AACW (public beta) code patch 1.16 (beta 8 update October 12)

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

I cranked up my AI activation and detection bonuses and they haven't done anything crazy yet. In fact, I think they're performing better than any 1.15 game I ever played.

[von Sachsen]

I guess the drive for Bellamonte in my game was just a one off then.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

I fixed the events (in the inc and xls).

As for the code problem, the USA are FE counterers so the value you give is reversed and then given to his enemy ... so yes a change of -35 to a nation which is countering the FE variable is a change of +35 (beneficial) to the faction receiving the help of FE, this is WAD.

For the second event, I don't get it. CSA are FE receiver, so -10 should be a penalty, are you sure?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[lodilefty]

Excellent sleuthing job!

And absolutely yes: while a "quick look" at solutions via text file editing is a neat debug tool, the Spreadsheet => csv => splitter path is essential for the finished result. Otherwise, the bug won't stat stomped!

There are many subtle things that occur with events that "call" factions, regions, etc. In a nutshell, the "registers" containing "current selection" are quite finicky...

We're trying to capture these nuances in the AGE Wiki [link in my signature], but a frequent 'debug' step is usually to try a different sequence of actions....

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[caranorn]

I chose 3-Star because Major General is used in-game for 2-Star Generals and a Lieut. General is actually a 4-Star General. I could not find a specific promotional event announcement for a 3-Star General... Besides, I found the 3-Star General more informative for use in-game.

Are you sure? I'd think it should be as follows in AACW:

1-star Confederate major generals and a mix of Union brigadier generals and major generals (in command of a division)
2-star most Confederate lieutenant generals and most Union major generals (in command of corps)
3-star a few Confederate lieutnant generals (Hood, Pemberton and some like jackson who died early) and otherwhise full generals, Union lieutnant generals (in command of armies)
4-star Cooper for the Confederates and full generals for the Union

I wouldn't be astonished if a problem had crept into the game over time. As far as I've always understood it the various AACW ranks are based on commands held (or that could have been held) in the war and not actual ranks. But I assume quite a few other generals gradually slipped into the game just based on their wartime rank...

P.S.: Both sides actually had more or less the same rank system during the war, iirc based on some pre war militia regulations written by Hardee (certainly by a later Confederate general). But the Union rapidly started to diverge from those rules leading to those sometimes confusing rules (and yes, Confederate generals could also command a level up, but usually that was just a temporary situation until a promotion could be ratified or another commander take over)...
P.P.S.: Gray I know you understand the system of ranks in both armies, my P.S.: was just intended for other readers who might be less familiar with the details of the war...

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Eugene Carr]

The game applies a uniform system to both armies (*=division or lower, **=corps or lower,***=Army or lower,****=? or lower)

In reality each army was rather different (US= Brig and Maj Generals until 1864 when Lt. Gen was created to put Grant to top of seniority)
(CSA= Brig, Maj, Lt. and full Generals)

In the 1st post Pocus says

Commander in chief class ability added

what does this mean?

S!EC

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

I just wanted to verify that building units takes much less time. Even Ironclads and Coastal Arty build by the 2nd turn after you order them. They used to take ~4-5 turns I think. This changes gameplay quite a bit.

Also, corps and army portraits often display generic soldier portraits instead of whoever is leading the unit. This isn't a big deal, but it is interesting because I've never seen it do that before.

[bigus]

Does this mean we can have Sherman commanding several armies?

[Eugene Carr]

Does this mean we can have Sherman commanding several armies?

Yes thats what I was really asking

[bigus]

ZOC don’t prevent retreat anymore

Nice!

[kingtaso01]

Just one thing I noted, it seems that Raphael Semmes (Confederate Admiral) get the title General instead of Admiral when promoted to 3-stars

[Pocus]

Yes thats what I was really asking

yes and no... CiC is to be seen has a set of new modifiers given to the entire nation from the ability of a general... Sherman would still command one army (and would not retire to be CiC only btw). This is not meant to be dynamic also, so it would not fit for the ACW I guess.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

Thanks Gray, will check that in the week then.

[tagwyn]

Pocus: May I download 1.16 (beta) and expect it to play smoothly as a new game? Thanks. t

[Pocus]

One bug was spotted dealing with production time, so if you can wait till the end of week, a new patch will be issued. Aside that, everything is ok.

[Pocus]

This is an interface oversight, luckily for AACW it just involved fixing the logic, no actual graphic rework. So fixed.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Pocus]

yes, I did not plan that naval stacks could one day build forts. But yes they can!