Relocation after enemy surrender

[Grand_Armee]

On two occasions now my troops have come hurtling home when the enemy surrendered.

1792 scenario:

I'm besieging paris. Inssurectionists cause France to surrender to me but not my ally. On a Concorde they came, my brave boys. Right into Magdeburg where I'd just improved both barracks and kulture. Sadly, my lads were bent on breaking windows because they plundered as soon as the wheels hit the tarmac. Boo-Hiss!

Same game, 4 years later:

I've laid siege to Stockholm after spending six months reducing the Swedish armies while laying siege to Rostock. Boom, Sweden surrenders! This time my lads took the quick trip to Courland. Yes, Courland at the eastern rim of the realm...with nobody there to greet them save a handful of militia with not a peanut butter and jelly sandwich between them. Lost some good men that day...but fortunately I'd forgotten to toggle the plunder switch that turn.

Not that I'd upgraded Courland...I figure Ivan will want it some day.

So, another thing is added to my wish list:

1. Fix bugs
2. Fix POW's so they can't be released without peace
3. Fix cossacks/guerillas/irregular putzes who can wipe out a depot protected by 200,000 men merely by being there
4. Fix teleportation after enemy surrender to avoid plundering the homeland or attrition by starvation.

After that...I'll be as happy as a pig in ****

[ericbabe]

We plan to do just this for the POW's in a future patch, and also to lower the cost of keeping them (and also to award victory points based on the strength of POW's returned at the end of a war.)

Version 1.1 has the new rule that depots can only be disrupted (that is, destroyed despite the fact that they are guarded) when the depot is located in enemy territory. We're also considering implementing a ratio such that if the depot is guarded well enough then it can't be disrupted no matter where it is. As it is now larger forces guarding a depot make it less likely that it will be disrupted, but it may still be too easy to disrupt them.

Plundering the homeland after a post-war relocation is something we should be able to fix (simply remove all plunder orders of any unit that gets teleported). Making teleported units immune to the supply/attrition rules is a bit more difficult to implement but it may be something we can address.

[Hard Sarge]

Making teleported units immune to the supply/attrition rules is a bit more difficult to implement but it may be something we can address.

that would be nice Eric

as it is not our fault for not being ready for the needed supplies for them

maybe a glitch rule, that the turn a enemy surrenders to you, you do not need supplies for the troops

(figure the folks back home are happy and pull out all the horded good to have a party for all the troops marching by ??????)

it could be exploited, but over all, the times you would gain from it, would be offset by the number of times you would of been hammered by it

( I lost 60 K + troops one time to this, took me 6 months before those Armies could move again)

HARD_Sarge

[ericbabe]

I agree it's disappointing to win a war only to lose 10,000's of troops. (I started preparing for it when I play by putting depots where I expect my units to be transported after the war...but this isn't something that players should need to do!) "No supply necessary on the turn you win a war" might be a good way to handle it.

[Ralegh]

I disagree Eric. The solution is to get rid of teleporting! Give 'em limited access for 3 months - if they need more they either take access rights as a peace term, or violate territory. They walked in - let em walk out.

This simple change would get rid of all the problems with teleporting to the wrong place; force naval powers to pick their guys back up, and remove plunder/supply problems - and it would be more realistic!

[Oh, and both access and violating need to allow fleets to sail into ports, allowing for embarking troops - which aint currently the case.]

[jchastain]

What if every peace treaty automatically included 3 months of military access for each side at no additional VP cost? When you select that it is a peace treaty, just append the additional clause right there and then.

[carnifex]

Teleportation should be eliminated.

Case in point: Your France is plowing through Austria on the way to Moscow. Hey, it's the Russian border! Whoa, Austria surrenders! Looks like we have to drive through Austria again

Give them 3 month access for limited and 6 month access for full surrender.

[YohanTM2]

ORIGINAL: jchastain

What if every peace treaty automatically included 3 months of military access for each side at no additional VP cost? When you select that it is a peace treaty, just append the additional clause right there and then.

