Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Expanding the AOP's capacity?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Public Beta Feedback >> Expanding the AOP's capacity? Page: [1]
[Poll]

Expanding the AOP's capacity?


Yes, expand the capacity of armies
  52% (19)
No, keep armies as they are
  47% (17)


Total Votes : 36
(last vote on : 5/16/2007 3:04:28 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/16/2007 7:42:57 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		As we near our "gold" release of the patch, we'll have a few issues that we want to poll you on. Here's the first:

Should we change the rules to allow a single army to hold more
corps/divisions, so that the AoP can be represented as one army instead
of three? (The primary argument against doing this is that the entire
army would then be able to move coherently under the game rules, whereas
forcing the player to divide the army into more than one group, as the
rules are now, more realistically models large armies moving in a
piecemeal fashion.)
Post #: 1
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/16/2007 9:49:16 PM   
BigJ62


Posts: 1800
Joined: 12/28/2002
From: Alpharetta, Georgia
Status: offline 		You could do both, after an army reaches a minimum size restrict its' movement to one province per turn thereby forcing the player to split the super army into smaller armies for extended movement.

Btw great game, I can't stop playing it.

_____________________________

Witp-AE
AeAi…AeAi …AeAi…Long live AeAi.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 2
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/16/2007 10:05:16 PM   
dude

 

Posts: 399
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: Fairfax Virginia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigJ62

You could do both, after an army reaches a minimum size restrict its' movement to one province per turn thereby forcing the player to split the super army into smaller armies for extended movement.

Btw great game, I can't stop playing it.



That's actually not a bad idea... there's another thread about reducing the movement rates of units... but if you reduced it as a unit gets larger that might make some sense.

_____________________________

“Ifs defeated the Confederates…” U.S.Grant

(in reply to BigJ62)
Post #: 3
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/16/2007 10:18:33 PM   
Greyhunterlp

 

Posts: 371
Joined: 12/20/2006
From: The UK (wot wot ole bean)
Status: offline 		I by expanding you mean allowing a relasitic setup, In my AAR I can't get two fully equiped corps into my army.  an Army should be able to hold the maximum for the setup - so I it can hold 3 corps, then It should be 3 corps with filled divisions, rather than the brigade maximum that seems to be messing up the setting up of an army. maybe lower the number of birgades a divison can hold - it was 5 wasn't it? my memories a little hazy but i'm sure i read somewhere that there was

3-5 regiments per brigade
3-5 brigades per division
3-5 divisions per corp

But i could be making that up.

(in reply to dude)
Post #: 4
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/16/2007 10:30:43 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Grey hunter,


North army holds 35 units max.
Corps 15 units max
Division 5 units max
U should be able to get 2 full corps and a added division in a corps container alone or as a division directly under the army, into an army.

For south its
Army holds 42 units max.
Corps 18 units max
Division 6 units max
U should be able to get 2 full corps and a added division in a corps container alone or as a division directly under the army, into an army.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 4/16/2007 10:32:23 PM >

(in reply to Greyhunterlp)
Post #: 5
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/16/2007 10:56:53 PM   
Drex

 

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline 		 







Should we allow Army Groups "XXXXX", evenough they weren't called by this name then, they were used as in Petersburg.

_____________________________

quote:

Col Saito: "Don't speak to me of rules! This is war! It is not a game of cricket!"

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 6
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 12:00:35 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Drex,
I'm rusty on this point -- what exactly are you pointing to in terms of Petersburg?

(in reply to Drex)
Post #: 7
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 12:55:14 AM   
General Quarters

 

Posts: 1059
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline 		If the major reason against larger armies is to represent the disjointed moves of multiple corps, that is not a biggie for me. I would prefer to see a single AoP or, maybe, a largish AoP and a smaller force called Washington Defenses or Dept (District?) of ... or something like that. The DC-Md-NoVa area often had, in effect, two forces, one operating in DC-NoVa and one operating in Western Maryland-Harper's Ferry-Winchester-the Shen. Maybe the smaller force could, in effect, be a force available for that assignment.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 8
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 1:09:39 AM   
Texas D


Posts: 121
Joined: 10/21/2006
From: Republic of Texas
Status: offline 		Could you not allow larger armies but with a relatively low chance of leaving a container behind? Such as an army moving but one of its divisions fail to move.

