AACW Patch 1.07h

[Pocus]

I just did a quick survey of 2 turns in my current campaign (1.07h). All the new units I'd checked were defaulted to defensive, not passive.

Houston, errr... Pocus, I think we have a problem!

Well, the complete rule is: you are created in passive, and when you reach some cohesion, you revert to defensive. So perhaps the combat happened late in the turn, and the unit was already nearly operationnal?
I can always take a look at the turn if need be.

As for the stickiness, it can be a results of a better appreciation of the interest of staying into the trenches, that I revised some weeks ago.

[willgamer]

Well, the complete rule is: you are created in passive, and when you reach some cohesion, you revert to defensive. So perhaps the combat happened late in the turn, and the unit was already nearly operationnal?

Well, I took a longer look and I will speculate about my redlined units that are in defensive mode.

In the interest of tidyness and reducing the number of tabs I combined redlined units as a matter of course. This results in some units reaching critical cohesion sooner than others. This cohesion triggers the switch to defensive, and after I move those ready units out, the remaining redlined units are still in defensive.

So unless you have spare time to code reset-to-passive for all redline units, I consider this a user issue.

[tagwyn]

[color="Blue"]EDITED[/color]

[color="blue"]Korrigan: I fail to see the relevance of this message. Infraction given until further explanation.[/color]

[Paul Roberts]

Hail to Bed Forest! Founder of the Ku Klux Klan!![color="Red"][/color]

I hate the Klan as much as any other decent human being, but... what was that for?

[McNaughton]

Actually, Forrest intended for the KKK to be representative of 'defensive' organization against hostility from the north (should a northern geurilla war or acts of intimidation be initiatied in the south). In the end, this never developed, and the organization pretty much became what it was initially organized to protect against, except targetting against a certain segment of society.

Forrest abandoned the organization after (pretty much according to him) it 'lost its way', and became something other than designed. He even spoke out for black organizations and individuals.

Also, he didn't do it on his own, but was a part of it. I was originally an 'anti-forrest' individual, based on his connection to the KKK, but, after actual reserach I discovered it is more complicated than simple black and white (pun intended).

[Paul Roberts]

I'm a southerner (and I actually have a family connection to Forrest!), but I'll be the first to say that his racism seems to have gone beyond even the norms of the time. Before the war he was a slave trader, after all. I'll agree that the KKK issue is more complicated than it may at first appear.

A wonderful general, of course.

But I fear we're giving the issue more attention than it deserves in this thread now.

[Korrigan]

Thread closed.
Thanks to two community members for cold blood answering (all posts have been deleted)