Ah, an easy yet elegant solution!

[Mynok]

I like the solution for human players...but what will the AI do with it? Forage around in my homeland for 3 months before getting stuck?

[:-]

[ian77]

ORIGINAL: Mynok


I like the solution for human players...but what will the AI do with it? Forage around in my homeland for 3 months before getting stuck?

[:-]

But armies did hang around until the peace was sorted out.... though I take your point about the AI, we could do with them making the best possible use of their troops.

Could teleporting not be delayed, like all treaties etc, for one month/turn? Then we could prepare for the return of our troops, or teleports are the last moves to occur after supply has been assessed... or maybe teleport in two months if no access treaty has been included in your peace terms... to allow the 1805 war to be continued by France against Russia once Austria surrenders...

Too many thinkings..head hurtings..[X(]

[ian77]

After a bit more thought, I think the victor should be given access, free of any treaty conditions.... you have won the war, they cannot stop you from marching your troops where ever you want...

I would imagine that the put upon loser would feel increased resentment if your troops are plodding all over their territory, but once you move out that resentment would/should vanish. This then solves the problem of ceding territory in the peace treaty, having the conquering garrison return from the teleport province, when the game finally caught up with the treaty arrangements and two months after surrender I get to march my troops back to their cosy new billets where they were before peace came and ruined it all...
only to discover a *(&^%£*&^ cossack was there when the province became mine, and conquered it without a fight!

[Squamry]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe


Plundering the homeland after a post-war relocation is something we should be able to fix (simply remove all plunder orders of any unit that gets teleported). Making teleported units immune to the supply/attrition rules is a bit more difficult to implement but it may be something we can address.

Could you not give an option for the player to select where provinces where teleporting troops go? For balance you might want to limit this to provinces adjacent to the surrendering enemy, but this gives the player some chance to stop 350,000 men being dumped into a province that can only support 30k.

[Reg Pither]

ORIGINAL: ian77

After a bit more thought, I think the victor should be given access, free of any treaty conditions.... you have won the war, they cannot stop you from marching your troops where ever you want...

Maybe there should be an automatic 1 to 6 month Free Passage clause for the winner of a war...?

[ian77]

ORIGINAL: Reg Pither


Maybe there should be an automatic 1 to 6 month Free Passage clause for the winner of a war...?

I do not think it needs to be limited to a particular period, IMHO it can be automatic "Violate neutrality" and after the auto forced Peace or treaty extended forced Peace, the loser can go to war / ultimatum / ignore as per normal game play...

If it is auto violate and you leave troops in their territory their resentment should build, if it is auto access, then there will be no build up of resentment. No real biggie, but IMHO auto violate is the more realistic, but I will go with whatever is the easiest to code/programme.... so long as we get rid of the teleporting[;)]

Ian

[Reg Pither]

ORIGINAL: ian77
If it is auto violate and you leave troops in their territory their resentment should build, if it is auto access, then there will be no build up of resentment.

Good point. I agree with your idea, then. [:)]

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Reg Pither

ORIGINAL: ian77
If it is auto violate and you leave troops in their territory their resentment should build, if it is auto access, then there will be no build up of resentment.

Good point. I agree with your idea, then. [:)]

yea, but who cares if there resentment builds up or not, they are not going to like you anyway, pretty much what ever you do, they are not going to like you LOL

funny, in my current game, all my ex allies were in the deepest red and they all broke and went to war with me

all my ex enemies are now bright yellow and smileing

duh

HARD_Sarge

[ian77]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge


yea, but who cares if there resentment builds up

HARD_Sarge

I care... I want to be loved by all the little computer people![:'(]

Ian

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: ian77

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge


yea, but who cares if there resentment builds up

HARD_Sarge

I care... I want to be loved by all the little computer people![:'(]

Ian

now you gonna give them ideas

how does COGSIMS3 sound ????

[ian77]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

how does COGSIMS3 sound ????

Probably very very loud, lots of volley fire, trumpets, hurrahs, and shouting... bring it on!!

Ian