Re: Courier Question?
Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 7:37 pm
no, you can specify multiple recipients i think....ive neevr tried it. just keep adding names to the list..
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?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.
Yes, that is correct!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.
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.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.
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.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.
Marching Thru Georgia 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.
These two statements just about sum it up. Any other behavior would be unrealistic in my mind.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.
Yes, let us just agree that we will disagree on this matter!I give up..
I understand your point, but I’m just not agreeing with it.I'm just trying to explain the logic behind the game design.
Yes, but everyone is me, and the courier is not sent by who is representing me at that time.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. .
Understood!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, this is my point, then why is it acceptable to have the courier message warped across the map. That has to be changed!You can't warp to their saddle and send a courier from them.
Everyone is under my control, every Commander, from the Brigade Leader, to the Corps Commander’s are all on Take Command.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.
Well, now it's three against one, point taken!Little Powell wrote:
Marching Thru Georgia 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.
These two statements just about sum it up. Any other behavior would be unrealistic in my mind.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.
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.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 if you really don't like what he does, then bypass the chain of command and direct his divisions personally.