Courier Question?

[con20or]

no, you can specify multiple recipients i think....ive neevr tried it. just keep adding names to the list..

[Davinci]

I suppose there could be a setting that would have couriers composed by you dispatched from the selected unit, but again that goes against the realism of the game.

I’m still not getting through here, this is a simulation , one of the best that the world of computers has ever been blessed with,correct?

It is not realistic, to have an order directed by a Corp’s Commander – that may be positioned behind the enemies line, and like magic , his Commanding Officer will dispatch said letter.

Now, a solution to this, since you are so stuck on this idea, would be for the Corps Commander to dispatch the message, the courier leaves his position, rides across the map to the Commanding Officer, and then rides to the Divisional Officer.

I can live with that, what you are describing is not logical or practical. No Offense!

If I understand correctly you are saying that when you are general lee, you order Longstreet by courier menu to move a division, and the courier goes from you(lee) straight to the division commander, not Longstreet.

Yes, that is correct!

LittlePowell is correct. The player can only order troops below him within his chain of command. Those orders flow directly from the player to the subordinate. There are no intermediaries.

OK, this is the part that I’m having trouble getting across to both of you. If I am in control of all available forces, then everyone is me.

Not, only the commanding officer, but everyone that I Take Command of!

So, if I order a regiment, brigade, division, corps, around – they are all acting on my behalf. Each one of them is controlled by me.

Now, if you are playing a game, and a player can snick behind your lines, view all of your movements, and then with a touch of magic, transmit those movements two miles across the map, I’m sure that you would call this a bug .

What is the difference?

davinci

[Little Powell]

I give up.

I'm not the one stuck on the idea.. I'm just trying to explain the logic behind the game design. I understand what you are trying to get through to me and I have all along.

I understand your reasoning for everyone that is TC'd becomes you, but the way the courier system is designed is to only have messages composed by you to be sent by you. It's different when you aren't sending couriers. You can select whoever you want under your chain of command and do with them whatever you want, and it's executed immediately. But when you are playing couriers only, it becomes like MP where every commander under you is like a living breathing human.. You can't warp to their saddle and send a courier from them..

It is not realistic, to have an order directed by a Corp’s Commander – that may be positioned behind the enemies line, and like magic , his Commanding Officer will dispatch said letter.

I'm not sure which order directed by the Corps commander you are talking about. When they are behind enemy lines and you are playing strictly couriers, they are going to make decisions completely on their own un-TC'd (if the courier can make it past enemy lines).. If they are TC'd, then you can still send them courier orders and they will follow them, but they won't make any decisions on their own.

[born2see]

Little Powell wrote:

Any courier message you send will come from you.. I've asked myself this same question before, and then it dawned on me. In real life, you couldn't take control of another commander and have them send around couriers. Any message you send is composed by you, any message other commanders send is composed by them.

Marching Thru Georgia wrote:

Ordering a division to move someplace by giving the order to it's corps commander might be a logical idea, but probably didn't happen often in 19th century warfare where line of sight was very limited. If Lee rode by a division or brigade that was not performing properly, he would order that unit directly. He wouldn't wait for a courier to find Longstreet, wait until Longstreet rode over to see what was happening, and then wait for Longstreet to write an order and send it to the division commander.

These two statements just about sum it up. Any other behavior would be unrealistic in my mind.

[Davinci]

I give up. .

Yes, let us just agree that we will disagree on this matter!

I'm just trying to explain the logic behind the game design.

I understand your point, but I’m just not agreeing with it.

I understand your reasoning for everyone that is TC'd becomes you, but the way the courier system is designed is to only have messages composed by you to be sent by you. .

Yes, but everyone is me, and the courier is not sent by who is representing me at that time.

I’ll say that part again, the courier is not sent by me at that time, which is the point that I’m trying to make.

It's different when you aren't sending couriers. You can select whoever you want under your chain of command and do with them whatever you want, and it's executed immediately.

