New official 1.12 patch

[Big Ideas]

Playing as the CSA I have noticed the second event of Lyons being on the map before the St Louis Massacre Event too, then Price appeared the next turn. I just figured Lyon was locked. But The Union player might chance some of his moves knowing Lyon would be unlocked next turm. I just figured it was how the program gifted the extra units.

BI

[soundoff]

I just figured Lyon was locked.

BI

No Lyon is not locked and he arrives with his troops. Just would like confirmation that this is WAD as I'm certain in previous versions Lyon did not appear a turn before the St Louis Massacre event fired.

[Pocus]

All I can say is that events like Fort Sumter triggers as it should, so I would say it is WAD.

[Gray_Lensman]

Actually, the St Louis Massacre event had to have occurred the previous turn (regardless of the event dating, due to the order of the events placed in the USA Events file) and is the triggering event for Lyon's appearance event (75% probability). The event that places Lyon is the triggering event for the event which places Price. (i.e. Price does not show up if Lyon doesn't). It's quite possible for Lyon to show up a turn or so earlier than Price due to the date ranging assigned to the events, but as designed, neither Lyon nor Price can show up prior to the St Louis Massacre event itself.

What may be confusing the issue is that the St Louis Massacre event is "announced" in all 3 events, though the event itself had already fired the previous turn. Evidently, you guys missed the previous turn's "announcement", but are seeing the "repeat" "announcements" as Price and Lyon's forces are placed. Basically, the original event author tied the "announcement" of the St Louis Massacre to all 3 events. The "Headline" is identical for all three events, but the "newspaper" text is identical only for the massacre event and Lyon, with Price having his own "newspaper" text.

I'll place this on my to do list for "straightening out" and get to it probably next patch. (not this current beta patch). I never really liked the 75% probability for Lyon anyhow. My reasoning... Sherman was out for a while for misperceived insanity charges. Should I assign a percentage chance that he might not show up because the higher ups continued to think he was insane? Definitely not, obviously... So since Lyon and Price were both active generals in the war, they should both show up 100% of the time.

[soundoff]

Many thanks for the explanation Gray

[arsan]

Actually, the St Louis Massacre event had to have occurred the previous turn (regardless of the event dating, due to the order of the events placed in the USA Events file) and is the triggering event for Lyon's appearance event (75% probability). The event that places Lyon is the triggering event for the event which places Price. (i.e. Price does not show up if Lyon doesn't). It's quite possible for Lyon to show up a turn or so earlier than Price due to the date ranging assigned to the events, but as designed, neither Lyon nor Price can show up prior to the St Louis Massacre event itself.

What may be confusing the issue is that the St Louis Massacre event is "announced" in all 3 events, though the event itself had already fired the previous turn. Evidently, you guys missed the previous turn's "announcement", but are seeing the "repeat" "announcements" as Price and Lyon's forces are placed. Basically, the original event author tied the "announcement" of the St Louis Massacre to all 3 events. The "Headline" is identical for all three events, but the "newspaper" text is identical only for the massacre event and Lyon, with Price having his own "newspaper" text.

I'll place this on my to do list for "straightening out" and get to it probably next patch. (not this current beta patch). I never really liked the 75% probability for Lyon anyhow. My reasoning... Sherman was out for a while for misperceived insanity charges. Should I assign a percentage chance that he might not show up because the higher ups continued to think he was insane? Definitely not, obviously... So since Lyon and Price were both active generals in the war, they should both show up 100% of the time.

Agree!
I always hate whet Lyons/Price don't show on my games. To the point of restarting the campaign!
Having a pro USA Missouri don't feel right to me

[Pocus]

By the way there is now the possibility in all AGE games to assign a variable death chance to leaders, for combat. Meaning you can have Lyons appears each time, but he is prone to be killed (say 10% !) each time there is a battle. Same for many of the CSA leaders...

[Gray_Lensman]

By the way there is now the possibility in all AGE games to assign a variable death chance to leaders, for combat. Meaning you can have Lyons appears each time, but he is prone to be killed (say 10% !) each time there is a battle. Same for many of the CSA leaders...

Cool.

You'll have to post the syntax for this... I'd like to add events for the leaders that were killed in battle that could trigger after their historical death date. Another "To-Do" list addition... hehe

[enf91]

I noticed something too. In the regular campaign game, Lyon does not appear if the St. Louis Massacre results in an increase in Union loyalty. However, in the Far West 1861-62 scenario, Lyon exists at the beginning of the game, but the St. Louis Massacre event doesn't fire until the next turn and is always the loyalty increase version (then again, I've played it only 3 times).

