Anyway, I must join the chorus of encomia and praise AGEOD to the hills. This baby is complex and deep. Now on to Vainglory of Nations!
Which army units?
A question: Which units are best to attach to your Army HQ's? After reading the manual and going thru the tutorials, I don't see a point to putting combat units--cavalry, infantry, artillery, etc.--with my Army HQs. Why shouldn't I just put them all in the subordinate corps where they're sure to find action? Or will my Army HQ get attacked and destroyed without protection?
Anyway, I must join the chorus of encomia and praise AGEOD to the hills. This baby is complex and deep. Now on to Vainglory of Nations!
Anyway, I must join the chorus of encomia and praise AGEOD to the hills. This baby is complex and deep. Now on to Vainglory of Nations!
Rexor wrote:A question: Which units are best to attach to your Army HQ's? After reading the manual and going thru the tutorials, I don't see a point to putting combat units--cavalry, infantry, artillery, etc.--with my Army HQs. Why shouldn't I just put them all in the subordinate corps where they're sure to find action? Or will my Army HQ get attacked and destroyed without protection?
Anyway, I must join the chorus of encomia and praise AGEOD to the hills. This baby is complex and deep. Now on to Vainglory of Nations!
Because basically, the army unit can act as another corps. Plus, if you use the corps structure to it's full intended extent as a way to spread out mutually supporting units, it is more likely to "March to the sound of the guns" than individual corps units are. For instance, if you're advancing on a broad front, three regions wide, placing a strong army HQ in the middle will provide much more efficient protection to the wings than advancing three corps wide with the HQ in the rear. You should get your Army HQ into action, but definitely not alone. It's a pretty powerful unit, but it can be destroyed, which can really screw you up, and it's also pretty darned expensive.
Another advantage would be being able to use your Army as a relatively independent force. In my current game as the South, I have Lee in army command in Kentucky. I have 3 corps of his off around Louisville, while a couple more are working their way up toward St. Louis. Lee with his quite powerful army unit is advancing on Evansville alone. You need to be careful when dispersing your army this much though, and only do it with very good leaders, as you don't want your corps wandering out of command radius (Press shift to see this area shaded) lest they lose their bonuses.
Rexor wrote:Or, in Lee's case, you might get caught in an Antietam-like situation!
Thanks for the replies, I think I'm putting this all together.
Quite true. Like Lee was, I'm probably a bit overconfident. I'm pretty sure that I have the main forces fixed where I can see them. If something else comes along, I'll probably be in deep trouble.
betas are great
what they says. A small army can be an army without corps, and in this case the Army HQ, full with combat unit, is the army, very mobile with a decent combat bonus.
Or you use them as a reserve corps. They are less powerful than corps, because a corps commander get bonuses (well sometime maluses when the army commander is crappy
) from the army, so this sum up. Army Stack only get the rating of the army commander.
what they says. A small army can be an army without corps, and in this case the Army HQ, full with combat unit, is the army, very mobile with a decent combat bonus.
Or you use them as a reserve corps. They are less powerful than corps, because a corps commander get bonuses (well sometime maluses when the army commander is crappy
) from the army, so this sum up. Army Stack only get the rating of the army commander.
Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."
I kind of figured that
It's not English, is it?
We might use the word 'minuses' as an opposite to 'bonuses' - but I like better the new word I've seen here today.
How do you pronounce it?
Mal-uses? It would sond like your talking about misused something - like MALicious USES.
It's like that word 'Maximal'. We might use 'Maximum', but 'Maximal' might be more accurate, esp. as used in Mathematics.
It's not English, is it?
We might use the word 'minuses' as an opposite to 'bonuses' - but I like better the new word I've seen here today.
How do you pronounce it?
Mal-uses? It would sond like your talking about misused something - like MALicious USES.
It's like that word 'Maximal'. We might use 'Maximum', but 'Maximal' might be more accurate, esp. as used in Mathematics.
Bonus , (bona, bonum)
Boni masculine "nominatif" plural case. (latin langage)
You have 36 possibilities of writing for Bonus in latin langage :
Masculine, feminine, neutral associated with the case following ( in french) :
Nominatif, Vocatif, Accusatif, Genitif, Datif, Ablatif.
Not so evident...
Boni masculine "nominatif" plural case. (latin langage)
You have 36 possibilities of writing for Bonus in latin langage :
Masculine, feminine, neutral associated with the case following ( in french) :
Nominatif, Vocatif, Accusatif, Genitif, Datif, Ablatif.
Not so evident...
La mort est un mur, mourir est une brèche.
Adlertag wrote:Bonus , (bona, bonum)
Boni masculine "nominatif" plural case. (latin langage)
You have 36 possibilities of writing for Bonus in latin langage :
Masculine, feminine, neutral associated with the case following ( in french) :
Nominatif, Vocatif, Accusatif, Genitif, Datif, Ablatif.
Not so evident...
Arrgh!!
You speak like my girlfriend!!
She has studied philology and knows Latin and a little of ancient greek... but the problem is that she loves to talk about it
leure:
She's a nightmare!! ...but i love her!!
Return to “AGEod's American Civil War”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests