Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

New Terrain Modifiers Mod

Wed Jul 04, 2007 10:11 pm

I have created a mod to slow the pace of operations in the big BOA campaigns.

The mod adjusts OFFFire/DEFfire and TQ for units by terrain and ground conditions. The mod slows the pace of operations by increasing the value of defense.

There are four major changes.

First is a fairly major modification in the OFFFire/DEFFire of terrain modifiers.
The Mod makes Defensive fire stronger than offensive fire in all terrain-sometime substantially stronger. The range of best defensive terrain, from weakest to strongest, is now clear, woods, forest, cities, wilderness/mountains, swamps, forts. As usual, major and minor rivers have a significant impact when an attacker crosses a river.

Second, I have increased the impact of ground conditions on both offense and defense. It is best to launch an attack in clear or frozen weather. It is substantially more difficult to launch an effective attack in mud or snow conditions. Blizzards negatively impact both offense and defense. Both OFFFire/DEFFire and TQ's were adjusted to reflect the impact of ground conditions when attacking or defending.

Third, militia now consistently defends better than it attacks. There is a gradual merger of offensive/defensive abilities between light infantry militia and regulars as terrain becomes more and more rough. Using militia to face regulars offensively or defensively in clear terrain is still suicide. However as terrain approaches wilderness, mountains, forests conditions, etc, the militia can perform very well offensively or defensively against regulars.

Fourth, forts are substantially stronger than in the past. You can assault and take an undermanned fort without too much trouble or if you have overwhelming odds. However if the fort has a substantial garrison, expect very heavy casualties. It is usually best to seige a fort. Also militia performs very well in forts or cities.

A quick comment on cities. Cities are still good defensive terrain but sometimes the terrain outside of the city can provide a better defensive option. An ideal defensive situation would have very rough terrain in conjunction with rivers.

I am happy with the results playing against the AI. I am also doing additional PBEM testing at this time but it is ready for people to try on their own. I still expect to do some additional tweaking but the mod is basically done unless some new ideas develop.

This mod produces a slower paced game operationally as the defense is more powerful than previously. Terrain and ground conditions need to be considered carefully before launching attacks and strategic offensives. Whether defending or attacking, always look for the right terrain and proper weather conditions for the troops in your armies. And finally, those British blitzs of 1775-1776 are much more difficult to perform when not in open terrain and clear weather. A good American player can make taking Albany a real challenge now.


To install and use the mod:

1. Find your terrain folder within the Gamedata folder of your BOA Folder.
2. Use copy/paste to make a copy of your original terrain folder.
3. Upload the zip file at the bottom of this post.
4. Unzip the file into your original terrain folder
5. Choose overwrite all files. (This mod will overwrite your clear, woods, forest, cities, mountains, wilderness, swamps and fort files.)
6. Restart BOA to ensure your games are using the proper data.

If you wish to play some games using the original terrain modifiers and some with the mod, you will need to have two terrain folders. The folder currently being used in a game needs to be named "terrains". The one not being used, I rename as either terrainsOriginal or terrainsMod dependent on which set of terrain data is contained. Then I simply rename the folders when I need to switch between game.

Any feedback is appreciated. Any solid suggestions on further changes, I will incorporate into this mod.

Enjoy!

PS: Latest terrain mod can be downloaded here. (TerrainMod13July2007)
Attachments
TerrainsMod13July2007.zip
(8.65 KiB) Downloaded 289 times

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25659
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Thu Jul 05, 2007 7:10 am

Its always good to see players modding a game, this is a sure sign it is appreciated. I hope you will get people trying your mod, and who knows it can perhaps incite us to tweak things for BOA gold.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

Plugger
Corporal
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 9:59 pm

Thu Jul 05, 2007 8:53 am

Goodaye,

Excellent mod. As you say, it adds a further dimension to the decision making. One that forces you to think more like a general of the day.

Well done.

Cheers,
Plugger

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:08 pm

Here is the latest update on the Terrain Mod. Terrain effects on Cavalry and Artillery are now updated. Also an increase in the impact of flooded rivers on movement when mud conditions are present.

PS: The terrain mod can be introduced into an AI or PBEM game at any time.

