enf91
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 6:25 pm

Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:23 am

Gray_Lensman wrote:There are 2 things wrong here.

1.) He has apparently done absolutely nothing to gain 3 seniority points and move up from seniority= 10 to seniority= 7
2.) He's been promoted (generically?) even though his seniority = 7 and not seniority = 4.


Maybe his default 2-star seniority is 7. After all, many generals have different seniority depending on their rank. Sumner, McClernand, Lyon, Grant, Huger, and so forth, were promotable before the generic promotion thing and fit what I just said. The promotion rule is that his seniority has to equal 1 or 2 or be 4 points above his original seniority.
At any rate, I think Smith has a normal promotion to 2 stars. His 3rd star would be "generic".

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:47 am

deleted

User avatar
Inside686
Captain
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:03 pm
Location: Lecco (Italy)

Wed Jul 01, 2009 12:50 pm

Hello,
Have you already got an idea of the approximate release date of this version (not to urge anyone but just to have an order of idea) ?

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Wed Jul 01, 2009 12:59 pm

deleted

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:43 pm

deleted

enf91
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 6:25 pm

Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:34 pm

[ATTACH]8317[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8318[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8319[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8320[/ATTACH]
Here you go. I used randomized generals exactly once, and it was not in the game in question.
Attachments
aacwscreenshot21.jpg
aacwscreenshot20.jpg
aacwscreenshot19.jpg
aacwscreenshot18.jpg

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:20 am

deleted

User avatar
Queeg
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 5:13 am

Thu Jul 02, 2009 2:38 pm

Thanks for all your hard work on this issue. In the meantime, I just play with the assumption that unearned promotions reflect political influence or cronyism that I can't control. The game, like life, doesn't always make perfect sense.

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Thu Jul 02, 2009 2:57 pm

deleted

User avatar
Inside686
Captain
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:03 pm
Location: Lecco (Italy)

Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:01 pm

When that might be is always up in the air


Ok it answers to my question. Thank you.

tagwyn
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:09 pm

Promotions!

Thu Jul 02, 2009 6:19 pm

Gen. Polk (Bishop General) for my CSA forces just got promoted in newest beta version. He was doing nothing to deserves such attention. IMHO. This was in 1861 vrsion. t

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Thu Jul 02, 2009 10:42 pm

deleted

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:16 am

Gray_Lensman wrote:I'm beginning to think we're going to have to move all starting seniority levels up above the promotion threshold.


What do you mean?

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Fri Jul 03, 2009 12:42 am

deleted

enf91
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 6:25 pm

Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:17 am

[ATTACH]8333[/ATTACH]
Just a cosmetic thing, but it is weird nonetheless. By the way, I'm the USA.
Attachments
aacwscreenshot22.jpg

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Fri Jul 03, 2009 1:37 am

Polk as a 2 star leader has a seniority of 4.

Has the new patch changed promotable leaders to all those who's seniority is1,2,3 or 4? It used to be only 1 and 2.

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:38 am

deleted

tagwyn
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:09 pm

Polk's Promotion

Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:56 am

Grey: Thanks for caring. t :coeurs:

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Fri Jul 03, 2009 4:32 am

deleted

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:05 am

deleted

enf91
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 6:25 pm

Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:35 pm

[ATTACH]8338[/ATTACH]
I forgot to highlight them, but the ships are what I want you to look at. This is the April 1861 campaign w/KY as the CSA. The ships came in New Orleans and Galveston, which are in the South West, but I selected the ships to come from the Deep South. In fact, the reinforcements screen doesn't have a way to build combat ships west of Florida.
Attachments
aacwscreenshot23.jpg

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:40 pm

deleted

User avatar
MrT
Colonel
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Zürich, Switzerland

buggy

Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:56 am

bug found:full april campagin, early July, Madision TN, 1st Texas Cav + McClungs art battery - appears for a second time. Checked in 3 seperate launches constant error.
using latest beta rc19 version.

edit: In the w-kentucky version of the full campaign the units in question only appear once in early july so based upon that i would suggest that the late june arrival of the units (i.e. the first instantance of them) is the erroneous one.

Regards

MrT

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sat Jul 04, 2009 1:34 pm

deleted

User avatar
MrT
Colonel
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Zürich, Switzerland

Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:13 pm

if 1.13b was the correct time of appearance then it should be early june

User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:42 pm

deleted

User avatar
MrT
Colonel
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Zürich, Switzerland

Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:48 pm

okay, one more data faultish thing, have u the 12lbs cannons removed from the army hq unit purposefully or is it a coding error?

edit: Okay the tool tip showsfor the HQ, 200/200 men 200/200 horses 0/0 cannons.
None of my hqs have it thought maybe i hadnt bought the correct replacment units, but even newly created hq units are missing this element also.

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

HQ Artillery

Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:53 pm

Working as designed ... unfortunately ... :confused:

The artillery shows up as a separate unit and must be purchased separately. Aggregate cost is the same as it was.
[color="DarkRed"][SIZE="2"][font="Book Antiqua"]"We've caught them napping!"[/font][/size][/color]

User avatar
MrT
Colonel
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Zürich, Switzerland

Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:54 pm

urgh did they get cheaper at least then?

User avatar
MrT
Colonel
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:38 pm
Location: Zürich, Switzerland

Sat Jul 04, 2009 2:58 pm

57.) Army HQ's units intrinsic artillery model removed from the HQ unit. (due to rare CTD bug).
a.) All scenario instances now have a standalone HQ Artillery unit.
b.) Additional standalone HQ Artillery units added to the Reinforcement Artillery Pool (made available and in equivalent amounts simultaneous with HQ reinforcements).

yep okay found the right section.. anyway u can make a merge function work for the units (hq+12lb) or is that to much of a coding rework?

Return to “Help to improve AACW!”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests