Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: The Red Baron

I have to believe the tooltip text is incorrect.

Probably a miss-translation from French to English, but the intent is political points not victory points. Later there is an event that reduces McClellan's politic point cost to demote him to something like 25 can't remember for sure.

So they didn't mean it costs political points, they meant to say his political point cost is now 100. That cost may very well mean hundreds of victory points and dozens of national morale, so the number 100 should not be confused with a number deducted from any of your pools. It is merely the number used to calculate the cost to demote him, i.e. political point cost.

Jim

Why not just give us the VP and NM cost? This Politic number seems like a smoke screen.

I suppose it accurately reflects the uncertainty a real general or president might have faced; i.e., you know a particular general is well-connected politically, but you don't know exactly how much snubbing him might cost you. You just know it will cost a lot (or a little)

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

ORIGINAL: veji1

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Because the Union can create unlimited Armies, though, you never have to pay that penalty. Just send the Leader and his "army" to some rear area, and create a new one with the guy you want.

There probably should be a limit on number of armies you can create, which would prevent that workaround, but for now, that's the way you do it

This is a big no no... The course of the war in the east depends on the Union having to do with the bad political generals, a Union that can optimize its command structure too quickly sort of breaks the game...

I agree, you don't even need the "HQ support"unit anymore for an army. Seems to me another "streamlined" feature to make it easier on "casual" players.

Related discussion over on AGEOD boards:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.p ... post295657

There is no unlimited number of armies, there is a hard limit for each nation.

ORIGINAL: Pocus

There is no unlimited number of armies, there is a hard limit for each nation.

But shouldn't that hard cap not just climb slowly ? particularly for the Union ? If you only have say 5 armies until late 62, you have to use your political generals because you need the armies in the field, you can't just give them an army and send it to Maine. If you use better generals with less political clout, than you pay a penalty for not having given an army to the political general.

That number can than climb in 63 and become virtually limitless in 64 ?