Same install instructions as from the first posts.

PS: Latest terrain mod can be downloaded at the top of this thread

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:10 pm

Plugger wrote:Goodaye,

Excellent mod. As you say, it adds a further dimension to the decision making. One that forces you to think more like a general of the day.

Well done.

Cheers,
Plugger


Thanks Plugger! Hope you enjoy!

If you would, let me know here if you run into any results or situations that feel ahistoric.

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Sat Jul 07, 2007 10:13 pm

Adjusted Fort terrain by modifying terrain contingencies and artillery values.

Within this mod, a complete garrison for a fort is set as 2 regiments and 2 support units. If under assault, only 2 regiments and 2 support units can defend at any one time regardless of the number of units within the fort. Artillery and supply are both considered support units.

The beseiging army is also limited to 2 regiments and 2 support units attacking at any one time regardless of total number of units in the army.

Like any other battle, units will rotate in and out of combat as casualties occur and regiments fail their morale. So any number of units may attack or defend a fort but only 2/2 regiments/support units will fight at any one time.

This modification of fort values will prevent a superstack army from attacking and capturing a fort with extremely low casualties.

If you decide to assault a fort, rather than seige, having artillery will allow for a bit easier attack than an attack without artillery.

I would appreciate any feedback and suggestions.

Latest Terrain Mod can be downloaded from the first post on this thread.

BobB
Private
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:37 pm

Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:46 am

Jagger,

I may be doing something incorrectly, but when I view the content of TerrainsModJuly 7, 2007.zip, it's contents are the same as TerrainsModJuly5.zip. I appreciate your assistance.

BobB

Omnius
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:15 pm
Location: Salinas, CA

Bogus Bunker Hill

Sun Jul 08, 2007 1:32 pm

Jagger wrote:Thanks Plugger! Hope you enjoy!

If you would, let me know here if you run into any results or situations that feel ahistoric.


Jagger,
I tried the regions mod and found it worked fine. However when I did a quick test to check out your terrain mod I found it is rather poorly thought out for militia. I did a quick test at the hardest level as the USA in the 1775 alt. scenario. I just wanted to see a quick combat to see the results so I didn't bother moving anything.

On the third turn when the Brits became active the Glover army ran off up north even though there was no combat. On the 4th turn I finally saw some combat at Boston. Ward's army was alone and got attacked twice at Boston on days 1 and 2, before the Glover army could get back into Boston to help out. The British lost both battles which was rather bogus. Mostly garbage militia standing tough against good British troops is just plain wrong. The losses were far lower which seemed like a good thing, both battles were about 10 American losses to 30 British losses.

However the lopsided losses in the Americans favor with the Americans winning both battles is looney tunes revisionist history. Poorly trained and supplied militia did not stand up to British regulars well at all, they usually ran off whenever the British showed their bayonets. American militia only performed well when they had a good leader that knew how to employ them. Like Daniel Morgan at the battle of Cowpens, he knew how to get the most from his militia in good defensive terrain. Plus the militia needed to be backed up by regular troops who would stand their ground.

Your modification of militia is way off base and needs to be tamed way down. I think the proper use of leaders who know how to lead militia, as is already done in the game, is the better way to make militia perform better. That and they did better in good defensive terrain where they could shoot at the redcoats and then melt away in the forest, experts at hit and run.
Omnius

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:37 pm

BobB wrote:Jagger,

I may be doing something incorrectly, but when I view the content of TerrainsModJuly 7, 2007.zip, it's contents are the same as TerrainsModJuly5.zip. I appreciate your assistance.

BobB


Hi Bob, the files are the same in both zip files. However the data contained in certain files within th July 7 file has been changed and differs from the data within the July 5 file. Actually only the data in the forts terrain has been altered in the July 7 file.

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:40 pm

Omnius wrote:Jagger,
I tried the regions mod and found it worked fine. However when I did a quick test to check out your terrain mod I found it is rather poorly thought out for militia. I did a quick test at the hardest level as the USA in the 1775 alt. scenario. I just wanted to see a quick combat to see the results so I didn't bother moving anything.

