goodwood
Lieutenant
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Toongabbie Vic Oz

All these generals

Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:12 am

Hi all, I'm playing the April 61 cam as the USA, and I'm around mid way thru 1863 and I have all these unused Brigadiers. more brig than division and corps. I seemed to spend more time shipping these guys all over the place to unclutter the area around Washington than anything else. There seems to be an excessive amount of them, how do the rest of u guys handle the excessive number of brigadiers?
Happily Grumpy:siffle:

User avatar
Crimguy
Lieutenant
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 4:49 am

Wed Jun 27, 2007 4:43 am

I'm nowhere near 1864 (at about Nov 1861), but I just combine them wherever I'm facing command penalties.

goodwood
Lieutenant
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Toongabbie Vic Oz

Wed Jun 27, 2007 4:55 am

Crimguy wrote:I'm nowhere near 1864 (at about Nov 1861), but I just combine them wherever I'm facing command penalties.


oops I just read your reply I should have said 1863 :nuts:
Happily Grumpy:siffle:

User avatar
arsan
Posts: 6244
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:35 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain

Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:31 am

Hi
I have a (slightly) related question... :siffle:
I think on one of the last patches (I think) was introduced the possibility of embedding leaders with brigades.
Now… what is its use???
Does it have some advantage on combat modifiers, CP…?
Is the same having a stack with a leader and a brigade that a stack with just that brigade with the leader embedded?

And… if you have a surplus of leaders like goodwood report… is embedding them the solution??
Anyhow, I suppose many of the historical leaders (at least the good ones) that comes embedded with a brigade should be separated and used as division and corps commanders, isn’t it?
Thanks!! :cwboy:

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25673
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Wed Jun 27, 2007 4:06 pm

You get additional leaders because the new division rule asks for a leader for each division. At first, you will think you have too much leaders, but soon you will see this is not the case!

Embedding a leader into a brigade provides the same benefit as doing that for in a division: the leader give a boost in combat efficiency in addition to the stats of the corps (or indep stack) commander.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
denisonh
Captain
Posts: 196
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:22 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:55 am

Play some PBEM, and you will find you don't have "enough" leaders..........

User avatar
caranorn
Posts: 1365
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 10:20 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:31 pm

The only thing I regret about the added leaders is that these include 2* generals who can rapidly form new corps and not just divisions. Though the ai seems to profit from this nicely (in my current game I was suddenly facing 4-5 reasonably strong Union Corps around Washington DC in November 1861, imagine how fast I recrossed the Potomac...).
Marc aka Caran...

veji1
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1271
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:27 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:14 pm

I have to agree with Caranorn : except some leaders at the beginning of the game for the Union, and with the exception of 3* generals, in the 1861 Campaigns all leader should appear as 1* when they reached that grade. Give high pol and seniority value depending on their political clout, etc... but let the game flow decide for who gets promoted...

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25673
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:32 pm

Don't forget that the vast majority of players are solo players, so we must tweak a bit reality and propose solutions that can help the AI. The best thing would be to have a PBEM only version of the Grand Campaign.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
sval06
Captain
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:46 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:34 pm

denisonh wrote:Play some PBEM, and you will find you don't have "enough" leaders..........


... Not enough troops as well in that case :p leure: :niark:

veji1
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1271
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:27 pm

Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:35 pm

Probably, or have the AI load a specific scenario and event setup.

Grotius
Captain
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 1:29 am

Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:36 pm

How do I "embed" a leader with a brigade? Does it just mean to put it in the same stack without forming a division?

Also, does putting a leader in the same stack give the rest of the stack the exact same benefits as a leader would provide in a division?

I'm at the very beginning of the grand campaign, playing as the Union. Will it help to send my leaders to places like Harpers Ferry and St. Louis to stack with the garrisons there, even if I can't form divisions yet?

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25673
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:02 pm

To merge a leader in a unit (brigade), just select both and hit the (+) button (second tab).

The benefit is that a leader embedded in a unit give more combat bonus when this unit fight. Division has another benefit, the command cost remains at 4 whatever what you put in.

If you have some excess leaders, you can add some in stacks with militia, they will give some slight combat bonus (the 3-1-1 sort I suppose?) and with some chance can gain an experience point or two, which can't be bad!
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
arsan
Posts: 6244
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:35 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain

Thu Jun 28, 2007 5:04 pm

About embedding leaders on brigades...
It does not have any negative side??
Can this leader function also as a stack commander while embedded??
If so, for any leader not on command of an army, corps o division, its better to always embed them with some brigade/regiment??

For example:
its better a stack of two brigades, one of them with a leader embedded than the same stack with the leader and the two brigades separated, isn't it?


Cheers!

Return to “AGEod's American Civil War”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests