AGEOD Forums

In the game i am playing I happened to kill Grant very early on, before Sherman could arrive and because of that Sherman never showed up for the Union AI. Though the chances of this happening are slim of killing Grant before Sherman arrives this denies The Union one of their Strong leaders early on.

Ouch, that would hurt the war effort. I cannot say that I have seen this myself. Then again I hardly ever see any generals killed. I think I average maybe 1-2 general deaths any game I play. I would have figured on more deaths, as it seemed generals got themselves killed off frequently in the real life ACW.

But then again I can understand the level they are at right now. I mean we only have a certain amount of generals. Granted, I would not expect Grant to be killed off like that though.

yeah i usually do not see a whole bunch of general dieing, however this game i managed to take out somewhere between 8 and 10 Union generals. The AI has them moving deep into southern virginia and Northern North Carolina, so i just trap them and take out 10 thousand men plus a general or two per enemy group lol.

I recently lost an entire CSA Corps led by Longstreet - 5 Generals killed or perhaps taken prisoner in one turn - ouch leure: leure: leure:

Why would Grant getting killed cause Sherman to not show up?

mikee64 wrote:Why would Grant getting killed cause Sherman to not show up?

Cant answer that one as I never play Feds.

Sherman turning up on Grant's Staff is an event-driven thing (I think) which will not happen if Grant is already dead.

Bit like playing the '61 campaign with the AI switched off - Buchanan and the Virginia do not appear because the AI cannot process the event, so Dahlgren and the Monitor do not appear either, and the Union never gets any monitors in the reinforcement pool.

There are a few things in the game which are event-driven and don't happen if conditions are not met for whatever reason.

The Confederates have to capture Norfolk to trigger the monitors and CSA ironclads event that places these in the re-inforcement force pools. So if the AI doesn't capture Norflok....

yeah thats why i was thinking that they should make Sherman appear where ever he first showed up, i know it was not with Grant. or they need to make it so He can appear even if Grant does die.

The Confederates have to capture Norfolk

True and far better put than I managed!

they should make Sherman appear where ever he first showed up

"Grant stood by me when I was crazy, and I stood by him when he was drunk, and now we stand by each other" as Sherman is supposed to have said. Tying the two together seems to be one of those ACW wargame traditions along with making General Lyon (if he survives Wilson's Creek) into a great commander.

deleted

Gray_Lensman wrote:I looked into this earlier this evening and haven't resolved how to change it just yet... It's not just Grant and Sherman.... There are a few other "pairs" also.

Is there a way of having a backup event that fires after a while if the original event doesnt?
ie if Grant is dead the Sherman event doesnt fire so eventually another Sherman event fires.
It would need to check that the first Sherman event hadn't happened.

S! EC

deleted

It wont meet the conditions because Grant isnt there.

I think you could insert a back up location say "SelectRegion $Alexander, IL|CondSkip" into the existing Sherman event and if Grant isnt there he would appear in Cairo instead.

S! EC

deleted

Big Ideas wrote:The Confederates have to capture Norfolk to trigger the monitors and CSA ironclads event that places these in the re-inforcement force pools. So if the AI doesn't capture Norflok....

From Lincoln and His Admirals, it was US Navy Secretary Gideon Welles receipt of "occasional vague intelligence" of the rebel's progress in building an ironclad that impelled him to "prepare a countermeasure" that ended up being the Monitor (p. 133). Would the USA have bothered developing monitor-class ships if the CSA had not initiated their own ironclads?

Chaplain Lovejoy wrote:From Lincoln and His Admirals, it was US Navy Secretary Gideon Welles receipt of "occasional vague intelligence" of the rebel's progress in building an ironclad that impelled him to "prepare a countermeasure" that ended up being the Monitor (p. 133). Would the USA have bothered developing monitor-class ships if the CSA had not initiated their own ironclads?

Great question!
I just quickly looked through two sources (Osprey Union Monitor and Spencer Tucker Blue and Gray Navies).
Both mention that reports about the construction of a rebel ironclad spured the US Congress to quickly approve funds for USN ironclads.
But they also mention that Welles was already a proponent of ironclads, noting the construction of such vessels by the British and French.

I think it would be fair to say that Welles would have pushed for funding of USN ironclads eventually.
The question is how fast the funds would have been approved by the US Congress or even by his own "old-school" Admirals?

sorry Grey i do not have the saved files anymore, at first i didnt think i had killed grant because there was no message, so i did not think about it till later when i noticed that Grant was no where. Then i thought about Sherman who i never saw and figured that he must not have appeared because Grant was dead.

cobraII wrote:sorry Grey i do not have the saved files anymore, at first i didnt think i had killed grant because there was no message, so i did not think about it till later when i noticed that Grant was no where. Then i thought about Sherman who i never saw and figured that he must not have appeared because Grant was dead.

Hi Cobra,have you still looked inside your backup save files,because there will be the last saves normally,otherside if you delete them then there will be no chance to replay the situation for the support.

greetings

Hohenlohe

edit:in one of my games I loose my onestar-general Jackson as his division was dissolved in Grafton due to very bad supply conditions and was nowhere to find onmap...

I dont have any of the files i had already finished the game a victory for the Confederates in 1863. I had Military control of Illinois. while total defense throughout the rest of the South.

deleted

cobraII wrote:yeah thats why i was thinking that they should make Sherman appear where ever he first showed up, i know it was not with Grant. or they need to make it so He can appear even if Grant does die.

Problem is, he fought at Bull Run, then was transferred out west, commanding a proposed movement into eastern Tennessee, then had a breakdown. Have him available for a few months, then yank him and put him back later? Easier to just put him in later on when he will stick around for a while.

deleted

deleted