On the third turn when the Brits became active the Glover army ran off up north even though there was no combat. On the 4th turn I finally saw some combat at Boston. Ward's army was alone and got attacked twice at Boston on days 1 and 2, before the Glover army could get back into Boston to help out. The British lost both battles which was rather bogus. Mostly garbage militia standing tough against good British troops is just plain wrong. The losses were far lower which seemed like a good thing, both battles were about 10 American losses to 30 British losses.

However the lopsided losses in the Americans favor with the Americans winning both battles is looney tunes revisionist history. Poorly trained and supplied militia did not stand up to British regulars well at all, they usually ran off whenever the British showed their bayonets. American militia only performed well when they had a good leader that knew how to employ them. Like Daniel Morgan at the battle of Cowpens, he knew how to get the most from his militia in good defensive terrain. Plus the militia needed to be backed up by regular troops who would stand their ground.

Your modification of militia is way off base and needs to be tamed way down. I think the proper use of leaders who know how to lead militia, as is already done in the game, is the better way to make militia perform better. That and they did better in good defensive terrain where they could shoot at the redcoats and then melt away in the forest, experts at hit and run.
Omnius


All testing of the mod, whether with the AI or against humans, has been set at normal levels. So for intended results, the terrain mod should be used with the AI level set at normal.

Myself, I play almost exclusively PBEM and I have been much happier with the results vs the standard terrain set. Although my tests against normal AI produced the expected combat results for me. But again, I haven't played a real game against the AI in quite awhile and never at hardest level.

From your test at hardest AI level, it sounds as if the terrain mod is not appropriate unless you are looking for the ultimate challenge. Which is probably to be expected if you select hardest AI. You may want to retry your tests at normal AI level. Of course, if you play primarily at the hardest AI level, you may consider modifying the terrain files or other files to produce the results which you feel are historical.

Also when evaluating militia performance in various terrains, you may want to consider the information in the thread titled "Militia in the Mountains" within this forum.

Appreciate the feedback!

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:52 pm

I will see if I can put together a combat tactics guideline which will provide an outline on what to expect when using various types of troops within different types of modified terrain.

Although most of it is common sense. Defense is stronger than offense. Solid ground, clear/frozen, is best for offense and mud/snow best for defense. The rougher the terrain, the better light troops and irregulars perform and the worse regulars perform. Most of these themes were already present in the original terrain files but the mod places greater emphasis on those factors with the intention to slow the pace of operations.

My PBEM games of the 1775 campaign often resulted in British Blitzkreigs. I did it myself a few times and had it done to me. With the mod, blitzkriegs are out except in ideal terrain and weather. But much of America is not ideal terrain nor has ideal weather except for about 3 or 4 months of the year. Once the Brits leave the open coast or weather takes a turn for the worse, the war is a lot tougher.

To sum up, the terrain mod now makes playing the English a challenge, IMO. As the Americans, I am willing to risk confrontation with the English under the right circumstances. The English now need to have show a bit of respect for unique American capabilities, the terrain and weather or risk another Burgoyne's disaster.

BobB
Private
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:37 pm

Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:13 pm

Jagger,

Thank you for the quick response and clarification. Great work! BobB

orca
Lieutenant
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:32 pm

Omnius wrote:On the third turn when the Brits became active the Glover army ran off up north even though there was no combat. On the 4th turn I finally saw some combat at Boston. Ward's army was alone and got attacked twice at Boston on days 1 and 2, before the Glover army could get back into Boston to help out. The British lost both battles which was rather bogus. Mostly garbage militia standing tough against good British troops is just plain wrong. The losses were far lower which seemed like a good thing, both battles were about 10 American losses to 30 British losses.

However the lopsided losses in the Americans favor with the Americans winning both battles is looney tunes revisionist history. Poorly trained and supplied militia did not stand up to British regulars well at all, they usually ran off whenever the British showed their bayonets. American militia only performed well when they had a good leader that knew how to employ them. Like Daniel Morgan at the battle of Cowpens, he knew how to get the most from his militia in good defensive terrain. Plus the militia needed to be backed up by regular troops who would stand their ground.


