Units Not Destroying Railroads

[patryn8]

Strange problem I'm running into on ACW 1.16 4a with quick-fix 1 & 2. My CSA units are not destroying RR as they should. In the turn included in this save file, my cavalry unit in Missouri (near St. Louis) did not destroy rail. My cavalry unit in Kentucky did not destroy rail either. On the other hand my units did destroy rail in Annapolis, MD and Grafton, WV, that turn. Any ideas why some units selectively carry out the orders and others do not?

[Njordr]

I have the same problem patryn8 stated, but with USA.

[lodilefty]

Wrong save, I think:

Late April 1861: no Cav anywhere near the regions you describe....

[patryn8]

Sorry, about that. The above file was "backup 9". This file is "backup 8" and the current turn before I process it.

[lodilefty]

Both your saves were the same turn, but I managed to check it anyway.

OK:

1. To destroy rail, unit must start turn in the region and not move.
2. If attacked, there is a probability that the destroy command will not be executed, even if the unit remains in region. (eg. Sometimes RR gets destroyed, sometimes not. I'm not sure what the exact probability is). In my test, the Cav at Frederick, MD was attacked, forced enemy to withdraw, and then successfully destroyed the RR.
3. If the unit retreats from combat, no destruction will occur.
4. AFAIK, if unit is in "passive" stance, no destruction occurs (I didn't specifically test this, as in your case 1-3 above explains all your reported situations)

If you think you see anything else, please post here...

Thank you for playing AACW

[gchristie]

4. AFAIK, if unit is in "passive" stance, no destruction occurs (I didn't specifically test this, as in your case 1-3 above explains all your reported situations)

Is this new since 1.15? I looked at the wiki and the "passive posture" post is silent about destroying railroads (granted, the wiki may not be up to date).

[color="Blue"]Passive posture

Basically the same as defensive posture above, except that it:

will receive penalties in combat.
is more likely to retreat from combat.
recovers cohesion faster.
does not affect military control of the region it is in.
will not march to the sound of the guns[2]
will not participate in stopping enemy stacks from crossing the river that the passive stack is on[3].

A stack retreating from combat will normally assume this posture.

If attacked while inside a structure, a stack in passive posture will be considered to be in defensive posture for combat purposes.[1] [/color]

[caranorn]

All Lodilefty said seems new to me. Originally you could destroy railroads if you started a turn in a region with railroad and issued a move order (first action during turn execution would be to destroy railroad in starting region, then start moving). This makes for a big change, greatly reducing the efficiency of raiders...

[lodilefty]

Is this new since 1.15? I looked at the wiki and the "passive posture" post is silent about destroying railroads (granted, the wiki may not be up to date).

[color="Blue"]Passive posture

Basically the same as defensive posture above, except that it:

will receive penalties in combat.
is more likely to retreat from combat.
recovers cohesion faster.
does not affect military control of the region it is in.
will not march to the sound of the guns[2]
will not participate in stopping enemy stacks from crossing the river that the passive stack is on[3].

A stack retreating from combat will normally assume this posture.

If attacked while inside a structure, a stack in passive posture will be considered to be in defensive posture for combat purposes.[1] [/color]

Will look into it.

Note that AACW Wiki is not as up-to-date as the AGE Wiki,so be sure to check that also

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

Both your saves were the same turn, but I managed to check it anyway.

OK:

1. To destroy rail, unit must start turn in the region and not move.
2. If attacked, there is a probability that the destroy command will not be executed, even if the unit remains in region. (eg. Sometimes RR gets destroyed, sometimes not. I'm not sure what the exact probability is). In my test, the Cav at Frederick, MD was attacked, forced enemy to withdraw, and then successfully destroyed the RR.
3. If the unit retreats from combat, no destruction will occur.
4. AFAIK, if unit is in "passive" stance, no destruction occurs (I didn't specifically test this, as in your case 1-3 above explains all your reported situations)

If you think you see anything else, please post here...

Thank you for playing AACW

I actually think this is how it SHOULD work but it has never worked that way. No house rules would be necessary if it worked like that.

[lodilefty]

I actually think this is how it SHOULD work but it has never worked that way. No house rules would be necessary if it worked like that.

1, 2, and 3 occur in the saves supplied, using 116-QF2