Version 3.06 under way

[Technopiper]

Patch 3.06? Been away for a while and what a pleasant surprise this is! This forum may seem "inactive" but the fact is we have been hiding. [:D]

[Technopiper]

Frank, is there a reason behind leaving an empty strip below the game screen? Is it to prevent the taskbar from blocking the interface? I would prefer to have the entire screen if that is possible?

[FrankHunter]

Technopiper, Yes, that's because I hate having a conflict with the taskbar.

zgrant, I don't have Blucher, I should buy the pdf, Sam Mustafa's stuff always has innovative rules.

[Technopiper]

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

Is there any resolution for this text error, which can happen after replacements have been added to a unit :

"655xx" seems to be a numeric overflow. 65535 (or FFFF in programing) is the maximum number allowed in a 16-bit binary system.

[FrankHunter]

"Is there any resolution for this text error, which can happen after replacements have been added to a unit"


Well that was a tough bug but I finally found it.

The game also now allows the miniatures resolution to be selected in solitaire games and regardless of which side is being played.

[Technopiper]

Thank you, Frank, for keeping this game active after, what, 15 years? That's really amazing.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

"Is there any resolution for this text error, which can happen after replacements have been added to a unit"


Well that was a tough bug but I finally found it.

Thanks, that's good to see, the game was very satisfying before, now it's going to be even better. [8D]

[FrankHunter]

Other changes just added,

1. The "Favours" option, or handicap, now consists of faster messengers for the AI and a firepower bonus in battle.
2. Replacements are generic but it costs 1 per infantry strength point, 2 per cavalry and 3 per artillery.
3. Replacements can be added if a unit is within 3 hexes of the Centre of Operations
4. Supply wagons and depots aren't shown during playback, they are visible only during orders. The reason was they don't play back, they are immediately updated and it just doesn't look right.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Other changes just added,

2. Replacements are generic but it costs 1 per infantry strength point, 2 per cavalry and 3 per artillery.

This a good improvement as it takes into account the relative value of different types of unit. Should it, or can it, be extended to 'quality' such as 'elite' units, which would be difficult to replace, as highly trained, motivated and experienced troops are not easy to find on campaign.

For example should it be 2 points for a 'veteran' replacement and 3 for an 'elite' replacement infantry.

'Trained' and 'Regular' are not too different in quality (90%/100%), so stay as the basic 1 point infantry replacement.

However, what about 'elite' cavalry/artillery, should the cost compound, meaning 'elite' artillery would cost 5 (3 for artillery + 2 for quality)

Maybe an adjustment to the overall replacement pool, you get more points to spend, but have to decide whether to use it on larger numbers of basic troops, or less elite.

Also, there is the PFE solution of separate pools for each type/quality of unit.

This comes from a running game where there have been loses to the Imperial Guard and should I be able to easily get replacements for these high value troops.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Other changes just added,

3. Replacements can be added if a unit is within 3 hexes of the Centre of Operations

Not sure about replacement range from LOC, I thought that it was about 5 hexes in the current version, but I have seen the replacement button working at longer ranges.

I have no evidence, but 3 hexes seems quite tough. I know units were returned to depot to be reorganised, but also replacements were marched out to wherever the receiving units were. Whatever figures are used is going to be a abstract compromise.

I haven't got a compelling argument for objecting, but what is the reason for reducing the replacement range ?

The replacements are going to be independent, while they march to the receiving units, technically out of corps command and possibly out of supply, so what would be a reasonable time to be in that condition.

I would have thought that they could carry at least 2/3 days of provisions, but another view is that 1 strength point represents 500 men, which is a weak battalion (or average battalion strength on campaign), so they would have supply wagons and could independently march further.

So where does the compromise lay ?

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Other changes just added,

1. The "Favours" option, or handicap, now consists of faster messengers for the AI and a firepower bonus in battle.

Good improvement, like it.

[Biondo]

I have a question for Frank. If I remember correctly, you can't directly move supplies between two towns without passing through the center of operations (so send back to the centre and then move forward again). Is this a game design choices? It will be possible to move them directly from a town to another?

I like all the other changes you made[:)]

Regards

[FrankHunter]

Biondo, right, that was a design decision, done to represent the Centre of Operations as the centre of an early 19th century supply network. I wanted that centre to be as real to the player as the actual centre of ops was to armies back then versus the better and more professional systems that came later and which provided more flexibility.

