CSA ** issue

[RebelYell]

Someone wrote about this before, I have played a conservative game to the end of 62 but have had some victories where promotions would have been expected.
Totally lopsides affairs where I dont even get experience for the leaders, GraniteStater can testify to these.


There really has to be some correction to this, maybe auto-promote according to seniority more as the army limits also get up?

This would make a nice game as some will get worse also, people never promote some generals for that reason.

So we would be getting ** and *** leaders so that in Mar 62 we get one *** promotion and two ** promotions, same in Mar 63.

Comments?

[RebelYell]

Please move this to the improvement section.


Edit Pocus: done!

[RebelYell]

Please move this to the improvement section.


Edit Pocus: done!

Thank you Pocus, could you talk about this with the test team?

[RebelYell]

Anyone with me on this?

It would only be 6 promotions based on seniority, they would not all be "bad" promotions for sure, it would be little different from game to game.

[Ace]

I am with you on this one.
What would you suggest?

[RebelYell]

I am with you on this one.
What would you suggest?

That a version with this is made for the beta team to try out.

[Ol' Choctaw]

I am fully aware of the lack of leader experience on the CSA side.

I have not see it so much on the Union side.

It is particularly noticeable when an army commander takes over and corps commanders, stack commanders or division commanders get no experience for the battles at all.

It makes it near impossible to get anyone promoted. It seems like only the ranking leader gets experience.

[GraniteStater]

And I must say, RY & I had an email exchange about this. So far, in any Union start, promos are glacial. Sherman and Thomas are still 1*s, maybe occasionally, these guys in particular, but also others whom you wish to fight with and get a promo for, do not get the opportunities.

This hurts the Union quite a bit for Army Cdrs - probably don't need to spell it out, but it means you have Grant (awesome), Rosecrans (OK), and McDowell and Buell (ehh - not too horrible and I have fought with McD in VA for the entire war). The others are just terrible.

As one may see, Corps Cdrs under McD & Buell are Active 1/3 of the time. They're acceptable on D, but for much else...'nuff said.

Not getting Sherman, Thomas, Sheridan to a shot at Army Cdr (heck, they're not even getting Corps Command - and I forgot Hooker, who's not a shabby Army Cdr, is actually my usual replacement for McD, but again, he's not even getting Corps Cmmd - same with Meade).

It's a wonder these guys haven't quit in disgust and gone into bilking the Federal gov't for shoddy goods.

[Ace]

That a version with this is made for the beta team to try out.

These are the lines inside gamlogic.opt files. Everyone can tamper with coefficients and share his experiences how it played out. We wouldn't want to over do it

// ********************************************************
// ***** EXPERIENCE POINTS *****
// ********************************************************

expMaxLevel = 1000
expProgCoeff = 100 // Prog Rate overall modifier in %
expXpGainCoeff = 100 // Xp gain overall modifier in %
expXpGainCoeffLeaderKill = 10 // Leaders get 10% of their subordinate SU xp gain
expXpGainCoeffLeaderDie = 5 // Leaders lose 5% of their subordinate SU xp worth loss

[RebelYell]

These are the lines inside gamlogic.opt files. Everyone can tamper with coefficients and share his experiences how it played out. We wouldn't want to over do it

// ********************************************************
// ***** EXPERIENCE POINTS *****
// ********************************************************

expMaxLevel = 1000
expProgCoeff = 100 // Prog Rate overall modifier in %
expXpGainCoeff = 100 // Xp gain overall modifier in %
expXpGainCoeffLeaderKill = 10 // Leaders get 10% of their subordinate SU xp gain
expXpGainCoeffLeaderDie = 5 // Leaders lose 5% of their subordinate SU xp worth loss

Well experience gain is one thing but I kinda like the idea of political generals, someone that beat some militia unit in West Virginia might get to lead an army for his seniority.
Both types of promotions would bring some variety to the game.

