Unit Names

[Stwa]

[PhilThib]

Tell me where, when and how you spot these units, in order we can determine whether they are generated by the engine (autoraise) or by the setup

[Stwa]

Tell me where, when and how you spot these units, in order we can determine whether they are generated by the engine (autoraise) or by the setup

Ok, here is the long version ,

1. The 78 Campaign xls does not name these units, nor do they appear in the event or scen files.

2. During the game they appear during 78 (I think), in New England.

However,

3. When I install 1.12a, the scen files indicate they were saved under version 1.09.

4. When I save new 1.12a scen files they are substantially different than the 1.09 equivalents.

5. It could just be my error, since I must save a CSV then edit it with notepad to replace "," with ";", then split the file. It seems error free because the script loads, shows map, and saves properly, but you never know.

[ussdefiant]

These problems are because the units in question are set to have the same names as various state militia units. The Americans have continental regiments from various states who are set to bear names such as 1st Massachuests, Virginia, Rhode Island, etc.

The game does not want to give identical names to any unit, so you get the bland default name when it raises a unit indentically named to one already on the map.

The best way to deal with this would probably be to change the names list for the problematic Continentals, such as setting them to 1st RI Line, 2nd MA Line, etc etc. and also change the event that converts rebel militias in Dec. 75 to avoid conflicts(Most of the problematic units are replacements for these if they should get destroyed).

[Stwa]

These problems are because the units in question are set to have the same names as various state militia units. The Americans have continental regiments from various states who are set to bear names such as 1st Massachuests, Virginia, Rhode Island, etc.

The game does not want to give identical names to any unit, so you get the bland default name when it raises a unit indentically named to one already on the map.

The best way to deal with this would probably be to change the names list for the problematic Continentals, such as setting them to 1st RI Line, 2nd MA Line, etc etc. and also change the event that converts rebel militias in Dec. 75 to avoid conflicts(Most of the problematic units are replacements for these if they should get destroyed).

Thanks, I think your analysis is correct. I was able to deduce, that one of the units affected was the 1st Rhode Island, which is Continental, but named the same as a militia unit already raised.

P.S.

One of the mods I am doing to each scenario is changing the names of the Supply units. I noticed in the DB XLS files for each scenario, every supply unit had a unique name by adding either arabic or roman numerals to the end of the word "Supply". (i.e. Supply #1)

I changed most of the Supply unit names to simply "Supply". So maybe what will happen is, if a Supply unit gets autoraised, then it might have the name "5. Supply", since "Supply" by itself is definately not unique?

So during a game you might see supply units named as follows:

Supply #12
Supply VII
Supply
10. Supply
West Point supply

Hence my (perhaps fruitless) attempt at modding this situation.

[ussdefiant]

Somewhat of an academic question, as currently neither supply nor artilerry units are set to be autoraised for either side.

[Stwa]

Somewhat of an academic question, as currently neither supply nor artilerry units are set to be autoraised for either side.

Cool, I think you are right again. I have been playing of few of the modded scenarious, and all the Supply units are indeed named "Supply".

Thanks much for your help.

[Stwa]

Tell me where, when and how you spot these units, in order we can determine whether they are generated by the engine (autoraise) or by the setup

Hi,

I have renamed some regiments as ussdefiant has suggested and it seems to fix this issue.

So, if ussdefiant's description of the problem is accurate, then how come you guys have not addressed this with a patch. Or is there some other fix, AGEOD has explained elsewhere.


Regards,

Stwa