Rasputitsa, the range from the Centre of Ops that a unit can take on replacements needs to be modified. Right now the range is based on "as the crow flies", which isn't right. Will change that.

[FrankHunter]

In the new game I've been working on I built the ability to change languages in from the get-go, wasn't a big deal. Retroactively adding it to CLGA now, lots of little details, especially in regards to available character length.

[Technopiper]

So Campaigns of La Grande Armee Volume II is coming true! That's excellent news!

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

I have sent copies of the CotD mods to Frank and I am sending out copies to anyone who needs them, just send me an email address so that I can reply with links to the folders.

I had hoped that Matrix would host the files in the Members Area, but nothing came of it.

CHEMKID has left the forum and his email is now inactive, so I have no way of contacting him and I'm not sure what the position would be of using his graphics in the published game, rather than a self install private mod.

I have not heard back from Matrix? The mod files could easily be posted in the Members Area. If not, I would think adding the mod files to a mods folder in v3.06 with full acknowledgement should be acceptable. Frank can discuss with Matrix himself when he gets the update package ready.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

I have sent copies of the CotD mods to Frank and I am sending out copies to anyone who needs them, just send me an email address so that I can reply with links to the folders.

I had hoped that Matrix would host the files in the Members Area, but nothing came of it.

CHEMKID has left the forum and his email is now inactive, so I have no way of contacting him and I'm not sure what the position would be of using his graphics in the published game, rather than a self install private mod.

I have not heard back from Matrix? The mod files could easily be posted in the Members Area. If not, I would think adding the mod files to a mods folder in v3.06 with full acknowledgement should be acceptable. Frank can discuss with Matrix himself when he gets the update package ready.

I saved the files when CHEMKID left the forum and made them available to anyone who wanted them, including Matrix. I had hoped that they would be made available in the 'Members Area', but that didn't happen. I would like to see them incorporated in the game, but that is above my pay grade and for others to decide.

If Frank provides another campaign, then we will need to find expertise that can provide a similar map for the new playing area. I would like to help as much as possible within the extent of my limited skills.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Rasputitsa, the range from the Centre of Ops that a unit can take on replacements needs to be modified. Right now the range is based on "as the crow flies", which isn't right. Will change that.

I realised that the replacement distance seemed to be as the 'crow flies' and quite liked that. I pictured groups of men, or small units, making their way along by-ways not directly under HQ control, back to their units from the depot, or hospital, leaving the main roads free for movements of large bodies of troops. I imagined stragglers moving in the same way.

If you are going to make replacement by road distance, then the movement allowance should be enough for an independent unit to move, which I thought should be about 2/3 days, about the range for men fending for themselves and perhaps carrying their own supplies.

It is very disruptive to have to send fighting units back to within close range of the LOC to receive replacements, but this is a design decision and in some circumstances may be valid, as a seriously damaged unit may have to go back to the depot, but I don't see that happening very often in this context where units fought on, down to very low numbers, before being relieved.

I understand your wish to give the LOC the importance that it had historically, but that is achieved by the supply system, whilst returning troops could have some flexibility.

This is expanding the discussion, which is not vital right now, but maybe you could consider a two tier supply system, such as PFE (general supply and combat supply), where general supply is more basic and can include foraging, whilst military supply (powder and shot) must come from the LOC. I know this partially covered in the present rules, but perhaps given more structure, with maybe payment for supplies, or just foraging, where currently it is difficult for the player to know which towns have been foraged.

[Rasputitsa]

The CotD counter set contains the icon for a 'barge' unit, is there any intention to introduce river supply.

The 1809 scenario would be problematic, as the spring snow melt and the rivers being high would have allowed supply downstream, but be much more difficult upstream.

Also, there is a 'pont' bridging unit, could that be brought into the game, or would it make it too complicated for the AI to handle ?

[FrankHunter]

The barge unit is supposed to be used when supply is moving along the Danube between two towns on that river. It wouldn't be used for supply to a corps but should for transferring supply. I can check to see if that is working, perhaps its just the wrong counter being displayed.

Originally I had march battalions that had to travel from the entry point all the way to the centre of ops or directly to a corps. That was in the prototype but I ended up going with the current rule. It might be easier to just bring them back.