I just want to understand how to stack

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Rafiki]

Nice work, Gray

I'm wondering though; can 3-stars even be used as divisional commanders?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[aargh57]

OK, I just made a 3 star a corps commander. Is this a waste? How many corps can an army have?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Rafiki]

Apparently, if you want to abuse your 3-star generals by making them Divisional Commanders, the game will actually let you. Of course, in most cases that general ought to resign in protest.

Priceless

My initial thoughts are there are no limits to the number of corps assigned to an army.

There is a limit; strategic rating of army commander plus something (3? 4?)

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

OK, I just made a 3 star a corps commander. Is this a waste?

Early in the war, you are likely to have more 3 star generals than army HQs to team them with. It doesn't cost anything to create a corps. So this is not a waste.

[Le Ricain]

Priceless
There is a limit; strategic rating of army commander plus something (3? 4?)

The maximum number of corps that can be assigned to an army is the army commander's strategic rating + 6.

[Le Ricain]

The tooltip will tell you if he is active or not. Not sure about an envelope, you may be confusing that for some other item. Hover your mouse over the Leader card itself and the tooltip will state whether he is active or not.

Clarification> The tooltip actually states "This leader can't perform offensive actions this turn." which is a little ambiguous. It means he is actually inactive.

The envelope can be viewed in your examples. The envelope is attached to the upper left hand corner of the stack icon. 'White' envelope indicates that the leader is active and a 'yellow' envelope will indicate that he is inactive. Also the envelope can be viewed in the upper right hand corner of the lower display.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Le Ricain]

Ah Ha, there we have it, +6... We can always depend on Le Ricain to have exact numbers in hand.

Always happy to help.

[lodilefty]

Ah Ha, there we have it, +6... We can always depend on Le Ricain to have exact numbers in hand.

Is this a moddable value?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[lodilefty]

And we can always depend on lodilefty to look for a modding angle!

[Rafiki]

Is this a moddable value?

As far as I could see, no.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Walloc]

Actually, this is a good question as Strat rating +6 does seem a little high, doesn't it?

In game terms i would say yes. I've never used more than 4-5 corps with an army and u can make REAL big armies with that. Usually i would only need 1 army in the east for either sides. Yes, this is a bit questionble, IMO.

In historical terms if u look at union armies as AOTP. Since the corps was "so small" u'd at times have 7-8'ish corps in that army. Thats not far from the SR+6.

IMO how it functions in game is more importandly, tho. So in that view u pose an excellent question Gray.

If Union side was more limited in the size of the corps can grow in the game.
I'd say u might need a SR+6, but since u get the most bonus from being in a corps with the best possible leaders. Those corps tend to grow to max possible in the game, which was large than historical.


Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[arsan]

I think 5 was more the minumum that the maximun number of corps the Union had on th east.
According to Shelby Foote, Pope has 5 or 6 before 2º Manassas (not sure) McCelland 6 on Antietam and Hooker at least 7 before Chancellorsville.
Of course they were smaller than the ones on game ( 2 or 3 divisions max) and with much less men.
With 1000 men per regiment on the game you usually operate with divisions nearly the size of a "real war" corps.
Regards

[Walloc]

In the Gettysburgs campaign u have I,II,III,V,VI,XI,XII and the cav corps. Thats 8.

Meade SR=5+6= 11.

I mean thats not far above. U could even argue, whether in fact if not in name, some of the other detachment is divisional or corps sized give the average of those 8 corps isnt much more than 11-12k per corps. At the battle it self.

But that isnt much the issue IMO. Game doesnt work exactly like history in that respect. Corps usually have more men. In that sense for purely gaming mechanics i still think its an excellent question.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

[lodilefty]

Army of the Potomac at Gettysburg had 8 Corps: 7 Infantry, 1 Cavalry
5 Inf and the Cav had 3 Divisions, 2 Inf had 2 Divisions.
Artillery was Army Reserve and integrated in each Corps and in each Cav Division

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Walloc]

Okay, you guys win... Maybe 6 is not so low after all.

Well thats "just" history Grey. U know, i dont think i've had an army with 8 corps under it and since the corps tend to be bigger i wont say its a bad thing to think over. How big should armies become?

If corps are bigger than in history maybe 6 is to much.
Purely in terms of "curbing" max size an army can be.
Changing corps size would be major work. So maybe the number should be lower.
I mean historicly u have both Shermans and Thomas's army, for some time in roughly the same area. U didnt just merge them, as players would getting the best army commander for most possible troops.
'64 east u have some of the same issues.

Just my thots on it,

Rasmus

[lodilefty]

Well thats "just" history Grey. I know i dont think i've had an army with 8 corps under it and since the corps tend to be bigger i wont say its a bad thing to think over. How big should armies become?

If corps are bigger than in history maybe 6 is to much.
Purely in terms of "curbing" max size an army can be.
Changing corps size would be major work. So maybe the number should be lower.
I mean historicly u have both Shermans and Thomas's army, for some time in roughly the same area. U didnt just merge them, as players would getting the best army commander for most possible troops.
'64 east u have some of the same issues.

Just my thots on it,

Rasmus

Hmmm,
Maybe we need to lower the MaxCP, which would reduce effective number of Divisions [maybe].
It would be nice if MaxCP could be defined separately for each faction, then we could start to modl the 'USA:small corps/CSA:big corps' differences between factions....

oh well, aother modding variable...

[lodilefty]

Well thats "just" history Grey. I know i dont think i've had an army with 8 corps under it and since the corps tend to be bigger i wont say its a bad thing to think over. How big should armies become?

If corps are bigger than in history maybe 6 is to much.
Purely in terms of "curbing" max size an army can be.
Changing corps size would be major work. So maybe the number should be lower.
I mean historicly u have both Shermans and Thomas's army, for some time in roughly the same area. U didnt just merge them, as players would getting the best army commander for most possible troops.
'64 east u have some of the same issues.

Just my thots on it,

Rasmus

Hmmm,
Maybe we need to lower the MaxCP, which would reduce effective number of Divisions [maybe].
It would be nice if MaxCP could be defined separately for each faction, then we could start to modl the 'USA:small corps/CSA:big corps' differences between factions....

oh well, another modding variable...

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[kreheiser]

I finally get forming divisions, thanks to all the help in various posts...is there a way to associate divisions to Corps like you associate Corps to Armies? I've seen that implied in some messages, but can't see how to do it if you can.

[tagwyn]

Except for AGOED!!! lol apy:

[tagwyn]

U can form divisons w/o having a corp/army around. Can u form a corp w/o having an army HQ around? apy: