the processing of a turn (sorry, I didn't think to have error logging on), but it was nothing catastrophic. The turn worked fine after I reloaded. Athena has not (yet) sent a stack to the Canadian border or otherwise done anything foolish. Good job!
A size one town can only hold a garrison of 10 elements before overcrowding happens. A stockade cannot be built in a region with a town, but can hold 25 elements before overcrowding. So one might raze a size one town and put the inhabits in a stockade (so to speak) and garrison the region with a Division plus.
A question I still have is whether a town in a region with a plantation can be razed and the plantation still produce extra GS?
I'm no where near finished with my RC9 experiments, but I have completed the first year of an actual long campaign. Athena did all right in 1861. I used the following settings for AI: Colonel, "Use all Behaviors" on, Normal activation bonus, the recommended low detection with normal aggressiveness and "Give AI more time" on. Here's how things stack up in January 1862:
[ATTACH]33139[/ATTACH]
In the summer of 1861, Colonel Athena laid siege to Fredericktown. MD, with a 1600 power stack under Beauregard. I kept a strong defense of D.C. , but the defenders of Fredericktown held fast and the siege was eventually lifted. Next, a force of about 1400 crossed the Missouri river and besieged Cairo. They assaulted the very next turn before my defenses had been set, but were beaten back. I sent the reserves to Cairo and Athena reinforced her stack to 2000 power. Lyons' Division arrived and engaged the more numerous rebels before the city gates. The battle went to day 2 while I watched in eager anticipation. Both sides lost about 6k men. Lyons withdrew into Cairo and the siege was lifted, as the Confederates were totally exhausted. A really epic scrap! Currently, a smaller force has crossed WV and is besieging Parkersburg. I have cut off their supply route and the gray coats got a blizzard for Christmas.
[ATTACH]33140[/ATTACH]
I did have to load up the CSA side in late May '61 to send a rebel militia regiment to take Norfolk, which Athena did not seem to notice was still flying the Stars and Stripes. However, this was a minor glitch in an otherwise lively game. I only experienced one crash during the processing of a turn (sorry, I didn't think to have error logging on), but it was nothing catastrophic. The turn worked fine after I reloaded. Athena has not (yet) sent a stack to the Canadian border or otherwise done anything foolish. Good job!
- Attachments
-
-
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
I ran a test with Goldsboro in Sampson, NC and the effect was perhaps perceptible. I added the region specifics before and then after the city was razed.
[ATTACH]33141[/ATTACH]
The region still produces one recruit without the city. The recruit was part of the plantation message along with the 75 food. Therefore, the 75 food must also still be produced or I didn't ace Logic 101.
Booyah!
[ATTACH]33142[/ATTACH]
Kearny commanded four of my famously controversial heavy infantry Divisions (a Marine, a Sharpshooter, two cavalry and the rest line infantry with a cohesion bonus brigade for each) and a Division of artillery as pgr had postulated (fifteen guns in a mix of 12 & 10 pounders with no other elements). +10 NM for a big boost. Athena had marshaled a really big force, so once again kudos to the devs for RC9. Great stuff!
P. S. I had Hooker as commander of the artillery Division and French was in the stack for the artillerist boost, so they totally rocked with 36 to 56 percent chances to hit for the batteries. One battery now has 5 experience stars and Hooker is promotable. Kearny has four XP stars. I really think that heavy infantry Divisions and an artillery Division per stack is the way to go.
[ATTACH]33141[/ATTACH]
The region still produces one recruit without the city. The recruit was part of the plantation message along with the 75 food. Therefore, the 75 food must also still be produced or I didn't ace Logic 101.
Booyah!
[ATTACH]33142[/ATTACH]
Kearny commanded four of my famously controversial heavy infantry Divisions (a Marine, a Sharpshooter, two cavalry and the rest line infantry with a cohesion bonus brigade for each) and a Division of artillery as pgr had postulated (fifteen guns in a mix of 12 & 10 pounders with no other elements). +10 NM for a big boost. Athena had marshaled a really big force, so once again kudos to the devs for RC9. Great stuff!
P. S. I had Hooker as commander of the artillery Division and French was in the stack for the artillerist boost, so they totally rocked with 36 to 56 percent chances to hit for the batteries. One battery now has 5 experience stars and Hooker is promotable. Kearny has four XP stars. I really think that heavy infantry Divisions and an artillery Division per stack is the way to go.
- Attachments
-
-
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
Well that is hard to tell. The region cash and recruit still show up in the ledger, which leads me to believe that the only thing that changed is the town population is no longer accounted. So the 75 food/GS should still be present or the message would be gone when you cursor over the plantation.
