Commander Loss Question? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> American Civil War – The Blue and the Gray



Message

submariner0 -> Commander Loss Question? (7/31/2007 10:51:40 PM)

I am playing my first long campaign (1861).

I engaged in a very large battle near Alexandria VA (initiated by CSA) in July 1861. I won the battle, but was unable to find a corps commander (Patterson) after the battle. It was confusing for a bit, but I eventually found his divisions stuffed into the Army HQ .. his unit was MIA and he was no longer in the roster list. The rules semed to indicate that 3-star generals at corps and army levels are nearly impossible to kill in battle .. what gives here? Also, if a general is lost during a battle, where are you informed of this? I believe an event of this importance should be included in the event list for the turn and on the battle results screen.



general billy -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 12:09:01 AM)

I think a general has a cross next to its icon if the general dies in an battle report , I also think you will recived a message in the event tab if an General is removed from game.



Gray_Lensman -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 3:34:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: submariner0

I am playing my first long campaign (1861).

I engaged in a very large battle near Alexandria VA (initiated by CSA) in July 1861. I won the battle, but was unable to find a corps commander (Patterson) after the battle. It was confusing for a bit, but I eventually found his divisions stuffed into the Army HQ .. his unit was MIA and he was no longer in the roster list. The rules semed to indicate that 3-star generals at corps and army levels are nearly impossible to kill in battle .. what gives here? Also, if a general is lost during a battle, where are you informed of this? I believe an event of this importance should be included in the event list for the turn and on the battle results screen.


There is an event which fires between the end of July '61 and the first of September '61 that automatically removes Patterson, presumably due to incompetence (Patterson not retained). This event probably occurred and you overlooked the event message. There is an ongoing debate to remove some of these (automatic removal) events. However, think of the alternative: An incompetent Patterson or Fremont remaining in the game and interferring seniority wise with the promotion system all thru the war, regarding Grant, Sherman, etc. and the National Morale points system Union hits that would continually occur.




submariner0 -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 4:23:47 AM)

I probably did miss the message in the log. I was looking for commander deaths.

I think automatic removal of generals (to follow history) should be an option not hard coded every game. I was playing with moderately randomized generals and Patterson was 4 2 2 .. not too shabby. Fremont is 4 0 1 .. also not too bad.

Thanks for the responses.



Bloodybucket28th -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 4:31:56 AM)

That's a good point.  With randomized stats, does it follow that Fremont is a jackass and antagonizes Lincoln, and if so but he wins battles, does Lincoln remove him?

It might be worthwhile to have an option to kill the leader events if randomized stats are chosen.




Gray_Lensman -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 4:33:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheBloodyBucket

That's a good point.  With randomized stats, does it follow that Fremont is a jackass and antagonizes Lincoln, and if so but he wins battles, does Lincoln remove him?

It might be worthwhile to have an option to kill the leader events if randomized stats are chosen.




That would be rather difficult to do in the events, but it would be nice if the event asked you if you would like to remove the specific General in question, sort of like Paradox games events.



Bloodybucket28th -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 5:37:13 AM)

Even better.



WhoCares -> RE: Commander Loss Question? (8/1/2007 3:43:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gray_Lensman
.... However, think of the alternative: An incompetent Patterson or Fremont remaining in the game and interferring seniority wise with the promotion system all thru the war, regarding Grant, Sherman, etc. and the National Morale points system Union hits that would continually occur.

Isn't it so that each time you bypass a General his Senority is reduced, by 4 I think? Sooner or later they should have dropped sufficiently to be no more problem, though admittedly, until than they can cause quite a mess with your NM...



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.984375