However, in BoA Ward is a militiaman leader, so there is a huge boost to TQ in this battle. And I wouldn't say that keeping the British cooped up in Boston is completely ahistoric :)

Omnius
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:15 pm
Location: Salinas, CA

That Explains It

Mon Jul 09, 2007 2:16 pm

Jagger wrote:All testing of the mod, whether with the AI or against humans, has been set at normal levels. So for intended results, the terrain mod should be used with the AI level set at normal.


Jagger,
Well that explains the problem. I find the normal level way too easy so I crank up the difficulty. I actually have found that the AI does play smarter at the hardest level with the movement setting left at the medium optimal setting plus that extra time for it to think and giving it full view of my armies.

Kind of strange that the mod doesn't work well at the hardest levels since all that does is give the AI some combat advantages in battle that didn't seem to translate well. I mean there was Ward, with no supplies or artillery and mostly militia that was poorly led and it whooped the Brits in both little battles even though the British AI had the fleet in port supporting the battle as well as both early armies. Normally that's a wipe out.

I have tried your regions mod and it seems to work okay at the hardest level, atleast I haven't seen any weird battle results. In my last hardest level game as the USA in the 1775 alt. scenario I had Washington in Hartford with a large army and along comes Howe with an even bigger army taking the southern route towards New York. I slid Washington down one region into the fields and caught Howe crossing the river and gave him a good whipping in 1775.

Even with lots of militia I find that without your mod I can still defeat better British troops because I try to get the right leaders in the stack that augment the militia, those partisan and militiaman leaders. Even when I fight in clear terrain, as in the example above, I can win battles by getting the right leaders in place to lead an army in battle better. That models history better because the militia only performed well when properly led.

I haven't tried PBEM because I found over the years that PBEM tends to degenerate into who cheats best. Is the PBEM in BoA cheatproof? Or can one player replay the PBEM file until he gets the results he wants for that turn? A game like BoA, with the WEGO system, would be a blast if the PBEM security is such that one or both players can't gimmick the results by replaying the PBEM file until they get good results. It's not a matter of password protection but game system integrity that makes a game cheatproof.

There was one Napoleonic game by Adanac Command Studies that had the proper PBEM system so that no player could pull the rerun cheat because the gameplay was set up so that the execution phase happened right after the second player did his turn but he couldn't see the results. When the first player looks the results are already fixed so he couldn't rerun the file to get better results. Is BoA something like that so no one can pull the rerun cheat?
Omnius

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:20 pm

Here is a guide providing some background on the interaction of the BOA combat model with terrain/ground conditions as well as expected performance of different troop types using my current terrain mod.

Interaction of Troop Categories and Terrain/Weather:

Troops have a variety of values which determine their combat performance. The primary values are OFFFire/DEFFire, Troop Quality (TQ), Initiative and Assault values. (These numbers are available in the models database.)

Offensive/Defensive (OFFFire/DEFFire) fire factors determine if the unit achieves a hit during the ranged combat phases. Troop quality is used as a morale check when a unit receives a hit and is used to determine if a unit will launch a close range charge/assault. Initiative determines which troops fire first. Assault is the value used to determine hits during a close range charge.

Battlefield terrain and weather apply a percentage modifier directly to OFFFire/DEFFire. Terrain and weather can provide protection factors which adjust the chance of a unit being hit by adding or subtracting discrete numbers from the inherent base OFFFire/DEFFire troop values. TQ values are altered by adding or subtracting from the units base TQ value. Altering TQ indirectly impacts Assaults as a TQ check must be passed before an assault can occur. Thus a higher TQ value increases the number of assaults that occur and a lower TQ decreases assaults. (Assaults are typically a significant strength of line/regular troops over militia.)

Terrain and ground conditions do not affect initiative. (One major combat advantage of British line troops is their high initiative. Invariable, their initiative is higher than Americans and will fire first against American troops. Regardless of terrain or weather, the Brits retain this significant advantage and the terrain mod has no impact on initiative.)

I do not believe assault values are directly affected by terrain and ground conditions except indirectly through troop quality (TQ) values. (Someone please correct me if I am wrong about terrain/ground conditions not impacting assault values directly.)

