Matrix Games Forums

Damn, I've been keeping most of the "Poor", "Bad" ones, etc. locked up in a Federal pen in Buffalo, NY. [:D]

i do same im to bored to assign them all and the bonus when poor isnt that high, oh does thís mean i can sell generals on Ebay too Gil? [:D]

Rasmus

Edit: thinking stray thots. Instead of gold farmers in Differnt MMPORGs i could sell a service playing a specific battle or turn through with more or less succes, ofc [:D]
Wonder what that would be called. Im not chinease and im not farming gold....

Usually, I execute "Fremont"  [:D]

Well there is a way. Put Fremont in charge of a single horrid bde in a division that im going to disband any how. Charge into CSA territory so when he loses a battle he cant retreat and is captured.

Dont have to demote him then... yes i know its free in first turn, but still i find that way just as gamey and more evil!

Shhhhhhh, can be used for other annoyance's too not to mention any names.

Yeah yeah i know, but these thing just pop into my head with out me trying. [;)]

Hmm, would another annoyance have the initials "Butler"?  Nah, he's too politically connected to treat that way, NOT! [:D]

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Well there is a way. Put Fremont in charge of a single horrid bde in a division that im going to disband any how. Charge into CSA territory so when he loses a battle he cant retreat and is captured.

Dont have to demote him then... yes i know its free in first turn, but still i find that way just as gamey and more evil!

Shhhhhhh, can be used for other annoyance's too not to mention any names.

Yeah yeah i know, but these thing just pop into my head with out me trying. [;)]

... don't generals left alone in an enemy occupied province run the risk of being captured? (I don't have the rules handy to look that up nor have I tested that...) If so... uh... just give him orders to scout out Richmond.... [:D]

ORIGINAL: Walloc

<snip>

Edit: thinking stray thots. Instead of gold farmers in Differnt MMPORGs i could sell a service playing a specific battle of turn through with more or less succes, ofc [:D]
Wonder what that would be called. Im not chinease and im not farming gold....

Hmm, maybe called "FoF Merc"! (Mercenary) or "Gamer for Hire" [:D]

You could advertise in "Gamer of Fortune"!

... don't generals left alone in an enemy occupied province run the risk of being captured? (I don't have the rules handy to look that up nor have I tested that...) If so... uh... just give him orders to scout out Richmond....

No they dont. So u have to attach a lousy bde sadly

ORIGINAL: Walloc

... don't generals left alone in an enemy occupied province run the risk of being captured? (I don't have the rules handy to look that up nor have I tested that...) If so... uh... just give him orders to scout out Richmond....

No they dont. So u have to attach a lousy bde sadly

...drat... too bad. "We need some volunteers for a suci... I mean scouting mission to Richmond... You'll have the honor of being led by our best General for the job.... General Freemont."

janh,
I believe that your questions have mostly been answered, but feel that I should add two things:
1) As I wrote yesterday, we did not program it so that you can permanently attach brigadier generals to brigades, mainly because this would be too much micromanagement for most players and thus potentially alienate players and drive off potential customers. That said, we are planning an expansion pack for later in the year, and one of our big areas of focus will be making the generals part of the game much more multi-faceted, and one thing we might do is what you suggest. (If we did it, it would have to be a game option that people can toggle off if they don't like it.) So, if you and others add this idea to the Wish List thread, it will definitely be considered when the time comes.
2) You're not the first to suggest an alliance between FOF and MMG. (And, I've noticed, the same suggestion has been made for AGEOD and MMG. MMG's ears must be constantly burning.) I'm not sure how well the two systems would mesh, but this is something to keep in mind for the future.

Hey Gil

Keeping in mind what Rasmus stated above re:combat bonuses from Generals stacked with a brigade, that does give some more impetus to having more (one-stars) available to pair up with brigades.

With that thought, comes to mind the rule about attaching more than one general to a container, and the one (general) used is alphabetically determined. Maybe for the expansion, there should be a way to mark which general is actually in overall command of the container, and thereby allow extra generals to be attached to the higher (division) container for dispersal as brigade commanders on the HW map if someone wants to play that deep. This would kinda give the original poster what he wants, regarding brigade generals, without too much change in the current coding, I would think.

I think I see what you're saying -- you want the player to be able to designate which of 2+ 2-star generals commands a division, so that one can use other 2-stars with good ratings to command brigades? I guess I can see some value in that -- might as well add it to the Wish List.

ORIGINAL: Gray_Lensman

Hmm, would another annoyance have the initials "Butler"?  Nah, he's too politically connected to treat that way, NOT! [:D]

Just stick Butler and that terrible 3 star in Ft Monroe. They'll be sitting in Andersonville by the time Sherman needs Butler's slot. [;)]