[anjou]

I'm beginning to think Generals should be randomized to an extent. At least when it comes to promotions. Else, it really is just a race to get the same leaders experience as soon as possible.

[RebelYell]

I'm beginning to think Generals should be randomized to an extent. At least when it comes to promotions. Else, it really is just a race to get the same leaders experience as soon as possible.

My suggestion gives you the opportunity to play favorites the best you can but when the auto-promotions come the situation can be that someone else also gets it.
Only part of the needed ** and *** would come like this, 6 promotions, rest would be your own picks.

Van Dorn and Bragg would be the types that get promoted if you havent found some new hero to promote.

[tripax]

It sounds like in your PBEM, generals get less experience because they fight fewer battles than in games you've played with Athena. Is this so? If so, I would guess that it must be related to how aggressive Athena is relative to human opponents. The more aggressive your opponent (or Athena), the easier it is to accrue stars for generals. So I would say that general experience could be modified by Athena's aggressiveness (I don't know how hard this would be) to reflect the lower number of battles fought/soldiers killed. This would give a more uniform general's promotion experience across styles of play. And in PBEM play we could modify experience gain by setting a low aggressiveness Athena (since AI setting is still set in PBEM, even if AI only controls NPCountries).

[Ace]

I used the database files posted by Pocus in the modding section of the forum.

I only added one event that promotes Bragg at the same time Longstreet and Jackson are promoted. I am not sure if it will work, so please report if it functions. I edited following files:

[ATTACH]27425[/ATTACH] to add an event
[ATTACH]27426[/ATTACH] to add tooltip for the event

I highlighted inserted rows with red color.

I used csv splitter to get
[ATTACH]27427[/ATTACH]

and saved local strings to
[ATTACH]27428[/ATTACH]


Extract and paste LocalStrings_CW2.csv and CSA Leaders.sct to their respective folders and see if it works. If it works additional lines can be added for more generals.

This is my first attempt at modding cw2 through excel database files. Up to now, I always edited in game file via notepad++.

Hope it helps...

[RebelYell]

It sounds like in your PBEM, generals get less experience because they fight fewer battles than in games you've played with Athena. Is this so? If so, I would guess that it must be related to how aggressive Athena is relative to human opponents. The more aggressive your opponent (or Athena), the easier it is to accrue stars for generals. So I would say that general experience could be modified by Athena's aggressiveness (I don't know how hard this would be) to reflect the lower number of battles fought/soldiers killed. This would give a more uniform general's promotion experience across styles of play. And in PBEM play we could modify experience gain by setting a low aggressiveness Athena (since AI setting is still set in PBEM, even if AI only controls NPCountries).

There could be a problem in experience gain but that is not my main point.

My point is that if there are armies and corps built, there has to be commanders for them even if you have not fired a shot.
The lack of leaders is making the game passive, if your opponent has corp commands and armies you cant fight them with independent commands usually.

[minipol]

Right. In real life, you would probably promote the next best guy. So maybe the game should allow you to promote a general in cases where the opponent has many more corps or army leaders. Could come with a NM, VP or generals stat penalty.

[GraniteStater]

Please let me add as a point for the devs, that the PbeM with havi & I has been dripping with blood, we have something like 1.2 million casualties between us as we approach the end of the game in mid-65. We haven't been shy about mixing it up on the dance floor.

From what havi has said, his promos are rare; mine have been close to non-existent, maybe half a dozen the whole game. This is all 1.03.

Much, much too slow. This kills the Union for any potentially decent Army Cdrs and kills the CSA for Corps Cdrs.

[RebelYell]

This is almost a bug in the game, not one promotion in the game and it is 64!!!!!

Jackson got one for decimating a Union corp in 62 but I did not want to promote him at that time.

If that is what it takes to get a promotion CSA will have very hard going forming armies.

GS can comment does Gardner deserve a promotion.

[Ace]

I have not had this issue in my games. I had promotions...

