AGEOD Forums

The current limit of four elements per regiment makes elements the *approximate* equivalent of 2 companies each. If they were companies, the limit should be 10. This would make forming accurate units much easier.

Does a Hit represent a certain number of men?

Is an element with ten hits twice as strong as one with five?

Are 10 hits always the max?

The limit shall not be exceeded, this is a physical constraint of the interface that we do not plan to change (too much work graphically, no budget for it, and in addition it would need to re-rework all DBs and setups).

Phil,

All DBs and setups for AWI could use re-work. At least I know the four element per unit restriction still applies. I can make suggestions based on that.

Does a "hit" represent a certain number of men? Understanding hits might help. This game is fascinating, with alot of potential.

Unless it has changed, I recall it was 100 men per hit. But wait for Hok confirmation...

That would mean 3000+ man regiments in the American Revolution. (8 hits @ 100 men each x 4 elements = 3200.) A correct figure which yields accurately sized regiments would be 15 or 16 men per hit, at eight hits per standard infantry element.
If 8 hit elements can reinforce up to 10 hits, the number would be around twelve, and now I'm starting to confuse myself

Pocus wrote:Unless it has changed, I recall it was 100 men per hit. But wait for Hok confirmation...

We have adjusted men per hit for BOA2 : it is 30 men per hit.

Is men per hit a flavor item? or does it play part in the combat resoultion?

I assume horses and guns per hit are just flavor?

If men per hits represents historic strength, at 30 men/hit you would have to halve the number of hits per element in the current game. This would make elements far to fragile.

I propose 10 men per hit and 12 hits maximum per element. This would allow for accurate oobs, and keep the flavor about where it is now, as elements should rarely be at full strength.

Another way to represent weaker units is to start them with fewer elements. Then replacements can bring them up to full strength. Thus we can limit the replacements to approximate history....

IMHO, We need to choose less 'what was' vs. more 'what could have been' to keep the game replay value.....

by the way, I agree with your math, and support the changes...

The system will support 12 hits per element; I changed a model to test it. I have'nt figured out how to set strength.

In an OOB [Group defined] in the database, you'll see columns with
The name of a regiment
The unit reference [from units DB]
The next column often says "NULL", but a number here will indicate how many of the elements exist at start. [see Units DB to see what the unit has defined] This will limit stregth until a replacement is available from the 'pool' to fill the empty 'slot'

You can use a 'set strength' command in the setup, but that only 'depletes' the elements [the 'red bars' we see], and the unit will regain full strength over time, under the appropriate conditions....

I'm at 'real work' today, so this is from memory.....

Perhaps with some definitive clarification, I can make oob suggestions to fiddle with this game, or BoA2. Thirty men per hit would mean at full strength twelve hits for a British battalion. I'm beginning to believe men per hit is mere "flavor" and was never meant to represent historic strength.

This is what I get for poring through history, and oobs.

Game is still fun.

Yes, the men per hit is just an "indication" of the actual strength of the unit, but it has no impact in terms of game play: a hit is a hit, even if in one case it means 30 men killed and 12 in another...

PhilThib wrote:Yes, the men per hit is just an "indication" of the actual strength of the unit, but it has no impact in terms of game play: a hit is a hit, even if in one case it means 30 men killed and 12 in another...

OK.
I think it's best that we get the men/hit [and horses, guns in BoA2] correct using the existing hits. This way we get the flavor correct, butt won't upset any previous playtest/balance......

lodilefty wrote:flavor correct, butt

You're sniffing the wrong kind of flowers there.

Jabberwock wrote: You're sniffing the wrong kind of flowers there.

Ah, Sigmund, you have caught me in my Freudian slip.....