Experience stars and promotable Leaders

[soundoff]

Given that I have just learnt that on a leader who is promotable:

One experience star = +1 to defense
The next experience star = +1 to offense
The next = +1 to strategy
The next = +1 to defense etc

I do so hope that if there is ever a AACW2 that these become random rather than fixed and that these bonuses will apply to all leaders promotable or otherwise.

[Rafiki]

Nope, first of all it applies to all leader, promotable or not.

Furthermore:

• Strategic ratings do not change because of experience.
• A leader’s offensive rating is increased by +1 for each even level of experience (2, 4, 6, etc.)
• A leader’s defensive rating is increased by +1 for each odd level of experience (1, 3, 5, etc.)

http://www.ageod.net/aacwwiki/Experience#Effects_for_leaders

[soundoff]

Fair enough Rafiki....a straight forward answer. Though I do wish there had been a heath warning with the 66 page manual that I so diligently printed out only a few months ago to the affect that it was basically of little use. After all page 27 of that manual which deals with LEADER ATTRIBUTES - Experience states 'Leaders gain and lose experience by winning battles and losing battles. This will in turn affect their other attributes.' No hint at all of these being absolutes or knowns.

Having 'knowns' with due respect reminds me of my table top days where French Guard 12lb artillery at a certain range could always hit with a die roll of 6 whereas at the same range no-one else could touch them simply because the Guard battery was 'A' class and the only other 'A' class batteries were Brits who never fielded above 9lbs. Mind you like in my table top days...I can live with the AGEod rule even if its not truely to my taste.

As an aside I should say that as I picked up the +1 strategy from Jabbers response to me in the 'On Battlefields of Yore' campaign thread I do think that some reference should be made in that forum to the information not being quite accurate, otherwise other players could get the wrong impression as I have.

[Rafiki]

Fair enough Rafiki....a straight forward answer. Though I do wish there had been a heath warning with the 66 page manual that I so diligently printed out only a few months ago to the affect that it was basically of little use. After all page 27 of that manual which deals with LEADER ATTRIBUTES - Experience states 'Leaders gain and lose experience by winning battles and losing battles. This will in turn affect their other attributes.' No hint at all of these being absolutes or knowns.

The manual can't elaborate on all the numbers that are involved in the game; if it did, it would be 300 pages long, and be outdated immediately when these numbers get tweaked through patches.

What the manual says is correct, and for the average gamer learning to play AACW, it is my opinion that it covers things sufficiently.

Having 'knowns' with due respect reminds me of my table top days where French Guard 12lb artillery at a certain range could always hit with a die roll of 6 whereas at the same range no-one else could touch them simply because the Guard battery was 'A' class and the only other 'A' class batteries were Brits who never fielded above 9lbs. Mind you like in my table top days...I can live with the AGEod rule even if its not truely to my taste.

When you look at the basics of this, AACW is a computer game, and computers need absolutes and specifics.

Then there are two widely differing tastes as to how much one wants to know about these things; some people prefer not to know and let things happen as they happen, without wanting to know exactly how events are triggered and how various things specifically affect other things. Then there are those who do wish to know these things, and these two approaches are more or less incompatible

Worth noting, though, is that these abilities don't correlate directly to game effects; they modify other things that in turn are subject to random determinations, so you don't get the same x => y => z effect you more often see in tabletop games.

As an aside I should say that as I picked up the +1 strategy from Jabbers response to me in the 'On Battlefields of Yore' campaign thread I do think that some reference should be made in that forum to the information not being quite accurate, otherwise other players could get the wrong impression as I have.

Indeed. I missed that part of Jabber's postings. I've replied there too. Thanks for pointing it out to me