1 star Gen.

[Jabberwock]

Which mythological figure had to roll a rock up a hill for eternity?

Sisyphus

[W.Barksdale]

I don't believe this is a Sisyphean problem. Perhaps have that small cap at the start representing the difficulties of the transition from peacetime to war. Once the states are fully mobilized and the war machine is running maybe remove it entirely? Say at a specific date.

[runyan99]

That's right. Funny, the Greek and Roman mythology course was supposed to be an 'easy A' in college, so I didn't really take it seriously. Then I got suprised by the final and I think I squeaked out a C in the end. Embarrasing. I think the prof was under pressure to make the course tougher right before I enrolled.

[Jabberwock]

Honestly, I'm in favor of complete removal. If a player has the generals and resources and wants to give everybody his own division, let the player decide that.

I posted the above for three reasons:
1. I like playing with Algebra.
2. Encourage those in favor of a floating cap to think further about how many variables could be considered.
3. See if I could get a reaction from Runyan. I did. Hooray!

[runyan99]

3. See if I could get a reaction from Runyan. I did. Hooray!

I am shocked, sir. Shocked.

[Jabberwock]

You forgot what I'm like after only a 3-month absence?

[Jabberwock]

I am shocked, sir. Shocked.

You forgot what I'm like after only a 3-month absence?

[soloswolf]

I am all for no cap.

If you are changin' history, why should history hinder you?

[Coregonas]

After some observation:

What if a division cap was proportional to the number of ** Generals.
Let X the cap and Y be the **. Then I define X=4Y for all X, Y > 0.

I think a logical conclusion to draw is that the divisions will represent the organisation capacity of your armed forces. When your Generals get better and more numerous so do your divisions.

Thoughts and Comments please.

YES. I agree EXACTLY with your idea.

BUT the other way round.

The number of ** Generals (Also * / ***) that must be promoted automatically depends on the number of men enlisted!!! More men enlisted (and surviving) more divisions needed.

So if the army is going big (because of the game is resulting so) the politicians will promote generals as needed!

[Jabberwock]

I'm playing with the leader mod. I Just created divisions 49-52.

1. The divisions have no names in the silver bar under the leader portrait, and unit tab tooltip displays 'leader_name ()'. Some are also missing in the unit tab itself.

2. The division tab of the roster no longer functions properly.

[lodilefty]

I'm playing with the leader mod. I Just created divisions 49-52.

1. The divisions have no names in the silver bar under the leader portrait, and unit tab tooltip displays 'leader_name ()'. Some are also missing in the unit tab itself.

2. The division tab of the roster no longer functions properly.

Uh oh...

Of interest: the old 'Division HQ' model only specifies 50 US Division names and has a line entry 'Forcepool = 48'....

I wonder if the engine still refers to this model for names.....

[Jabberwock]

Uh oh...

Of interest: the old 'Division HQ' model only specifies 50 US Division names and has a line entry 'Forcepool = 48'....

I wonder if the engine still refers to this model for names.....

I expect it is something like that.

[lodilefty]

I expect it is something like that.

Actually, it's the units file.
I have no way to test, but if your game:

Edit the 300USA_Division.uni file, increasing the forcepool and adding names.
Then back up a turn and try to create them again.....

[lodilefty]

Actually, it's the units file.
I have no way to test, but if your game:

Edit the 300USA_Division.uni file, increasing the forcepool and adding names.
Then back up a turn and try to create them again.....

Would you belive this one? [what old TV character said that?]

Looks more like the Division names are in the Factions folder .fac files. That's also where the Army names are hiding....

[Jabberwock]

Well I just finished testing the first proposed solution. My hard drive has been thrashing all evening, so it takes a little time.

[Aurelin]

Would you belive this one? [what old TV character said that?]

Agent 86. Maxwell Smart

[Jabberwock]

0Union.fac file worked after a(nother) restart. The ledger works fine now. We could just add a division name for the maximum number of generals available to a given faction.

[runyan99]

Say what now? Can you clarify what fix I need to make for the mod?

[Jabberwock]

For now, in 0Union.fac add division names for divisions 51-72.

Here:

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[runyan99]

What about the "ForcePool = 48" statement, should it be increased to whatever limit also?

Good question, but I guess if Jabberwock was able to form more than 48 divisions with that code intact, it must not be limiting. Pocus?

[runyan99]

For now, in 0Union.fac add division names for divisions 51-72.

Here:

That means one more file needed to install the mod. Too bad.

Is this not an issue for the CSA since their divisions are named, not numbered?

[Jabberwock]

I did change ForcePool in the 300USA.uni file when I was testing lodi's suggestions, but I was able to initially create the divisions with it set to 48.

[Jabberwock]

That means one more file needed to install the mod. Too bad.

Is this not an issue for the CSA since their divisions are named, not numbered?

There are already 50 divisions named in their file. No change is needed unless the cap is higher than that.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

Sounds likely. I guess we have to wait for Pocus to wake up to find out. I don't have a non-April game with anything like that number of divisions (yet).

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

I got an idea how to test it, without actually building all the divisions. Back in a bit.

Doh! I must be tired. But I'm messing around with my new exploit at the moment, I'll just let you test this.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[runyan99]

Going back to BoA, I remember that the 1775 campaign did not have any events past 1776, and then the game would refer to the 1776 scenario for data. It is possible that the July 1861 scenario somehow refers back to the April scenario for data in the same way, but I do not see the reference in the scenario file. I don't know, but it is a possibility.

Change the setcombiunits in the April campaign, then start a July campaign and see what happens.