KillCalvalry wrote:It is impossible to unpack brigades; the elements must stay there. You also cannot move outside units into a brigade with two exceptions: a) you can merge a general in there, and b) 2 Militia units can brigade together, though once you do that you can't take them apart.
KillCalvalry wrote:Fear not though with all that artillery; form DIVISIONS. Divisions can hold up to 18 elements, so they are great for combining lots of small units to one cohesive group. A good composition is 4 artillery elements, 1 Sharpshooter, 1 Cavalry, maybe 1 Marine, and the rest infantry.
johandenver wrote:One example is that I might have one corps that lacks artillery and
one that has too much of it.
It would be very neat to just group a few batteries from the first corps together in a brigade and transfer it to a division in the second corps.
The only option now would be to transfer the whole division from one corps to another, and thereby perhaps leaving the first corps lacking in infantry.
Also, I will definately give this game a chance.
It's one of the best games around in it's genre.
But should that stop me from wanting it better?
johandenver wrote:One example is that I might have one corps that lacks artillery and
one that has too much of it.
It would be very neat to just group a few batteries from the first corps together in a brigade and transfer it to a division in the second corps.
The only option now would be to transfer the whole division from one corps to another, and thereby perhaps leaving the first corps lacking in infantry.
johandenver wrote:Ok, good. That would be one way of dealing with the artillery situation I guess. Not ideal, but it does work.
But what about unattached single regiments that are not brigaded?
I can't imagine it would be that hard to make it possible to just group a bunch of these together and call them a brigade, would it?
I'm sorry but I just don't see the point of making the game this way.
It's not as, if my wish was granted, the game would have to sacrifice
a bunch of other things to do it.
People who don't care about it could just keep on playing the way they've done sofar.
It would just add more to the game, so why not?
johandenver wrote:As I've said somewhere before, a combination of AACW & Take Command 2nd Manassas would be my wet dream![]()
AACW handles the strategic aspect and TC2M does the battles with input from AACW....would be glorious
200 years in the future...but still glorious![]()
johandenver wrote:Yes, it sure was a great game.
I spent countless hours with that.
Of course it did have it's limitations as well, primarily graphics though.
Most things were easy to mod but graphics were a real pain, at least for me
Also, the campaigns sucked big time.
That's one great thing about AACW, the grand scale of it all.
As I've said somewhere before, a combination of AACW & Take Command 2nd Manassas would be my wet dream![]()
AACW handles the strategic aspect and TC2M does the battles with input from AACW....would be glorious
200 years in the future...but still glorious![]()
Czrasai wrote:Both are excellent, but I prefer each as they are. I'm probably in the minority but I would not like to see this.
johandenver wrote:Another thing, why do so many brigades consist of 2-3 regiments?
That was not the case in the actual civil war.
Perhaps it was in Napoleonic wars (I don't really know much about that)
but most brigades in the civil war contained more than 3 regiments.
Some confederate brigades, late in the war, could have 6-7 of them.
This has to be a another design decision that I just don't understand.
It would have been just as easy to make it historically correct.
But I can see that I'm not going to get any clarification on my original question. Or even someone to agree with me![]()
To put it harshly everybody seems to think everything is fine the way it is.
I give up my quest of making everybody see things my way![]()
lodilefty wrote:If you think of "demi-brigades" we get closer to the design.
Often tactics demanded that only a portion of a brigade be sent to the flank or some other area of the battlefield.....
Also, at least early on, integral artillery was somewhat common. The Black Hat Brigade fought at 2nd Manassas and beyond with an attached battery.....
While it would be nice to have flexibility to reorganize at brigade level, by the time we reach the "historical" part of the war where brigades were adding regiments (a political effect by the way: Governors wanted to recruit new Regiments, not replacements. More patronage possibilities!!), we're pretty much into Divisions, where how a brigade is organized doesn't matter...
I'd hate to see such a fine game get "buggier" by adding complexity. Soon will be unsupportable..... It's a GAME, not a Military Training Simulation....
That's my two cents.....
johandenver wrote:If army names, for instance, could be changed then it would satisfy me as well as all the others who doesn't care and just leave the names as they are. I find it strange that no one seems to agree with me on this.
Return to “AGEod's American Civil War”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests