CW2 and 1.05 ?

[CSARebel]

There is a bug in the patch. It promotes every leader on seniority 1 after u process the turn.

Same problem here.

[AndrewKurtz]

There is a bug in the patch. It promotes every leader on seniority 1 after u process the turn.

Pretty amazing that got through to a final patch. I would have expected at least one turn to have been processed with the final EXE.

[BattleVonWar]

I found that I didn't need to process a turn as the CSA. I could immediately promote any General with 1 Seniority

[Michael T]

This is very annoying, I have been waiting for this patch to start a game for about 6 weeks now. Now another delay I expect...

[kaiser]

Hard to believe something that obvious could get through testing. I'm sure Pocus will take care of it quickly though.

[Stauffenberg]

This is very annoying, I have been waiting for this patch to start a game for about 6 weeks now. Now another delay I expect...

As a scenario designer myself, though certainly not a programmer, I know you will spend most of your time designing and implementing items but are always left with far less time to playtest the result at length... that's what a dedicated forum is for right? To help out.

I noticed this automatic promotion issue myself in a late 1863 game against the AI and took advantage of it... I can be shameless against a PO ("programmed opponent", and I don't subscribe to the notion of artificial intelligence... yet).

I'll carry on playing out this match against Athena who, by the way, has been a wily opponent with surprising strategic choices, and will post any constructive comments that I have. I notice the turn processing is at least twice as fast which is a good thing. But above all, I appreciate the fact that AGEOD does not rest on its laurels with a release and maintains it's focus upon refining it. Certainly a gem like this deserves it. I've played and designed games, published detailed scenarios for over 40 years now and this particular game is a almost the Grail of game design. It really has no peer for the subject at hand--not surprising given the thorny knot involved with modeling the ACW, allowing for the perplexing inertia--as well as an incredible positive impetus derived from a particular general--resulting from commander dynamics and politics.

The thing I like most about this is that it manages to foreshadow WW I as so many others have pointed out. But this was only at the very end around Richmond and Petersburg (apart from the "over the top" line charges of infantry). In the main it manifested a classic mass and maneuver type of warfare, also demonstrated not long after in the Franco-Prussian war. This was the standard for wars between major powers--professional armies fought it out and then a victory was declared and terms were honourably settled. I'll be a bit controversial here and note that Lincoln upped the ante in the CW by deliberately allowing generals like Sheridan and Sherman to decimate civilian assets (Lee and Davis did not)--this did not foreshadow WW I so much as it did WW II which saw the citizenry targeted like never before--e.g. Rotterdam, London, and Dresden, not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I think the crowning achievement of AACW and AACW II is the emphasis upon the personalities and reputation of the generals who fought the battles. That and a meticulous attention to detail, a complete understanding that this is history grognard terrain and, recognizing that, supplying heaps of minutae and historical chrome.

One thing I learned from my own research and work is that changes made to the basic design thereafter can have innumerable unanticipated consequences. Change what seems to be a relatively innocuous integer or dynamic, and somehow it can often directly or indirectly change everything else. Our task here is to supply feedback to refine things.

[BattleVonWar]

Stauffenberg, they will certainly fix this. In the meantime a player could follow the honor system and wait till the promotion event fires for whatever commander.

Also as far as the swath of destruction in more modern warfare. It depended on situations I think. If you view WW1, you see it in Belgium and Northern France to the degree that the Entente demands war reparations that helps WW2 come along some will argue. Also there are whole towns that don't exist all over the European Map... I mean literally they were obliterated. Serb forced March... on and on... Also I think if you imagine the South never really got much Yankee Real Estate(Maryland in places was hopeful to rise on the side of the Confederacy when invaded) PA, was not held long and so strategies naturally to end things more quickly were realistically different. If the South was invading the North it would have likely employed more aggressive strategies of destruction. At least in my opinion. It's raiders certainly were destructive in "certain isolated locations."

[Pocus]

Sadly this is a debug setting left in the code just before creating the final 1.05 EXE and as this is not readily noticeable (no crash or message), it got through, this is quite unfortunate indeed.

[Projekt Pasha]

How long until we can expect a hotfix on this.

[Pocus]

It is now up with Auto-updater and Steam. Posting the link in the main forum right now too