Newbie questions about combining stacks for combat, etc.

[loki100]

Thanks Ape!

I will probably switch it up then. Although I don't have any issue with any of you guys having that, I might as well not leave it laying around.

You can also use wetransfer - I've shifted to this rather than dropbox. Basically you upload the file and it generates a url link that you can then send on/post.

The file is deleted after a week so its not a permanent link but it also means that there is nothing personal to you associated with the download.

[Captain_Orso]

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B4Z2SFExwYgiUS04R1d5UFY1QWM?usp=sharing

Can someone check to see if this works? There should be 5 battle log files...

Also, can anyone who knows more about how these things work point out if I have left a big security hole or anything by doing it like this?

If you were a spy, or a criminal, somebody who could expect that "people" are looking for them, and wish to do them harm, I'd say, not using a throw-away account was dumb.

Being that, this is not the situation... I think ... , not really. Setup Google's security systems, like two-part password entry, and use a good password(*). This is of course valid for every account you have. Always remember, forums are one of the major source for stolen email addresses. Security is often abysmal to non-existent, and having databases stolen, with email addresses, forum-passwords, full names and post addresses (if recorded) is not a seldom occurrence.

But, that you know, that G-Mail account belongs to YOU, doesn't mean anybody else does. Just because the email address is 'known' doesn't really mean a lot by itself. That being said, there are hackers who mine the internet to look for cross-references. They use an email address to look for other places where it might be found, and look there for any information they can find.

But it is SO unlikely that a hacker would come account this thread, in this forum, and see a link to to that Google Drive account, and then come up with the idea, that it would be worth his while to follow up and try to find more information about your account and you. Why would he do that? I mean, between hacking into the your account, ACG, or the NSA, I'd take the NSA. They probably have better porn on their hard drives.... probably....



Of course the ones who do this the best are Google, Facebook and co., mostly because people give away most of the information they want, for free, with out them having to do anything more than maintain a cookie in your browser, which tells them when you visit a site they are monitoring. Of course, they are not going to try to break into your email account, I mean, Google already has full access to it, and everything in it, but such is the modern world.


(*) What's a good password?
- As long as allowed by the site.
- Uses as many different characters as allowed by the site.
- Is used on one account only. Never use the same password for more than one site nor account.
- Change it regularly.

Further, having a long, complex password means, you cannot memorize it. Which means, you need a safe way to record it. I'm using KeePass. It's fairly simple to use, and has a built in password generator, for which you can setup profiles for generating passwords in accordance with the rules of any site.

It's good that you think about your security while underway in the web, but in this case I wouldn't worry bout it.

[Cardinal Ape]

@Orso, Your post reminds me of one of my all time favorite Onion videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juQcZO_WnsI


@ACG, What 'delayed commitment' setting are you using?


I've been trying to figure out more about how MTSG works, I think the wiki is a bit outdated. One of the things I'm having trouble figuring out is also in your battlelog, ASJ Def Bory Def. I cut out some of the non-relevant lines.

Code: Select all

11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Battle in 576 Gibson, TN Day: 6 Round: 0
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Commit Chance 1001110 Army of Mississippi 50 %, Rolled: 8 Commited
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  TGroup.SetTarget Army of Mississippi is targetting Army of the Tennessee
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  GiveGroupsTargets                     1001110 Army of Mississippi supports 1002916 P. Beauregard' Corps against 1001825 Army of the Tennessee
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Checking combat stance for United States of America in region 576 Gibson, TN
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Preliminary test: No need to retreat from this battle: OppPower: 3283 FacPower: 3577 .
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Checking combat stance for Confederate States of America in region 576 Gibson, TN
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  InCS %: 0 New Retreat Will %: 100
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Ammo %: 100 New Retreat Will %: 100
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Weighted average of Trench levels: 2
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Power of opponents compared to us: 108.96 % Base Retreat Will: 7.00 %
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Dice rolled: 50
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  => We want to stay in battle
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  TGroup.SetTarget Army of the Tennessee is targetting P. Beauregard' Corps
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  Commit Chance 1001110 Army of Mississippi 50 %, Rolled: 83 Not commited
11:36:59 AM  (Reporting)  A battle has started in Gibson, TN


In most rounds of combat there are two sets of commit rolls, these sets are separated by the 'Preliminary test' line. I'm not certain what each set does?

Only corps that succeed in the second set of commit rolls actually fight in that round of combat. The corps that succeed in the first set, but fail in the second do not fight in that round of combat. So I think the second set is the true MTSG rolls.

The first set appears to be some type of roll call that the game uses to determine what the battle might look like before it begins. The game totals up the power of the 'roll call' and decides if both factions want to stay in battle. After that the real MTSG rolls happen.

In that battlelog, The Army of Mississippi says, "Yeah, we got your back Beauregard, start that battle!"
Thinking he has enough forces, Beauregard engages the enemy, but the Army of Mississippi fails to live up to its RSVP.

Is that right?

[ArmChairGeneral]

Once I can test the situation where there are two corps rather than an army and a corps I think we will be able to say more definitively about the two commitment rolls. I am pretty sure you are on track for the first roll: if the second stack does not commit on the initial roll then the first stack will want to retreat.