[berto]

By the way there is now the possibility in all AGE games to assign a variable death chance to leaders, for combat. Meaning you can have Lyons appears each time, but he is prone to be killed (say 10% !) each time there is a battle. Same for many of the CSA leaders...

IMO, all leaders should be subject to possible death. All of them, from Lee and Grant on down, all of them put themselves in situations where they easily could have been killed.

[Gray_Lensman]

IMO, all leaders should be subject to possible death. All of them, from Lee and Grant on down, all of them put themselves in situations where they easily could have been killed.

But the historical facts were, they weren't. Sorry, Berto, but on this one, I'm drawing the line. I can agree with increasing the possibility for death for those leaders historically killed in a Civil War battle when they live on beyond that historic death as justification for creating an event to increase the possibility of their individual death later in the game, mainly because it seems rather non-historical that they do live on. But I won't go along with increasing the chance for all high ranking Civil War leaders to be killed. This would be a grognard fantasy only and would probably turn most casual gamers off when their high ranking officers were killed.

Something like that would be for a MOD only.

[Pocus]

Beside we would have to have 2 versions, one against the AI and one for PBEM. Because the AI would have big trouble finding replacements for the like of Lee, Grant or Sherman, if killed by a stray shot.

[Jarkko]

Maybe it would be possible to have the following added to the options, so that the player could choose one of them:

* Leaders do not have historical death-dates, but all leaders may die in combat. The more reckless leaders are more prone to die in combat.

* Leaders do not have historical death-dates. One start leaders without a promotion-path may die in combat, and the more reckless leaders are more prone to die in combat. No two or three star leader, or a one star leader which can be promoted to a two star leader, can die in combat.

* Historical death-dates are in use, leaders are removed from game when their historical death-date is reached. Leaders can not die in combat.

* Historical death-dates are in use, leaders are removed from game when their historical death-date is reached. One start leaders without a promotion-path may die in combat, and the more reckless leaders are more prone to die in combat. No two or three star leader, or a one star leader which can be promoted to a two star leader, can die in combat.




One can at least dream of such an option-panel, right?

[Eugene Carr]

Agree!
I always hate whet Lyons/Price don't show on my games. To the point of restarting the campaign!
Having a pro USA Missouri don't feel right to me

Also agree about making sure Lyon/Price appear but would like to keep the permutations of Missouri loyalty.

How about events to bring in Lyon and Price (without their troops?) if the Massacre events dont fire?

This means you get them but you still dont know what if any massacre event you'll get.

S! EC

[Gray_Lensman]

Options would require an entire set of events specifically designed for each choice, something not really worth the effort (for me). Also, additional options might require additional panels to be designed, which according to Pocus is a major PITA, and for AACW, again, not really worth the effort.

Actually, the current way is a good compromise of sorts... The major leaders generally have very little chance of death in the game. This is done for obvious reasons... to keep the casual gamers interested.

Also, the lower level leaders have an easier time of being killed in combat.

When the scenarios are designed, efforts are made to insure that generals that are already dead are not in the intial placement or show up later. Occasionally, however, one of these will be discovered and then I remove him from whichever later scenarios he should not be included in.

With the addition of the new event command (mentioned above by Pocus) a few specific events can be designed for those leaders who are living on beyond their historical death dates to help out even more in this compromise design.

All in all, a pretty good compromise of sorts.

[Gray_Lensman]

Also agree about making sure Lyon/Price appear but would like to keep the permutations of Missouri loyalty.

How about events to bring in Lyon and Price (without their troops?) if the Massacre events dont fire?

This means you get them but you still dont know what if any massacre event you'll get.

S! EC

At the moment, Lyon and Price trigger off the Massacre event itself, so things will have to eventually be reordered... Might be a cool idea however... Untie Price/Lyon from the Massacre event, but tie their troops to the Massacre event. Problem is, the troops are kinda historically tied to the specific regions. If Price/Lyon show up without troops and then move to who knows where, having troops suddenly appear with them wouldn't really do, so the troops would still have to make their appearance in their original region of appearance.

[Eugene Carr]

At the moment, Lyon and Price trigger off the Massacre event itself, so things will have to eventually be reordered... Might be a cool idea however... Untie Price/Lyon from the Massacre event, but tie their troops to the Massacre event. Problem is, the troops are kinda historically tied to the specific regions. If Price/Lyon show up without troops and then move to who knows where, having troops suddenly appear with them wouldn't really do, so the troops would still have to make their appearance in their original region of appearance.