After Kearny defeated the CSA armies in Illonois, I was able to send another Corps to Cairo, which was again under siege. Kearny rested his force for 9 days while the other Corps initiated combat. He then MTSG and relieved the siege of Cairo as well.
[ATTACH]33146[/ATTACH]
Here is a rundown of the big picture.
[ATTACH]33147[/ATTACH]
In the meantime, 3-star General Grant landed in Fort Monroe and took Williamsburg with only one Division. The rest of his army arrived by coastal transport, but Colonel Athena correctly reacted to this immediate threat by sending a large defense force to protect the capital at Richmond.
[ATTACH]33148[/ATTACH]
There was one rather interesting development.
[ATTACH]33149[/ATTACH]
So Athena is aggressive, seems to have a plan in the West and is responding to threats against Richmond. At the settings I'm using, Athena gets $600+, 135 conscripts and 135 WS (plus whatever the blockade runners bring in) per turn and has a fleet of several Steam Frigates and sail Frigates raiding in the sea lanes box. So, you must accept an ahistorical challenge to get an Athena that can do the strategy right, but it's worth it if you are up to the task. Good work!
After Kearny defeated the CSA armies in Illonois, I was able to send another Corps to Cairo, which was again under siege. Kearny rested his force for 9 days while the other Corps initiated combat. He then MTSG and relieved the siege of Cairo as well.
[ATTACH]33146[/ATTACH]
Here is a rundown of the big picture.
[ATTACH]33147[/ATTACH]
In the meantime, 3-star General Grant landed in Fort Monroe and took Williamsburg with only one Division. The rest of his army arrived by coastal transport, but Colonel Athena correctly reacted to this immediate threat by sending a large defense force to protect the capital at Richmond.
[ATTACH]33148[/ATTACH]
There was one rather interesting development.
[ATTACH]33149[/ATTACH]
So Athena is aggressive, seems to have a plan in the West and is responding to threats against Richmond. At the settings I'm using, Athena gets $600+, 135 conscripts and 135 WS (plus whatever the blockade runners bring in) per turn and has a fleet of several Steam Frigates and sail Frigates raiding in the sea lanes box. So, you must accept an ahistorical challenge to get an Athena that can do the strategy right, but it's worth it if you are up to the task. Good work!
- Attachments
-
-
-
-
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
Athena currently has 92% of my land force/half of my naval power and has $1380/1400 conscript companies/144 WSU on hand. She has her replacement pool covered, except for missing 120 chits for heavy, i.e. coastal artillery. I assume that she is keeping a fixed percentage of resources available in case of battle losses.
Perhaps she prefers a fur coat to a bikini.
Perhaps she prefers a fur coat to a bikini.
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
Gray Fox wrote:Athena currently has 92% of my land force/half of my naval power and has $1380/1400 conscript companies/144 WSU on hand. She has her replacement pool covered, except for missing 120 chits for heavy, i.e. coastal artillery. I assume that she is keeping a fixed percentage of resources available in case of battle losses.
Perhaps she prefers a fur coat to a bikini.
What is left in her force pool?
Tripax, Athena has exhausted her WS this turn with $1800+ and over 1400 conscripts left over. So that seems to be the problem.
Pocus, I would gladly send you the save file, but sadly, the ability to attach a saved game file to a post or PM escapes my humble forum skills.
Colonel Athena did a good job of defending Richmond with a force of about 6500 power. Grant used a conservative attack with his army coming from Kent so that he needn't cross a river. I had two Corps set to Offensive in reserve ready to MTSG from Kent. I didn't use synchronized move because of the traffic jam rule that I felt might play a detrimental role to my attack. Grant lost the initial engagement, but then forced Beauregard to retreat.
[ATTACH]33162[/ATTACH]
The next turn one of the reserve Corps assaulted the city defenses for the final victory.
[ATTACH]33163[/ATTACH]
Athena did reasonably well. She had a solid defense of Richmond and kept pressure on in KY and at Cairo. Her main problem was not enough WS. I must say that I had a very enjoyable game with RC9. Bravo to everyone concerned!
Pocus, I would gladly send you the save file, but sadly, the ability to attach a saved game file to a post or PM escapes my humble forum skills.
Colonel Athena did a good job of defending Richmond with a force of about 6500 power. Grant used a conservative attack with his army coming from Kent so that he needn't cross a river. I had two Corps set to Offensive in reserve ready to MTSG from Kent. I didn't use synchronized move because of the traffic jam rule that I felt might play a detrimental role to my attack. Grant lost the initial engagement, but then forced Beauregard to retreat.
[ATTACH]33162[/ATTACH]
The next turn one of the reserve Corps assaulted the city defenses for the final victory.
