Issue with determining the commander of Allied armies

[JanSorensen]

As per rule 13.8.6 the commander of an Allied Army is a leader of the phasing player.

Whoever wrote and/or proofread this needs a flogging as it says nothing whatsoever about the commander for the defending force.

In the original EiA rules the commander was a leader from the side with the most corps - yet in EiANW it appears to be the leader with the highest seniority rating regardless of the number of corps from each nation.

How come - and where is that documented? Mind, the read me for 1.02k does not seem to mention this. At the very least - document the procedure, please.

[DCWhitworth]

Hi I raised this issue in this thread - tm.asp?m=1749422&mpage=1&key=&#1749422

It's covered in the addendum file in the data folder.

[JanSorensen]

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth

Hi I raised this issue in this thread - tm.asp?m=1749422&mpage=1&key=?

It's covered in the addendum file in the data folder.

Much appreciate the answer.

Not your fault I am sure but placing such information in the Data folder rather than in the manual folder or in the read me file seems to serve only to cause confusion.

Matrix - please have the manual writer update the manual to reflect the addendum. Its clear that neither game nor manual was ready to ship when you did so please alleviate the issue with the manual in addtion to the work in progress on the game.

[DCWhitworth]

I'm sure Matrix have this on the list of things to do, but there's no point in getting down to it right now with more changes to the game potentially on the way, the manual would just get out of date again.

[JanSorensen]

I disagree. With that mindset noone/few will be left playing the game when its time to update the manual.
Most people will play a new game within the first year (or less) so updating the manual much later makes less sense.
Besides, a skilled writer should be able to incorporate the addendum into the manual in an afternoon.

[MarshallEllis]

It is true that I am resolving through seniority as opposed to corps size. How bout we fix than THEN document?

[JanSorensen]

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

It is true that I am resolving through seniority as opposed to corps size. How bout we fix than THEN document?

Marshall Ellis,

I am not sure I understand what you mean.

Are you suggesting to fix the issue so the commander of an allied army is selected based on number of corps from each nation?

Either way is fine by me - as long as its well documented. My main issue was the lack of documentation - followed by the surprise that errata / changes are documented sometimes in the read me and other times in the data folder.

Please fix the inconsistent way of documenting changes first. As it is now needless confusion is being generated

[MarshallEllis]

JanSorensen:
 
Yep! That's exactly what I am asking, should we fix this so that the corps numbers determine leader?
 
The documentation (manual addendums) and current version release notes are ALWAYS in the DATA dir???
Are you saying the readmes have different info?

[JanSorensen]

Marshall Ellis,

I dont really care either way concerning the commander of an allied force. As long as its clear how things work I am fine with the current implementation.

The readme in the main folder tells me that all units may now be put on loan (amongst alot of other things). Nowhere in the Data folder do I see that info (release notes or addendum). Nor did I even know to look in the Data folder at all!

Its entirely possible I have somehow misunderstood things - but normally I expect to read the "read me" file and have it tell me what I need to know - or atleast where to look. Why I should be expected to read the "read me" file in the main folder, the release notes in the Data folder and the addendum in the Data folder puzzles me. Mind, thats in addition to reading the manual.

[MarshallEllis]

JanSorensen:
 
I don't think you misunderstood anything. There is room for a disconnect here since typically Matrix builds the readme and I build the release notes. I'm not throwing this at Matrix because maybe I changed something after submitting my list to Matrix. Your point is noted here.
 
 
 
 

[Jimmer]

I believe (going from memory here) that the original game rules were:
 
The leader came from the major power with the most corps counters in the battle (corps larger than 20 factors did NOT count as 2 for this purpose).
 
Within that first restriction, the leader who commands is the one with the highest commander rating. It does not matter if a leader with a higher rating is in the stack with another MP's corps. Only the leaders from within the force with the highest number of corps could lead.
 
There were two end-cases:
 
If the MP with the highest number of corps didn't have any leaders, then a commander from the second-largest group of corps would lead. Etc.
 
If there is a tie between two or more powers for "highest corps count", then the players would decide which force was "larger" by agreement. If they couldn't agree, a die was rolled to decide.
 
The same rules applied to both offensive and defensive commander choosings.