I thought that the Massacre event added the Lyon and Price events.

My idea was to have a Leader event for them that checked if they were already on the map and whether the massacre had taken place ( in case they had been killed already) set for after July 61.
This way if not brought in by the massacre event then they come in similar to other generals.

Actually I wonder now if Prices Missouri Militia should still appear with him even in the latter case?
Actually #2 Shouldnt Prices troops be Missouri rather than Arkansas? even if thats where they appear.

S! EC

[Gray_Lensman]

I thought that the Massacre event added the Lyon and Price events.

My idea was to have a Leader event for them that checked if they were already on the map and whether the massacre had taken place ( in case they had been killed already) set for after July 61.
This way if not brought in by the massacre event then they come in similar to other generals.

Actually I wonder now if Prices Missouri Militia should still appear with him even in the latter case?
Actually #2 Shouldnt Prices troops be Missouri rather than Arkansas? even if thats where they appear.

S! EC

Haven't examined the accompanying troops in detail.

The current "vanilla" events has them as 3 separate events, with Price's event (w/troops) triggering off of Lyon's event (w/troops) triggering off of The St Louis Massacre event (no troops) (75% probability).

[bigus]

New scenario updates are available .....Here

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=118997#post118997

[Easterner]

IMO, all leaders should be subject to possible death. All of them, from Lee and Grant on down, all of them put themselves in situations where they easily could have been killed.

I agree; odds should be that every leader can be killed, perhaps be on a sliding scale of probability. Example:

1/2% for Army
1% Corps
2% Division
3% Brigade
4% Unassigned Leaders

IIRC Albert Sidney was only (real) Army CO KIA. Lee took a slight face wound and in Chancellorsville fighting Joe Hooker got concussed by a cannonball.

[tagwyn]

lucky for Yanks Hancock was around to save the day!! apy: PS: I was NOT there!!

[Dogrobber]

James McPherson also was KIA at the Battle of Peachtree Creek & was commander of the Army of the Tennessee at the time.

[berto]

At the battle of Stones River (Murfreesboro), Rosecrans suffered a very near miss when his uniform was splattered with blood from his chief of staff, Col. Julius Garesché, who was beheaded by a cannonball while riding alongside.

[Note: No longer debating the point, just offering some additional facts.]

[bigus]

At the battle of Stones River (Murfreesboro), Rosecrans suffered a very near miss when his uniform was splattered with blood from his chief of staff, Col. Julius Garesché, who was beheaded by a cannonball while riding alongside.

[Note: No longer debating the point, just offering some additional facts.]

Hooker too at Chancellorsville (near miss) but put out of action.

[Gray_Lensman]

I just found an erroneous line in the Command Chain tutorial that somehow slipped in between the time the files for v1.12 were submitted and then when they were included in this "official" v1.12 patch.

Basically, the second turn 1st tutorial page instructs the player to Click on Sherman, then Proceed to the Next Turn... ending the tutorial prematurely before the user gets a chance to see the rest of the second turn's text instructions. I also slightly reworded some ambiguous text to make it more clear.

Below is a Quick Fix for this problem in .zip format. For those familiar with my Historical Accuracy MOD format, just do the normal unzip after pointing WinZip to .../ACW folder.

For those not so familiar, you can unzip the file LocalStrings_ACW.csv and copy it directly over the file of the same name in your installation. The location path is ...ACW/Settings/LocalStrings_ACW.csv. If you're not comfortable with this, just wait until the v1.12a (RC6) or the official v1.12a update patch is released. It'll have it already in place.

Regards and sorry for any inconvenience.
.

[tagwyn]

Gray: Don't like your new pic. Not that you care at all. t

[Gray_Lensman]

Gray: Don't like your new pic. Not that you care at all. t

You really can't please everyone. However it just might have a tad bit more appeal than your "invisible" pic.

[bigus]

2 Scenario Tutorials have been added in the CW Mod Forum.

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=118997#post118997

[Pocus]

You should tell people what's in these tutorials or I'm unsure many will take a look?

[soundoff]

I've never had this fire so am unsure as to the sequence of events. Now I know in 1.12 there is a bug preventing intervention from going below zero but was/is intervention itself broken?

The reason that I pose the question is that in one of my current games playing as the South I've actually hit the magic mushroom figure of 100 but intervention has not fired. It did not fire on the turn I achieved the 100 maximum figure, nor the next turn. I assumed that on reaching 100 the event would fire automatically. I presume that assumption must be either incorrect or the event itself is broken.