In AACW there was an easy way to sort through your leaders - which was awesome, because how else could you organize all of them?
Is there a way to do that in CW2? For the life of me I cannot find a similar list.
Leader Roster
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
LCcmdr wrote:Yes. Open the ledger and select "Forces." This page has two sides with various filters (like aacw). I believe it's the F1 key.
I'll look again when I'm at home, but I swear I did not see a "leaders" option on the Forces page. I could filter by stacks that had leaders or not, but I didn't see anything about just leaders. But I'll check again. Thanks for the info!
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
What I do is open the ledger to the list of units and then left click "Switch to Forces List", "Click to hide stacks without a leader" and "Force Name". Then I cursor over the command stars icon for each entry to get a by name menu of all the leaders in that stack with their stats.
[ATTACH]37833[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]37833[/ATTACH]
- Attachments
-
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
Gray Fox wrote:What I do is open the ledger to the list of units and then left click "Switch to Forces List", "Click to hide stacks without a leader" and "Force Name". Then I cursor over the command stars icon for each entry to get a by name menu of all the leaders in that stack with their stats.
But that's just ridiculous! Are you really telling me they took that big of a step back from AACW? Leaders are the backbone of the entire game, and the only way to compare them is hover over the stars? WHY? How is that honestly useful? Sure, when looking at a force it's nice to see, at a glance, what the leader is about, but if I just want to sort through generals to gauge where I should send some, or who are the most senior, I have to dig through forces? What about all of the generals in the various leader pools? If I want to see them in list form, do I have to have them separated into individual stacks?
I'll admit I haven't had any time over the last few days to explore the list, but I was honestly hoping I had just missed something really obvious like "Oh, just hit F1 and select the "Leader" button and they are all there!"
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
Yes, that is what I am telling you.
Actually, the feature you mention from AACW is one that I never used. You don't get a lot of three or two stars, so I can pretty much remember who's who. That leaves me with an annual new set of one stars to cull for the good leaders. From the list I mentioned, when you cursor over the stack commander for the named force, you get a menu of all the Generals under the commander in that stack with their stat numbers. This is how it works for the stack of Generals in a pool, too. So if I find a new 3-1-2 I can send him to replace a 3-1-1. The special abilities are not listed, but I actually go to the icon to review what the Generals have going for them. This can be done by cycling through the unit stacks, which I am usually doing anyway.
Actually, the feature you mention from AACW is one that I never used. You don't get a lot of three or two stars, so I can pretty much remember who's who. That leaves me with an annual new set of one stars to cull for the good leaders. From the list I mentioned, when you cursor over the stack commander for the named force, you get a menu of all the Generals under the commander in that stack with their stat numbers. This is how it works for the stack of Generals in a pool, too. So if I find a new 3-1-2 I can send him to replace a 3-1-1. The special abilities are not listed, but I actually go to the icon to review what the Generals have going for them. This can be done by cycling through the unit stacks, which I am usually doing anyway.
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!
Gray Fox wrote:Yes, that is what I am telling you.
Actually, the feature you mention from AACW is one that I never used. You don't get a lot of three or two stars, so I can pretty much remember who's who. That leaves me with an annual new set of one stars to cull for the good leaders. From the list I mentioned, when you cursor over the stack commander for the named force, you get a menu of all the Generals under the commander in that stack with their stat numbers. This is how it works for the stack of Generals in a pool, too. So if I find a new 3-1-2 I can send him to replace a 3-1-1. The special abilities are not listed, but I actually go to the icon to review what the Generals have going for them. This can be done by cycling through the unit stacks, which I am usually doing anyway.
I'm glad that works for you, but I found the leader roster to be an invaluable tool, not just for knowing who was good or bad (especially in games with leader randomization) but for easily assessing the seniority and political situation of the leaders.
I get that I can hover over the stack of generals and get their base stats at a glance, but it does not replace a central roster of leader information. Especially once you've had contact with the enemy and people are gaining and losing superiority (or are KIA).
I'm seriously at a loss on this one. It seems like something that should have been included in the game by default, but now I'll have to keep track of my own leaders outside of the main interface. What a pain-in-the-ass.
Has anyone already created a historical leader spreadsheet for 1.0.6? If so, are you willing to share it?
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
Thanks Gray Fox!
After looking at the file it seems there are no new union generals after 1864? (And only two then?) Is that right?
Granted (no pun intended), by 64 there is probably little use for new generals, but I do find it interesting.
At some point I'll have to add the special abilities to the spreadsheet and repost it on the forum.
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
Gray Fox wrote:You might PM some of the posters in that thread to see if a "latest greatest" file exists.
(1000 posts...woohoo!)
I'll do that. And congrats for joining the Guard of Honor!
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.
-
ArmChairGeneral
- AGEod Grognard
- Posts: 997
- Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:00 am
- Location: Austin, TX, USA
Jerzul,
Interesting point about randomized generals. I am like Gray Fox in that, while I was disappointed in the new Leader management screens, they were at least OK for what I needed and I was able to keep everything else straight in my head after playing through a few times. I haven't ever played randomized generals, though.
(Because I think it is a loser for the South since you have a good chance of ceding your biggest advantage with nothing to compensate. And because historical verisimilitude blah blah blah. Actually, I think you just inspired me to go play it !)
Thinking about randomized generals, I can see how I would miss the old interface if I didn't already have a pretty good idea of who was who.
Fox,
Congrats on the Guard of Honor, and a big Thank You! You didn't just make 1000 posts, you made 1000 GOOD posts! This forum would not be as lively, interesting or useful without your contributions and insights.
Interesting point about randomized generals. I am like Gray Fox in that, while I was disappointed in the new Leader management screens, they were at least OK for what I needed and I was able to keep everything else straight in my head after playing through a few times. I haven't ever played randomized generals, though.
(Because I think it is a loser for the South since you have a good chance of ceding your biggest advantage with nothing to compensate. And because historical verisimilitude blah blah blah. Actually, I think you just inspired me to go play it
!) Thinking about randomized generals, I can see how I would miss the old interface if I didn't already have a pretty good idea of who was who.
Fox,
Congrats on the Guard of Honor, and a big Thank You! You didn't just make 1000 posts, you made 1000 GOOD posts! This forum would not be as lively, interesting or useful without your contributions and insights.
-
Straight Arrow
- General
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2014 5:44 pm
- Location: Washington State
ArmChairGeneral wrote:Fox,
Congrats on the Guard of Honor, and a big Thank You! You didn't just make 1000 posts, you made 1000 GOOD posts! This forum would not be as lively, interesting or useful without your contributions and insights.
Amen!
Fox,
You truly carried a baton in your knapsack.
Congratulations on a rank well earned.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children of one's youth.
-
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 25 guests