some observations with 1.04

[Spruce]

1) I assaulted the Union fortresses at Hampton roads as CSA. After I Defeated their defenses the game crashes,

2) When you draft new troops it says it will cost you one NM ? What is this ?

3) I constructed extra Ironclads - I build 3 times the CSS Fredericksburg. Somewhat annoying.

4) After taking some part of MO, I was able to recruit 50 militia (reinforcment pool). Isn't this a bit exagerated?

[Adam the VIth]

1) I assaulted the Union fortresses at Hampton roads as CSA. After I Defeated their defenses the game crashes,

2) When you draft new troops it says it will cost you one NM ? What is this ?

3) I constructed extra Ironclads - I build 3 times the CSS Fredericksburg. Somewhat annoying.

4) After taking some part of MO, I was able to recruit 50 militia (reinforcment pool). Isn't this a bit exagerated?

1) have not seen that one before
2) NM = national morale
3) confirm, I had three of them as well.
4) I have noticed that MO militia are rather high, but had not seen 50. MO was a weird state, so perhaps this was intentional?

[Spruce]

well let me clarify, I know that NM means National morale, I never realised that it costs you national morale to construct units. I don't think it costs you, so this might be a bug - or just something I don't understand.

the amount of militia that MO is giving you is fubar - I think 40 or 50 militia is about 4 times the amount VA or GA is giving you. I don't think that MO was 4 times as densely populated compared to VA or GA.

[pasternakski]

You're right, Spruce. Missouri in the 1860s was pretty sparsely populated.

That's just far too many militia for Missouri.

On your other point, you are paying morale for new conscripts going into the pool, not for actual construction of units. The costs (also VPs) are stated on the "drafts" page.

[McNaughton]

Missouri gets their militia via event, I believe. It may be that these events are being triggered multiple times resulting in substantially more militia than you should be getting. Plus, Missouri Militia are also gained through Kentucky events.

[Johnny Canuck]

The problem appears to be with the following two events (if I am reading them correctly):

Code: Select all

SelectFaction = $CSA
SelectRegion = $Richmond, VA
StartEvent = evt_nam_CSA_BorderStatesTroops1861|0|2|evt_txt_CSA_BorderStatesTroops1861|Event-img_CSA_BorderStatesTroops1861|$Richmond, VA|11

Conditions
  MinDate = 1861/08/08
  MaxDate = 1862/01/01

Actions
  DescEvent = Is triggered by KY seceding
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde2KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde6KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde8KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Cav3KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Art3KY;2
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Art4KY;1
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Reb1KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Reb1MO;20
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde7MO;10
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde8MO;10
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Cav1MO;6
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Art3MO;6
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Sup1MO;10
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Reb1MO;20
  ChangeWSUPool = 10
  ChangeConscriptPool = 30

EndEvent

SelectFaction = $CSA
StartEvent = evt_nam_CSA_BorderStatesTroops1861B|1|0|NULL|NULL|NULL|11

Conditions
  MinDate = 1862/03/01
  EvalEvent = evt_nam_CSA_BorderStatesTroops1861;=;0

Actions
  DescEvent = Backup event (later) if the former is not triggered
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde2KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde6KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde8KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Cav3KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Art3KY;2
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Art4KY;1
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Reb1KY;3
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Reb1MO;20
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde7MO;10
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Bde8MO;10
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Cav1MO;6
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Art3MO;6
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Sup1MO;10
  ChangeUnitPool = $uni_CSA_Reb1MO;20

EndEvent

As you can see, there are two '$uni_CSA_Reb1MO;20' entries, which, I think, is why you can have 40+ militia units (a few more militia are also added via the St. Louis Massacre event set). Obviously one of those two lines should be removed (though it is possible that the first entry is supposed to be a regular brigade type instead).

Beyond that, the values themselves are too large (especially noticeable in comparison to the Kentucky values). My suggestion would be that the Missouri values should be reduced by about two-thirds.

[pasternakski]

Well, as usual, I shot my fool mouth off without checking the facts. In 1860, Missouri had a free population of 1,067,081, which was within about 40,000 of Virginia (before West Virginia parted company with them, mind you). Missouri was, therefore, the most populous of the border states, including Kentucky, which it outnumbered by almost 140,000.

So, I guess some modification to the Missouri militia numbers is in order, but maybe not to the extent I was thinking.

Just ruminating over the tables is interesting...

Source: "The Civil War and Reconstruction" by Randall and Donald (their source was U.S. Census, 1860, Population, pp. 598-599)

[Wilhammer]

Check this out:

http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/collections/stats/histcensus/

Choose 1860, and then run a query on;

First, Free population.

After the query runs, notice the total column has 'Map This' - totally cool.

Try another query, like 'manufacturing establishments' - and run 'Map This'.

[Spruce]

hm, so replacements cost you NM ? Never seen that happen in my game ... ? Is this really so ? I'm confused

[Pocus]

Missouri gets their militia via event, I believe. It may be that these events are being triggered multiple times resulting in substantially more militia than you should be getting. Plus, Missouri Militia are also gained through Kentucky events.

A very accute case of copypaste-isis... this is fixed for the upcoming patch, thanks you all.

About draft: when you force people into draft, you lose national morale. Not so when you call for volunteers, this is on purpose.

[Spruce]

A very accute case of copypaste-isis... this is fixed for the upcoming patch, thanks you all.

About draft: when you force people into draft, you lose national morale. Not so when you call for volunteers, this is on purpose.

Pocus, that's not the point - the point is that when you are in the screen for replacements (or was that reinforcments), the cost indicated states "1 NM"

[Wilhammer]

Yes, we pay the NM to call these recruits up on the Draft screen; we expect to pay that 1 nm.

After you do this, whenever you BUY a unit, you are told that purchase will cost 1 NM.

I think that 1 NM cost per unit purchase is unexpected, and I don't think you actually pay for anything.

[Pocus]

Pocus, that's not the point - the point is that when you are in the screen for replacements (or was that reinforcments), the cost indicated states "1 NM"

what you see is the total cost of your expenses, whatever the screen you are looking at. Is it clearer?

[Spruce]

what you see is the total cost of your expenses, whatever the screen you are looking at. Is it clearer?

The problem is that I'm not 100% sure wether it ha to do with replacements or reinforcments. But in one of those screens - NM is payed ! I'm not talking about the draft list ! I'm talking about the screen where you "buy" new units or reinforcments.

NM is listed as an expense - altough I don't "experience" my NM to drop when I do this.

Check it out - otherwise we keep on talking in the air !

[tc237]

Check this out:

http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/collections/stats/histcensus/

Great website Wilhammer!!

Can you re-post this in the "ACW History Club section"

[McNaughton]

The problem is that I'm not 100% sure wether it ha to do with replacements or reinforcments. But in one of those screens - NM is payed ! I'm not talking about the draft list ! I'm talking about the screen where you "buy" new units or reinforcments.

NM is listed as an expense - altough I don't "experience" my NM to drop when I do this.

Check it out - otherwise we keep on talking in the air !

Re read what Pocus said.

On the expenses, it shows TOTAL expenses in ALL areas (in financial, drafts, reserves, replacements, etc.). You see that -1 NM point because you put into effect a law that resulted in 1 NM point being used. You see it in reinforcements and replacements as it shows TOTAL EXPENSES in all areas (not just in Reinforcements or Replacements, but all, everywhere, added up for you). IMO this is good, as it shows how much you have spent all over, and how much you have left. The -1 NM point is because of something else you did, not what you immediately just bought (sell back all your replacements and reinforcements, and you will still see this -1 NM point cost, as it has nothing to do with the screen you are currently on!).

Or, are you saying that for a particular unit you are required to spend a NM point?

[Spruce]

hey McNaughton,

you are funny ! I don't get it at all and want to clarify - and you just repeat what already has been said by others.

Could you please make things more clear instead of less clear and for sure the current feedback from the game is "fuzzy" otherwise I wouldn't have to ask so many times here !

It's NOT in the "policy window" - it's in the window where you buy units or replacements. It indicates "buying this unit will cost you one NM". This is very odd, as it doesn't cost me this NM - I'm pretty sure about that.

the next person reporting here in this thread should clarify stuff - not make it more fuzzy. And I'm also speaking about myself here .

[Jacek]

Do you get this message in the tooltip when you hover your mouse over a given slot with unit (i.e cavalry, infantry etc) or in the line BENEATH the slots? I get such messages BENEATH the slots and it indicates that in the turn you did some actions presumably in Politics window that cost you NM points (printing money, draft, embargo etc.) . It is a normal occurence then.

If it is in the tooltip though then it is a bug in my opinion.

[Stonewall]

Spruce,

Perhaps instead of trying to describe what you see, take a screenshot and post it.

[Rafiki]

[CENTER][/CENTER]




[SIZE="1"](Guessing that that "smiley" was made with a different kind of thread in mind, though... )[/size]

[Spruce]

[CENTER][/CENTER]




[SIZE="1"](Guessing that that "smiley" was made with a different kind of thread in mind, though... )[/size]

ha Rafiki ! That's funny !

The best thing is that I figured out what is going wrong and now I understand also McNaughton and Pocus.

Indeed we needed some picture. But I'm no good at posting pictures

What I described was indeed the popup under the "purchase of unit windows" describing your balance change. If you print paper f.e. your NM will drop and it is described there.

so - that's clear for me !

[tagwyn]

Tell your friends to buy AGEod games!! I remember when I thought SSi and AH would be with us forever!! Let's keep these guys going!!! Tag

[Pocus]

By the way, a new game is planned for fall 2007

[Doomwalker]

Anyway you can give us a hint as to what genre it will be Pocus?

[Korrigan]

It'll be a turn-based wargame.

We can't tell you more as we are bind with business contracts.

Wait for few days and the thruth shall be revealed.

[Chamberlain]

By the way, a new game is planned for fall 2007

Hint Hint Hint


Chamberlain

[LMUBill]

I just hope it's not about the British in southern Africa. That subject is such a Boer.

[blackbellamy]

I hope it's a strategic WW2 game. I only have like a dozen of these on my shelf at the moment.

[Makhno]

Might be Empire in Arms or WIF , les arlésiennes du wargame informatique

[Pocus]

there are men, and rifles. And ships too. Also you get generals in it.

Wow, 4 tidbits of informations in a post