Suggestions

[KG_Soldier]

Garnier,

Is there a way to make attack/defend OOBs where the attacker will have more men? Well. . . I really know the answer to that, so. . . will you consider making that possible?

[Garnier]

Yeah I've thought about that and intend to at some point.

We'd need to use objectives for an attack/defend game but it would be more fun I think.

[RDBoles]

Is it possable to have mixed matched OOB's. Example Shermans Army 60,000 matched up to say R E Lee's Petersburg Army 1864 about the same 60,000? Or Grants troops from the Fort Henry, Donaldson against the Army of Potomac under Beauregard? Or mix match corps and divisions? Just a thought.

[Kerflumoxed]

Mr. Garnier....just curious: Do the CSA Whitworth fire only the solid bolt per war-time use, or do they use cannister, shell, etc.?

Thanks

Jack

[Garnier]

I don't know you'd have to look in the logistics files.

[John Buford]

Cav?

Please?

[Garnier]

Cav is a difficult issue.

Suppose I just 'added cav' meaning you can have your division be cavalry instead of infantry. I don't have a lot of experience with cavalry in the latest version. I don't know what effect it would have to throw cavalry into these battles, and I don't know how much cavalry should be allowed to match an amount of infantry.

If there was enough cavalry that having a cavalry division was more powerful than an infantry division, everyone would want cav.

And what about which side has more cavalry in a battle. Suppose one side had half their players leading cavalry divisions and the other didn't. Such battles would be fun occasionally but they wouldn't be balanced.


Suppose I just allowed you to attach a cavalry brigade of two smallish squadrons to your division, and in battle maybe they'd count as roughly 3 men for the balancer. But then if everyone wants cavalry, and I think most people would like having one or two small cavalry units in their division, it wouldn't be so great. How would I decide who gets cavalry and who doesn't.

Most civil war fighting on the corps scale didn't have cavalry in the action. Cavalry was used for scouting, screening, raiding etc, not so much on the main battlefield.

So as much as I'd like to see cavalry on the field now and then, I don't have a good solution for how to do it yet without totally changing the game. I think eventually a decent plan could be figured out, but I don't know.

[John Buford]

Garn...

I understand the balance issue. It seems in normal pickup games most folks don't care to run cav.

I am a cav guy by heart. Do wahtever it takes to get them into your balance.. even if that means starting them off weak and slowly upping their numbers/skills to achieve that balance.

I'd rather run weak cav than strong legs... any day.

Thanks for your effort!

[IronBMike]

So rifle ranges are 250 I think I read?

What is the effectiveness breakdown for that range? Realistically the rifle fire shouldn't be too deadly unless it's under 150, IMO. Many reasons for that but I'm not gonna go into them now.

[Garnier]

They're still as deadly at that range as they had been at 160 yards, as far as I know. We don't have many options for them, basically it's 160 yards or 250 yards right now, and 160 gives horrible gameplay due to canister. It's not how I'd want it but I don't see a better alternative currently.

Good to see you around again Mike, hope you join us.