[ATTACH]33163[/ATTACH]
Athena did reasonably well. She had a solid defense of Richmond and kept pressure on in KY and at Cairo. Her main problem was not enough WS. I must say that I had a very enjoyable game with RC9. Bravo to everyone concerned!
- Attachments
-
-
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
Here's my "for what it's worth" analysis. Athena had about as many combat Divisions as the Union, 33. Of course, she had no artillery Divisions, because she hasn't read pgr's posts no doubt . However, most of her ad hoc Divisions were not very good. Only 15 had the benefit of a sharpshooter and only half had a full complement of 17 elements whereas over 90% of my Divisions had both.
It's not like this is the best Athena could do as the South. She built almost all of her brigades. The CSA can make a full 20 Divisions equipped with a brigade containing 2 line infantry regiments and a sharpshooter, 2 brigades each with a line infantry, a conscript and a cavalry element, and a brigade with 3 line infantry, a conscript and a battery of 6-lbers, topped off with 3 volunteer/militia elements. Another four Divisions could be assembled with a large VA brigade of 6 line infantry, a cavalry element, a 6-lber and a 12-lber battery, a second brigade of 2 conscripts, 2 line infantry, a cavalry element and another 6-lber battery, a sharpshooter and a sailor for river crossing bonus. This would give the CSA a large group of decent, standard Divisions and a reserve stack of four very strong Divisions with more than enough brigades left over to form the necessary garrison Divisions of mostly militia. You just have to put the pieces together.
Just my two Lincoln pennies worth.
. However, most of her ad hoc Divisions were not very good. Only 15 had the benefit of a sharpshooter and only half had a full complement of 17 elements whereas over 90% of my Divisions had both. It's not like this is the best Athena could do as the South. She built almost all of her brigades. The CSA can make a full 20 Divisions equipped with a brigade containing 2 line infantry regiments and a sharpshooter, 2 brigades each with a line infantry, a conscript and a cavalry element, and a brigade with 3 line infantry, a conscript and a battery of 6-lbers, topped off with 3 volunteer/militia elements. Another four Divisions could be assembled with a large VA brigade of 6 line infantry, a cavalry element, a 6-lber and a 12-lber battery, a second brigade of 2 conscripts, 2 line infantry, a cavalry element and another 6-lber battery, a sharpshooter and a sailor for river crossing bonus. This would give the CSA a large group of decent, standard Divisions and a reserve stack of four very strong Divisions with more than enough brigades left over to form the necessary garrison Divisions of mostly militia. You just have to put the pieces together.
Just my two Lincoln pennies worth.
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Gray Fox wrote:8<
Pocus, I would gladly send you the save file, but sadly, the ability to attach a saved game file to a post or PM escapes my humble forum skills.
8<
Congrats on the victory!
To upload files:
--
Prepare your saves for uploading first. If you have a good file manager that your are proficient at using you will have no issues. What you want to upload (I assume you know where the 'game saves' are, so I won't explain that, unless you request it).
Copy the '..\Saves\Scenario_Name' directory to some working directory. In the working directory go into the 'Scenario_Name' directory and delete the Replay files and the BackupX directories not needed. In each remaining BackupX directory delete the Replay files. Now archive the 'Scenario_Name' directory with its content into a compressed format, preferably RAR format. If you cannot do RAR format, ZIP format is better than nothing. Regardless, the resulting archive may not exceed 4.77MB in size.
---
To attach files to a post, click the [Go Advanced] button at the bottom right and wait for the forum posting page to change to the advanced page.
Below the 'Your Message' section is the 'Advanced Options' section. Here you find the [Manage Attachments] button. Click on it to open the 'File Upload Manager'.
At the top right of the 'File Upload Manager' window click on [+ Add Files] button to open the 'Upload Files from your Computer | Website' dialog.
At the bottom of the 'Upload Files from your Computer | Website' dialog click on the [Select Files] button to open the MS Window Open/Select File(s) dialog window.
Navigate to where you have saved you archive(s), select the archive(s) using normal MS Windows key-presses and mouse-clicks for selecting--with <Ctrl><click> you can select multiple files--and click [Open] to complete the dialog. The selected file(s) will now be displayed 'Upload Files from your Computer | Website' dialog window. At the bottom of this, click the [Upload Files] button, to upload the file(s). This may take several minutes, depending the the entire upload size and you Internet connection speed.
Your uploaded file(s) can now be seen in the lower section of the 'File Upload Manager' window under 'Attachments'. At the very bottom right of this window click the [Done] button when you are.
Now when you click [Submit Reply] your uploaded attachment(s) will be visible and dowloadable in your post
[ATTACH]33168[/ATTACH]
Danke schoen!
Danke schoen!
- Attachments
-
- 1861 April Campaign1.zip
- (512.7 KiB) Downloaded 88 times
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests