Randomized generals' ratings

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Randomized generals' ratings

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 >> Randomized generals' ratings

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Randomized generals' ratings - 9/6/2007 2:48:14 AM

olperfessor

Posts: 98
Joined: 4/28/2003
From: New York, N.Y.
Status: offline

I assume that using the historical ratings for generals favors the Confederates, and if this is true, I wonder if this advantage is lost if the player chooses to randomize ratings? That is, are the historical Confederate ratings randomly reassigned, or do both sides simply use the same random number system?

Post #: 1

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/6/2007 2:51:16 AM

Erik Rutins

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline

As far as I know, even in the randomized ratings the CSA gets a slight edge.

_____________________________

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 olperfessor)

Post #: 2

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/6/2007 7:09:52 AM

cesteman

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

The CSA gets the upper hand with randomized setting? I didn't know that.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)

Post #: 3

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/6/2007 4:25:10 PM

Yogi the Great

Posts: 1948
Joined: 4/10/2007
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

I don't know this, but I kind of assumed that they took the same historical ratings in the game for both sides, and just randomized which general has them. So CSA still has the big edge, you just aren't sure which general has what on either side until tested.

_____________________________

Hooked Since AH Gettysburg

(in reply to cesteman)

Post #: 4

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/6/2007 4:54:35 PM

Gil R.

Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

To be more specific, the CSA's historical ratings are better at the outset, but over time the USA's generals get better, with some really good ones (Custer comes to mind) not appearing until 1863 or later. Therefore, it's very much in the CSA player's interest not to have his good generals killed off, because he gets relatively few later in the war. (Remember Lee at Gettysburg telling Longstreet that he couldn't lead the charge because the South had lost too many good generals already. That could become a problem for the CSA player, too.)

< Message edited by Gil R. -- 9/6/2007 4:56:24 PM >

_____________________________

Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.

(in reply to Yogi the Great)

Post #: 5

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/8/2007 10:22:10 PM

Bombsight

Posts: 45
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

Read Douglas S. Freeman's trilogy on "Lee's Lieutenants" for that thought.

_____________________________

Tactics II

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 6

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/10/2007 7:19:22 PM

DrewGator

Posts: 30
Joined: 10/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

(Remember Lee at Gettysburg telling Longstreet that he couldn't lead the charge because the South had lost too many good generals already. That could become a problem for the CSA player, too.)

Conversly, killing off Union generals could work to a USA player's advantage!

_____________________________

DrewGator
Union Army of Occupation
Florida

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 7

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/13/2007 8:50:34 PM

Bombsight

Posts: 45
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

At face value the killing off of Union Generals would be in the interest of the North. Unfortunately in the early years, the best union generals were forced to expose themselves and as a consequence, got themselves shot in the process. Examples are Nathaniel Lyons at Wilsons Creek, Israel Richardson at South Mountain, Phil Kearney at Fairfax following the 2nd Manasas, John Reynolds at Gettysburg and on and on.

_____________________________

Tactics II

(in reply to DrewGator)

Post #: 8

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/15/2007 4:15:25 AM

Gil R.

Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DrewGator

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

(Remember Lee at Gettysburg telling Longstreet that he couldn't lead the charge because the South had lost too many good generals already. That could become a problem for the CSA player, too.)

Conversly, killing off Union generals could work to a USA player's advantage!

Don't forget that even the worst generals can give a boost, so you don't want to get them needlessly killed off.

At the same time, if Fort Monroe gets destroyed in the July scenario then Butler's captured, which makes it that much easier to be able to promote a new 4-star later in the game.

(in reply to DrewGator)

Post #: 9

RE: Randomized generals' ratings - 9/29/2007 4:42:32 PM

decaturkev

Posts: 38
Joined: 1/14/2007
From: Hampton Roads, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whit

Read Douglas S. Freeman's trilogy on "Lee's Lieutenants" for that thought.

A primer for anyone who wants to play as CSA in this game.

_____________________________

Private, CSA
Norfolk Light Artillery Blues

(in reply to Bombsight)

Post #: 10

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Randomized generals' ratings

Page: [1]