(in reply to General Quarters)
Post #: 9
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 1:21:52 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		My $.02: I'd prefer the larger army and model the coordination at a smaller scale with some detailed battle or quick battle delays in the future as time allows. Much as I like the idea of modeling that coordination, I'd rather do it below the map level at this scale.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Texas D)
Post #: 10
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 1:35:06 AM   
Kingnothinb

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 3/3/2007
Status: offline 		I agree with Erik. One large army but you can delay out the arrival times of the divisions in HW like what happened many times in the real war.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 11
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 3:33:14 AM   
Drex

 

Posts: 2524
Joined: 9/13/2000
From: Chico,california
Status: offline 		Maybe I'm wrong here, but Chamberlain in his "Passing of the Armies" mentions the Army of the James being present also besides the AOP. Grant also gave Sheridan command of multiple Corps making him an army commander of sorts. The Army of the James was commanded by Ord and comprised the XVIII and X Corps after Butler was relieved by Grant.

_____________________________

quote:

Col Saito: "Don't speak to me of rules! This is war! It is not a game of cricket!"

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 12
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 8:48:47 PM   
General Quarters

 

Posts: 1059
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline 		It should be harder for a large army to actually get all its units into the battle -- a frequent problem especially for some generals.

(in reply to Drex)
Post #: 13
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 9:15:52 PM   
dude

 

Posts: 399
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: Fairfax Virginia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

It should be harder for a large army to actually get all its units into the battle -- a frequent problem especially for some generals.


I agree and I think I posted elsewere that the starting locations/times of divisions in Detaild Combat should be staggered possibly using a general's initititive rating. Do this instead of in one nice line formation but the reason against it was because the CoG players didn't like the way detailed combat started and wanted an easier setup in a nice line formation or grouped together.

The problem is there are two groups of players (I walffle back and forth between both camps) that want a more realistic move and setup, and others that want (for lack of better term sorry...) less realisitc moves and setups. It's why some people like chess... and others checkers...

Neither method is right or wrong and depends on a players preference... which is why I hope the developer's keep adding more "options". Instead of always making it one or the other .... give the player the choice on how to play. Sometimes I'm in the mood for a challange... sometimes I'm not but still want an enjoyable game.

Allow an option for larger armies... allow an option for more random setups for detailed combat... Allow an option for force size to affect movement rates... the more options--- the more people can enjoy their style of play.

Dude

_____________________________

“Ifs defeated the Confederates…” U.S.Grant

(in reply to General Quarters)
Post #: 14
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/17/2007 11:43:23 PM   
Walloc

 

Posts: 3141
Joined: 10/30/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		IMHO a true type of meeting engagement would be good. Like Gettysburg where troops on BOTH sides trinkled on to the battle field. Possibly over days, this could be affected by both over all commander and specific corps/ division commander's initiative. Ofc this would never be any one's deliberate choice. So this check should be made pre where sides are given the choice now. Especially if bigger armies are implimented.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

< Message edited by Walloc -- 4/17/2007 11:45:15 PM >

(in reply to dude)
Post #: 15
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/18/2007 1:30:19 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		I'm hopeful this wouldn't be too hard to do, since the "Feint" option already does it to some degree, but Eric would be the ultimate judge of the actual challenge.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Walloc)
Post #: 16
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/18/2007 5:56:42 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline 		Wow, so far the votes are pretty evenly split between changing things and keeping things the way they are.  Since keeping things the way they are now is easier to do, I reckon I'm inclined to do that unless a stronger consensus for allowing bigger armies emerges.

_____________________________



(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 17
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/19/2007 7:42:19 PM   
General Quarters

 

Posts: 1059
Joined: 12/3/2006
Status: offline 		John F. Kennedy said something to the effect (but sounded better) that, 'if there is not a reason to change, that is a reason to preserve.'

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 18
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/19/2007 8:30:25 PM   
Greyhunterlp

 

Posts: 371
Joined: 12/20/2006
From: The UK (wot wot ole bean)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

John F. Kennedy said something to the effect (but sounded better) that, 'if there is not a reason to change, that is a reason to preserve.'