I think, but am not totally sure, that you are correct and the second commitment roll is to determine whether the non-targeted stack decides if it needs to/can enter combat in support of its allied corps. In later rounds the commit percentage for ASJ's second roll steadily increases. I am not sure whether this is due to the changing situation on the battlefield, a la the wiki's "overmatched" rule, or whether it increments on a round by round basis automatically and it eventually joins (the max observed chance was 95 %) if the battle lasts long enough.

In the ASJ Off Bory Def battles, Grant targets Bory and eventually ASJ makes the commitment roll and supports, but ASJ's Offensive posture still does not allow him to target Grant on the first round.


In no case (and I actually ran four other battles while tinkering to get the setups and log files right) did ASJ engage on the first round, which is what you would expect from what (we think) we know about the Special Army Combat Rule (SACR). I really want to see what happens when we have two regular corps, since the SACR is clearly muddying the waters. ASJ always rolls his 1st round second commit at 50% in the battles I ran and failed in in all the iterations I looked at. I will try running it several times to see if I can find one where he makes the roll on the first round and see what happens.

One interesting thing is that in the ASJ Def Bory Off setup, ASJ's Army simply does not appear in the commitment checks at all. Maybe that is that because an Army can only support a defending stack (regardless of whether the Army is in Off or Def).

[ArmChairGeneral]

Ape, I used whatever the default delayed commitment settings are, I have never touched that slider in all the time I have played the game :-)

[ArmChairGeneral]

Also, bear in mind that I haven't gotten to anything that touches on MTSG yet. Both stacks are in the same region so the MTSG rules don't apply. Proof of this is that ASJ's commit percentages are only 50% where we would expect them to be much higher if he were MTSGing from 0 days away.

I am pretty sure that the low commit chances have to do with the SACR and/or the fact that defensive stacks don't target unless they are chosen by an attacker or are able come in on later rounds in support of a friendly stack. Again, using two corps rather than an Army and a Corps will illuminate this further.

[Cardinal Ape]

Yup, that ASJ Def Bory Att battlelog is a bit weird. You'd think the Army of Mississippi would show up in the commit rolls on later rounds to support Bory's corps. Stranger is how the Army of Mississippi succeeds in retreating twice in two different rounds of the same combat and suffers hits in both retreats.

Ya, the commit chances increase by 10% for each additional round of combat.

I'd recommend messing around with the 'delay' setting once you start testing MTSG. What I've seen has me convinced that the setting supersedes the MTSG rules on the combat explained wiki. The setting, from what I can tell, puts hard clamps on the min and max chance to MTSG. Within the range of the min and max chance, which is about 20%, is where the rest of formula (strategic rating, posture, MC etc) seems to get packed into.

[Cardinal Ape]

Ya, after thinking about it more, I'm pretty sure the first set of 'commit' rolls are a preliminary test to check if a battle should even happen. I'm sure you can recall getting messages about a force retreating before battle in the in-game message box.

I gave the theory a test. Trying to get a retreat before battle message, I ordered Hancock's 500pwr force to move into a region occupied by A.P. Hills 2000pwr corps. Hancock was in DP, so was Hill.

Here is the 'retreat before battle':

Code: Select all

5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 7 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Commit Chance 1007837 W. Hancock' Corps 30 %, Rolled: 13 Commited
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  TGroup.SetTarget W. Hancock' Corps is targetting A.P.Hill' Corps
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  TGroup.SetTarget A.P.Hill' Corps is targetting W. Hancock' Corps
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  GiveGroupsTargets 1007837 W. Hancock' Corps initiating fight against faction 1000002 engaging: 1008044 A.P.Hill' Corps
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  TGroup.SetTarget A.P.Hill' Corps is targetting W. Hancock' Corps
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  1008044 A.P.Hill' Corps new target is 1007837 W. Hancock' Corps
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Checking combat stance for United States of America in region 239 Augusta, VA
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  InCS %: 0 New Retreat Will %: 100
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Ammo %: 100 New Retreat Will %: 100
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Weighted average of Trench levels: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Power of opponents compared to us: 483.54 % Base Retreat Will: 100.00 %
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Dice rolled: 93
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  => We will try to retreat
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  W. Hancock' Corps There is no enemy on offensive, retreat is automatic.
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  W. Hancock' Corps succeeded in retreating
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  W. Hancock' Corps will take 7 hits while retreating (though no hits can be done on round 0)
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Group 1007837 W. Hancock' Corps will retreat in same region Augusta, VA
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Checking combat stance for Confederate States of America in region 239 Augusta, VA
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  No need to retreat from this battle (enemy at 0 power).
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 8 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 9 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 10 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 11 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 12 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 13 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 14 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  (Reporting)  Battle in 239 Augusta, VA Day: 15 Round: 0
5:49:21 PM  --- End of Log --- 

In the above battle and in all other iterations I ran where there is a successful retreat before battle, Hancock's force ends the turn in DP in a 100% enemy MC controlled region. He does not gain 5% MC because no battle really happens. Uh oh...