Understood!

You can't warp to their saddle and send a courier from them.

But, this is my point, then why is it acceptable to have the courier message warped across the map. That has to be changed!

I'm not sure which order directed by the Corps commander you are talking about. When they are behind enemy lines and you are playing strictly couriers, they are going to make decisions completely on their own un-TC'd (if the courier can make it past enemy lines).. If they are TC'd, then you can still send them courier orders and they will follow them, but they won't make any decisions on their own.

Everyone is under my control, every Commander, from the Brigade Leader, to the Corps Commander’s are all on Take Command.

Nobody can send a courier message except me, and all messages, should be sent from whatever location I’m at!

I agree with you on that the last say-so should be the Commanding Officer, but to keep this Civil-War-Atmosphere, the Corps Commander should dispatch a courier that rides to the location of the Commanding Officer.

This code is already in the game. Have you ever had a regiment unit under the Take-Command and ordered them somewhere, the Brigade leader would dispatch a courier to said unit.

The courier would not be dispatch by the Commanding Officer.

Hey, after all of this, I’ll resign from this debate and accept the fact that this is not going to change.

davinci

[Davinci]

Little Powell wrote:

Any courier message you send will come from you.. I've asked myself this same question before, and then it dawned on me. In real life, you couldn't take control of another commander and have them send around couriers. Any message you send is composed by you, any message other commanders send is composed by them.

Marching Thru Georgia wrote:

Ordering a division to move someplace by giving the order to it's corps commander might be a logical idea, but probably didn't happen often in 19th century warfare where line of sight was very limited. If Lee rode by a division or brigade that was not performing properly, he would order that unit directly. He wouldn't wait for a courier to find Longstreet, wait until Longstreet rode over to see what was happening, and then wait for Longstreet to write an order and send it to the division commander.

These two statements just about sum it up. Any other behavior would be unrealistic in my mind.

Well, now it's three against one, point taken!

I really don’t know what \ which Civil-War-Books that you guys are reading, but the Corps Commanders pretty much had control over their Divisions.

Remember when Jackson was stationed behind the railroad-cut, and General Lee asked General Longstreet to help him out, General Longstreet decided that it was best to use his artillery.

This is just one example, but exactly when did General Lee Take Command of said Corps?

davinci

[Little Powell]

I really don’t know what \ which Civil-War-Books that you guys are reading, but the Corps Commanders pretty much had control over their Divisions.

And the Corps commanders have control over their divisions in this game too. If you want you can let Longstreet do what he wants without your intervention... And he will do just that if he's un-TC'd. You may not like what he does, but he will act on his own... And if you really don't like what he does, then bypass the chain of command and direct his divisions personally.

[born2see]

Little Powell wrote:

And if you really don't like what he does, then bypass the chain of command and direct his divisions personally.

Which is another touch of reality. It's called relieving a commander of duty.

I myself have wanted to do that many times and appoint that Tewes guy or LP acting commander. Bet I wouldn't lose too often then.

[RebBugler]

Hmmm, sounds like a simple request, D wants the courier to spawn from the officer that's sending the order. And I agree, that would be more realistic than spawning from the top CO, who may be miles away.

I may be wrong, but I think this is especially acute in MP courier play. If you are a division CO, and you give an order to a brigade CO, the courier spawns from the top CO, not from your ME. I remember thinking that was a bug, but I really just don't know enough about courier play, because it's just unfun for me...so I regard it as work...not play. But, I will work on it...for the team. :silly:

Beat your drum and get a following...and I'm outta here, danged couriers. :whistle:

[con20or]

Hi Davinci, i tried replicating this last night, and i could not find a way in the courier menu to order longstreet to move a division. i could order one of longstreets divisional general to move, but that was it. Then the courier went from me (lee) to that general. That makes sense, as i ordered the general, not longstreet. How did you try do it?

Is the problem that there is no "Corps general - move division here" option in the courier menu?