Isn't that just a fancy way of saying "if it ain't broke. Don't Fix it."?

(in reply to General Quarters)
Post #: 19
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/19/2007 8:43:39 PM   
cesteman


Posts: 845
Joined: 2/15/2004
From: San Luis Obispo, CA
Status: offline 		Why not test the change out and see if the scenario is still playable if it's not too hard to change?
Christian

(in reply to Greyhunterlp)
Post #: 20
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/19/2007 9:21:58 PM   
dude

 

Posts: 399
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: Fairfax Virginia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cesteman

Why not test the change out and see if the scenario is still playable if it's not too hard to change?
Christian


In know in Crown of Glory you could change the settings in the data files to enlarge the container capacities (I modified that a few times for fun) and I think I saw the same settings here in FoF. I will probably give it a try and see how I like FoF with larger armies.



_____________________________

“Ifs defeated the Confederates…” U.S.Grant

(in reply to cesteman)
Post #: 21
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/19/2007 11:18:31 PM   
cesteman


Posts: 845
Joined: 2/15/2004
From: San Luis Obispo, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dude




In know in Crown of Glory you could change the settings in the data files to enlarge the container capacities (I modified that a few times for fun) and I think I saw the same settings here in FoF. I will probably give it a try and see how I like FoF with larger armies.



Let us know how it turns out and how you did it.
Christian

(in reply to dude)
Post #: 22
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/20/2007 2:42:05 AM   
dude

 

Posts: 399
Joined: 5/4/2005
From: Fairfax Virginia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cesteman


quote:

ORIGINAL: dude




In know in Crown of Glory you could change the settings in the data files to enlarge the container capacities (I modified that a few times for fun) and I think I saw the same settings here in FoF. I will probably give it a try and see how I like FoF with larger armies.



Let us know how it turns out and how you did it.
Christian


I won't get a chance until this weekend at the earliest, but it looks like the same values as CoG... you can find the data in the AcwPlayers.txt file. There are rows for each country (USA, CSA, Britain,.. etc) and fields for
MaxContainer0--armies
MaxContainer1--corps
MaxContainer2--fleets
MaxContainer3--cities
MaxContainer4-Divisions
MaxUnitStr

You can use either a txt editor or I use MS Excel to cleanly line up the columns of data. Just change the numbers to a value you want to use. The USA for example starts with a army size of 35 while the CSA starts with a 42. If it's like CoG these should be the values you are limited to in the game for the containers until you buy tech that increases them (like the MaxUnitStr where the USA starts at 3000 while the CSA is 4000).

Dude

ps... one of the thing's I've really liked about CoG and now FoF was the ease of tweaking the values of things in the data files. Since they are all text files you can easily edit them... just make sure you keep a copy of the original files somewhere or better yet create a scenario with your modified files in the ...Forge of Freedom\Scenarios folder. I believe you can copy an existing scenario... rename the folder and just modifiy the file in it or add in the modfied files you need for that scenario. I had my own modified scenarios before the patch because I didn't like the setups... I deleted them once the patch came out though since they were so much better. Take a look in the Data folder... there are lot's of things you can modify if you still arn't happy with the official settings. Don't like a unit type's values.. mod it... don't like the cost of a building type... edit it's value... tweak the values until you find the settings you like.


< Message edited by dude -- 4/20/2007 2:50:50 AM >

_____________________________

“Ifs defeated the Confederates…” U.S.Grant

(in reply to cesteman)
Post #: 23
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/20/2007 4:40:09 AM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		Yep, that's exactly it - note that you need to change this for each scenario folder you want to test it with, IIRC.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to dude)
Post #: 24
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/20/2007 4:48:35 AM   
Twotribes


Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline 		I do this all the time. I leave divisions as is and change Corps to 22 and army's to around 100 depending on how I feel. Usually so I could if I wanted get 5 Corps in an army.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 25
RE: Expanding the AOP's capacity? - 4/21/2007 1:25:59 AM   
cesteman


Posts: 845
Joined: 2/15/2004
From: San Luis Obispo, CA
Status: offline 		Thanks for the food for thought :)
Christian

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Public Beta Feedback >> Expanding the AOP's capacity? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.531