Please report if my files do as planned, Bragg auto promoting. If it does, we can set Hardee, Van Dorn and Sherman auto promote as well (of course this is all non official mod).

[GraniteStater]

Two PbeMs now & a sufficient time with 1.02 & 1.03 in SP. As I have mentioned, havi & I were sparring from the start and we have had very few promos.

Glacial. Very rare. Nothing like AACW at all and the first game was fair - not fast, sometimes Grant took a while, but the Union could usually get Sherman or Thomas, or both to 3* - definitely Hooker in the East...

CW2 is vanishingly small.

If you would Ace, elucidate about your mod.

[Ace]

I do not know how to mod seniority increase rate, I added an event that promotes Bragg in the first months of '62 the same way some other CSA and USA generals are automatically promoted. I basically copy pasted an existing event, changed its name and changed generals in question.
If it works, I might add a few more...

Love your footnote , but do not praise me too much, I might get cocky

[tripax]

Just a note, since general exp is a function of regiment or brigade exp, if generals are upgrading less than expected then brigades might be accruing exp less than expected. Have you seen this? I guess it would be hard to know, but it would be interesting to see.

[Ace]

It is not experience issue, but an advancement in seniority issue.

[Mickey3D]

Until now in my PBEMs I had leaders ready for promotion on a regular basis, but what is hurting the process is the need to extract the commander from the stack to promote him (e.g. a * division leader part of a corps that you would like to promote to **) : sometimes you can't affort it because the overall situation is too tensed (you want to keep your force grouped and don't want to set the division aside from the corps) or you don't have another leader to take over divisional command while you promote the leader.

It would definitively help if the promote order could be given to an individual unit in the stack and not to the whole stack.

[RebelYell]

Until now in my PBEMs I had leaders ready for promotion on a regular basis, but what is hurting the process is the need to extract the commander from the stack to promote him (e.g. a * division leader part of a corps that you would like to promote to **) : sometimes you can't affort it because the overall situation is too tensed (you want to keep your force grouped and don't want to set the division aside) or you don't have another leader to take over divisional command while you promote the leader.

It would definitively help if the promote order could be given to an individual unit in the stack and not to the whole stack.

This is another important issue, hope both are soon corrected.

[tripax]

It is not experience issue, but an advancement in seniority issue.

Isn't seniority advancement controlled by general's experience?

[minipol]

This is another important issue, hope both are soon corrected.

Yes I hope so too. I have missed several promotions because of this in previous games vs Athena (in combination with inactive generals)

[GraniteStater]

I do not know how to mod seniority increase rate, I added an event that promotes Bragg in the first months of '62 the same way some other CSA and USA generals are automatically promoted. I basically copy pasted an existing event, changed its name and changed generals in question.
If it works, I might add a few more...

Love your footnote , but do not praise me too much, I might get cocky

Just paste the snippet with where to park it in the file structure, if you want. Then we can all decide who, what & where until the whole thing gets resolved.

And like Mickey3D says, that's always bugged me, especially since it is very common not to promote on the spot 'cuzza the situation on hand - which is why you earned the promo in the first place.

[Highlandcharge]

I am in a pbem game as the Union.. I have Lyons as a 3 star general and Smith, Cook and Ord as 2 star generals so in my games the promotions seem ok so far, Sherman, Thomas and Sheridan have not been in any big fights yet, I will see what happens when they do get into some big fights...

Regarding having to remove a general from a stack to promote him, it would be good if it could be changed.... I remember having the same thought about AACW1

[RebelYell]

I am in a pbem game as the Union.. I have Lyons as a 3 star general and Smith, Cook and Ord as 2 star generals so in my games the promotions seem ok so far, Sherman, Thomas and Sheridan have not been in any big fights yet, I will see what happens when they do get into some big fights...

Regarding having to remove a general from a stack to promote him, it would be good if it could be changed.... I remember having the same thought about AACW1

I have some good defensive victories and nothing from them, I would have more active defense if I had more corp promotions.