AACW 1.045 Public Beta Patch (Divisional HQ Removal)

[Stonewall]

I do not think that this has been mentioned before, but in 1.047 we get an "army HQ" icon in armies (and not the picture of the general), although in corps, divisions or commands with leaders we get the leaders picture instead (the exception seems to be a command with a leader embedded in a brigade, in which case the icon is the one of the unit that is embedded with the general). Is this WAD ?

I think this is a side effect of the embedded leaders taking on the icon of the type of unit they are embedded with. The Army leaders are essentially part of an embedded brigade...the Army HQ. So, they take on the icon of that unit. I much preferred the original way of showing the leader face (the blacked out face icon) to the new method of using divisional hq units. That said, there's an easy user way to change that. I haven't figured out how to change the army...yet...

[AndrewKurtz]

(1.047) I am unable to create Divisions with the USA in the July 1861 scenario. In turn two of 1861, both Lyon and Sumner are active. The make Division button is not active.

Oddly, if I select Lyon and the one regular unit, the PLUS button is activated. This is before I create a division (which of course I can't). If I also select one of the militia, the PLUS button is disabled.

[Stonewall]

There's a reason for that. The regular unit is capable of having an embedded leader. The militia is not.

Do you have enough resources to create a division? I only play the April scenario so I'm not familiar with the July setup.

[caranorn]

Do you have any locked units in your stack? I believe the create division button is unavailable in such a case.

[AndrewKurtz]

Do you have any locked units in your stack? I believe the create division button is unavailable in such a case.

Nope. Second turn of the scenario and Lyon and company are not locked.

[AndrewKurtz]

There's a reason for that. The regular unit is capable of having an embedded leader. The militia is not.

Do you have enough resources to create a division? I only play the April scenario so I'm not familiar with the July setup.

Checked the resources. Plenty.

[McNaughton]

(1.047) I am unable to create Divisions with the USA in the July 1861 scenario. In turn two of 1861, both Lyon and Sumner are active. The make Division button is not active.

Oddly, if I select Lyon and the one regular unit, the PLUS button is activated. This is before I create a division (which of course I can't). If I also select one of the militia, the PLUS button is disabled.

You can apply generals to brigades, to have them command individual brigades. This is why Lyon and one Brigade can form into a unit (they aren't a division, but a brigade with an assigned commander).

How many divisions can you have on the field at once? In the 1861 scenario, I believe you are limited in the number of divisions you can field at one time (eventually raising to the total). You start with 5 out East, have you reached your division max yet? Also, I have noticed that not every general can create divisions.

[AndrewKurtz]

How many divisions can you have on the field at once? In the 1861 scenario, I believe you are limited in the number of divisions you can field at one time (eventually raising to the total). You start with 5 out East, have you reached your division max yet? Also, I have noticed that not every general can create divisions.

Maybe that's the issue. What is the limit for the USA in late July, 1861? If five, that may explain it.

[jimkehn]

Does anyone know why some Generals can't command divisions? Is it because their senority isn't high enough?? Interesting idea if it is true.

[AndrewKurtz]

Does anyone know why some Generals can't command divisions? Is it because their senority isn't high enough?? Interesting idea if it is true.

Or maybe this what I am seeing. Which Generals?

[caranorn]

I have T. Wood with a seniority of 97 commanding a Division, so I don't think that's the issue.

But I've encountered another issue. In my current game Lyon has formed a division at Rolla Mo with a number of Militia Regiments, Sharpshooter Battalion, some Regular Infantry (Lyon's lone company;-)) and Artillery and his Regular Cavalry Regiment (guess these are the four regular companies he had with him at Wilson's Creek). So all his units are regiments. I formed this division the previous turn and it received the number 7 (3 being Hooker's in the AotP and 6 Wood's under Banks and Patterson), yet now it doesn't show a number, but still seems to act like a division (I was able to attach additional units this turn). So I'm not sure whether there is just a naming problem or whether this is a remnant of the previous dissolving divisions...

[caranorn]

One turn later, having split Lyon's division and reformed it (to remove two Militia Regiments and then add the newly arrived brigades and artillery), the division is once again correctly labeled as 7th Division.

P.S.: Note I didn't form a new division in the meantime, if I had I assume Lyon would have ended up with the 8th or higher numbered division.

[tagwyn]

Pocus: As long as a leader can be subject to being killed or wounded, I do not believe he should be removed by scripted events. After all, you make the scenario effective as of the date it begins. The rest is up to us, the players, i.e Jackson was killed in real life but should not be removed from game, not real life. Larry

[Stonewall]

Maybe that's the issue. What is the limit for the USA in late July, 1861? If five, that may explain it.

Shouldn't be an issue in July. Both the Union and Confederacy should have reached their division caps of 48 and 24 by July. The July scenario looks to be coded right. Its got the maximum divisional limits incorporated in it.

I have no idea what the problem is.

[McNaughton]

Here's a question I don't know has been asked, has anyone noticed the AI building more divisions? Are their commands more efficient than prior to the removal of Divisional HQ units?

[Stonewall]

AI seems to be building more divisions, however, they are not necessarily fully populating them. I see a lot of strength 85-100 ai divisions. I play mainly CSA, so I can't comment on whether the CSA ai is building more divisions. I still also see ai stacks of 5-10 leaders (not in division command) with 40-50 independent brigades/batteries.

If nothing else, the new rule makes organizing ai forces much easier than having to hope there is a HQ unit in a huge unorganized stack. I'm sure that once the kinks in the new rule get ironed out and its a stable portion of the game platform, the ai will be taught how to utilize it properly.

[veji1]

I play with 50 max divisions for the CSA and 99 for the USA, The AI seems to make full use of the new feature : I see many divisions ranging from 100 to 250 AV... It still has problems organising properly Corps within armies, with a balanced dispersion of the force in between them : Sometimes I see a Corps with 8 CPs out of 13 and right beside it an independent force with 25 CPs out of 8...

But I guess once this new, simpler concept is fully implemented, Pocus will be able to focus on making sure the AI uses it properly, ie organising well the sequence of AI actions : Make sure it checks its forces at the beginning of the turn, organises them properly (making divisions, filling them up, making corps and balancing them out, slightly overfill corps rather than having a big independant force), then hands out orders, etc...

There also needs to be a way to implement an effective reinforcement system for the AI : It seems to me it gets confused with all the forces it builds, I guess so hubs or recruiting centers should be implemented for the AI : a stack should check for generals without a command in it, except the first 2 of them, all the others should be sent to the nearest recruitment center or hub (script 4-5 cities for the AI on each side) were troops are gathered an Divs are built... etc.

[Pocus]

Division HQ removal is now officially adopted and 1.05 is underway.

Andrew Kurtz: you lacked one tiny conscript company to fill up the cost, even if you had plenty of money and supplies. So no bugs.

Caranorn: I would like your saved game on this one.

[marecone]

Hi boss ,

How soon shall we get our new patch? Today, tommorow...
You spoiled me

[Pocus]

by underway I mean: within 30 mn

[marecone]

by underway I mean: within 30 mn

Thank you. Amazing

[Pocus]

Done, further problems can be posted in the new 1.05 thread.

Thanks all the volunteers for their participation in improving AACW !