Troop Categories:

There are five primary categories of ground fighting troops within BOA: Regulars, Irregulars, Militia, Cavalry and Artillery.

Regulars- Regular regiments include grenadiers, highlanders, fusiliers, marines, German grenadiers, Tory provincials and all line regiments regardless of nationality as well as American trained line.

Irregulars-Irregular units include light infantry, rangers, partisans, mountaineers and Indians. (For quite some time, I did not realize Light Infantry perform as irregulars rather than line. This characteristic makes light infantry much more valuable in difficult terrain than I realized in the past.)

Militia-all militia regiments. As militia are trained to "regular" status, the regiment will gain regular elements and function as a mixture of militia and regulars until the entire regiment is trained.

Cavalry Regiments. All cavalry in BOA are dragoons. Dragoons are trained to fight both as traditional cavalry as well as dismounted infantry. (Note that Tarletons Legion is not cavalry but irregulars. Always ensure that cavalry is actually cavalry and not irregulars as they each perform best in different terrain. Cavalry strength is in open/wooded terrain and irregulars strength is in forests, swamps, mountains, etc..)

Artillery- Artillery comes in a variety of types including field artillery, siege artillery and non-mobile coastal defense batteries.

Note that many line regiments have sub-elements that are different form "regular" line companies. Typically those different sub-elements are grenadiers, light infantry or cavalry. Those regiments will perform better than pure regiments when operating in terrain suited to the special expertise of their unique sub-elements. Example: Many German regiments have one or two sub-elements which are light infantry. As light infantry are "irregulars", those regiments can function better in "irregular" terrain and less well in territory more suited for pure "regular" line infantry. Militia regiments will also have this hybrid performance as they transition through training from pure militia to pure line troops. Line regiments with grenadier sub-elements are extra heavy and are stronger than pure line regiments in typical "regular" terrain.

Regulars

Regulars always perform better in defense than offense regardless of terrain or ground conditions.

Regulars always attack best in firm ground conditions of clear or frozen ground. Within the mod, Regulars will have a large advantage when attacking militia in open or wooded terrain on clear/frozen ground. Militia will have a very slight defensive advantage when defending in forest and greater defensive advantages in wilderness, swamps, mountains and forests. Ground conditions of mud/snow decrease the offensive capabilities of regulars which produces a stronger defense regardless of whether the opponents are regulars or militia. Frozen ground conditions are slightly worse than clear terrain for offense but better than mud/snow conditions.

Regulars always have an advantage in defense against Militia. However the defensive advantage of regulars over militia is least in mountains, swamps and wilderness. Regulars defend best in mud/snow conditions. Major and minor rivers both significantly improve defense if not frozen. Dug-in entrenchments are also a valuable defensive advantage for regulars.


Militia

Militia always performs significantly better in defense than offense. Basically militia is a very poor attacking force. Militia can be respectable in defense in the right terrain/ground conditions.

If you must attack with militia, forest, wilderness and swamps are the best terrain for attacking militia. Militia are even worse when it comes to attacking cities or forts. Mud/snow reduces the attacking capability of militia as well but less than it impacts regulars. So snow/mud slightly reduces the offensive advantages of regulars vs militias. When militia fight militia, the defending militia will always have a substantial advantage. The best situation for using militia to attack defending militia is in open or wooded terrain. If you are going to attack with militia, ensure you have an advantage in number and good leaders with special abilities.

Militia cannot stand before regulars in open terrain. They will put up only a slightly better defense in wooded terrain. On defense, militia can hold their own to regulars in forests. Militia is a very respectable defensive force against regulars in wilderness, swamps and mountains. Mud/Snow provides significant defensive advantages to militia to the point where regulars need numbers to beat defending militia. Major and minor rivers both significantly improve defense if not frozen. Dug-in entrenchments are also a valuable defensive advantage for militia. Militia is primarily a defensive force.


Part II

I will cover irregulars, cavalry, artillery, forts, cities and rivers in later updates.

Also there will definitely be another update to the terrian mod. I created a spreadsheet which gave me a good overview of totality of the terrain impact. I see some tweaking necessary in the overall trends in certain terrains. Hopefully have it done by the end of the week.

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:01 pm

Omnius wrote:Jagger,
I have tried your regions mod and it seems to work okay at the hardest level, atleast I haven't seen any weird battle results. In my last hardest level game as the USA in the 1775 alt. scenario I had Washington in Hartford with a large army and along comes Howe with an even bigger army taking the southern route towards New York. I slid Washington down one region into the fields and caught Howe crossing the river and gave him a good whipping in 1775.


Omnius, I think that is what the terrain mod is all about. Right terrain and ground conditions for battles with defense stronger than offense. Taking care and planning with offenses and needing time to recover from large battles. Slowing things down.

Even with lots of militia I find that without your mod I can still defeat better British troops because I try to get the right leaders in the stack that augment the militia, those partisan and militiaman leaders. Even when I fight in clear terrain, as in the example above, I can win battles by getting the right leaders in place to lead an army in battle better. That models history better because the militia only performed well when properly led.


Abilities still make a big difference with the mod. With the right combination of leaders, the Americans can put together a very powerful army.

I haven't tried PBEM because I found over the years that PBEM tends to degenerate into who cheats best. Is the PBEM in BoA cheatproof? Or can one player replay the PBEM file until he gets the results he wants for that turn? A game like BoA, with the WEGO system, would be a blast if the PBEM security is such that one or both players can't gimmick the results by replaying the PBEM file until they get good results. It's not a matter of password protection but game system integrity that makes a game cheatproof.

There was one Napoleonic game by Adanac Command Studies that had the proper PBEM system so that no player could pull the rerun cheat because the gameplay was set up so that the execution phase happened right after the second player did his turn but he couldn't see the results. When the first player looks the results are already fixed so he couldn't rerun the file to get better results. Is BoA something like that so no one can pull the rerun cheat?
Omnius


My experience with BOA PBEM has been very good. My opponents seem to have a real interest in the period. The game is not a pure win/lose competition but a recreation of the challenges of history. Definitely the PBEM system can be improved and does requires trust. But BOA seems to have attracted the right sort of people. What I would really like to see in the PBEM system is replay for both players instead of just the host. Hopefully in the future.

Jagger
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:31 pm

Sat Jul 14, 2007 3:07 am

Irregulars

Unlike regulars and militia, irregulars are strongest on attack. Indian bands, partisans, rangers, etc. are most effective with the surprise attack in forests, wilderness, mountains or swamps. Their superb attack capability of most irregulars is offset by a low assault capability-except for rangers and light infantry. In addition, they are also fairly ineffective in attacks against forts and cities regardless of terrain.

If you anticipate a potential massed attack by irregulars (Massed Indian tribes is an example) in rough terrain, your best defense is within a city or fort. It is ideal to attack irregulars first and hopefully catch them outside of ambush status. A second major weakness is the small number of elements composing all irregular units except light infantry. Most irregular units cannot absorb many casualties and survive. One hard fight and they must withdraw to recover.

Irregulars perform best in rough terrain and better on offense than defense. Major weaknesses are attacking forts/cities, low assault values and the small number of elements within a unit.

Dragoons

Dragoons are cavalry trained to fight on foot as well as mounted. Many felt dragoons did not perform either function as well as pure cavalry or pure infantry.

Dragoons have strong offense and defense in both open and wooded terrain representing their mounted capabilities. In all other terrain, I am assuming dragoons are fighting on foot. They will fight slightly worse than regular line in all dismounted situations.

Ideally, dragoons are most effective in open and wooded terrain for both offense and defense.

Updated terrain mod with tweaks dated 13 July 2007. Upload from first post at top of thread.

User avatar
Stwa
Colonel
Posts: 395
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 7:01 am

Don't let Omnius scare you away

Sat Aug 04, 2007 6:26 pm

Jagger,

This is a most interesting mod. I have tried it, and it works well. (i.e. does not cause any crashes etc.) This combined with your regions mod, makes for an interesting game.

I like the theory behind the mod, and have seen other gaming rules (miniatures and board games), try to implement these ideas as well.

In general, I do not like using the difficulty toggle. It simply makes all units move and shoot better. (Kind of a last resort). So the normal setting is the way to go for me.

Return to “Birth of America”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests