Please let us split or change bridages formations.

[Nox165]

Would be nice if we could split a really big bridgage into two small bridgages. If that's not possible giving us the option to bend or change the formation would also be welcomed.

[A. P. Hill]

Frankly, and I've said this before, I'd like the troops at regimental level and allow us to build our armies from there.

[Kevlarburrito]

On 1/11/2017 at 6:38 PM, Nox165 said:

Would be nice if we could split a really big bridgage into two small bridgages. If that's not possible giving us the option to bend or change the formation would also be welcomed.

You are referring to the next unit level below brigade. This is called a regiment, or battalion. The game does NOT depict the army composition of the day accurately. There are not "two smaller birdgages [read: brigades]" in one brigade. A Civil War era brigade was composed of 2 to 5 regiments of 1,000 men each as the standard. This would place brigades at 2,000 to 5,000 men each. Then, yes, it would make sense to divide brigades up into regiments. Or "small brigades" as you worded it.

[Col_Kelly]

That would mean changing the whole AI so it could act at a regimental level. Lots of work for un-guaranteed results. I like the idea of a brigade bending to avoid flanking fire however. 

[Fred Sanford]

Maybe if regiments were shown in the Camp only? i.e., performance stats, composition, commanders and all that are tracked on the regimental level, and they player could form, reinforce or disband these regiments in Camp.  The player would also group the regiments into brigades, which would be what gets used in battle, just like now.

[thomas aagaard]

7 hours ago, Kevlarburrito said:

You are referring to the next unit level below brigade. This is called a regiment, or battalion. The game does NOT depict the army composition of the day accurately. There are not "two smaller birdgages [read: brigades]" in one brigade. A Civil War era brigade was composed of 2 to 5 regiments of 1,000 men each as the standard. This would place brigades at 2,000 to 5,000 men each. Then, yes, it would make sense to divide brigades up into regiments. Or "small brigades" as you worded it.

The regiments was never at full strength. around 4-500 men was more common.(with CSA regiments a bit larger than US regiments)
At Gettysburg the union average regimental strength was just 375 men.

And that is why this game is a brigade level game... and work fine as such.

Allowing it in the camp - sure that could be fun.
But not on the battlefield. that would change the game to a battalion level game and that is a totally different game.

Edited January 17, 2017 by thomas aagaard

[Admiral666]

I doubt it'd be easy to do, but we essentially have the necessary groundwork as it stands. Shift everything up by one -- current brigades become regiments, divisions become brigades, corps become divisions, and finally create a new level of the OOB for corps level command. I see that as the ideal way to implement this without needing to completely rewrite large portions of code. Hopefully, anyway.

[Fred Sanford]

41 minutes ago, Admiral666 said:

I doubt it'd be easy to do, but we essentially have the necessary groundwork as it stands. Shift everything up by one -- current brigades become regiments, divisions become brigades, corps become divisions, and finally create a new level of the OOB for corps level command. I see that as the ideal way to implement this without needing to completely rewrite large portions of code. Hopefully, anyway.

Except there'd be about 4x as many units on the map, with the consequent impact on performance.  Also, historically brigades operated together, but if we had separate regiments used the same as brigades are now, they'd be all over the place.  The game already allows more operational flexibility than historically feasible wrt to command and control.

[jimcarrel]

"they'd be all over the place"... ha it's already like that when I split out skirmishers. I can hear them all over the map yelling "Hey John! Where are ya at!?"

[RobWheat61]

7 hours ago, Admiral666 said:

I doubt it'd be easy to do, but we essentially have the necessary groundwork as it stands. Shift everything up by one -- current brigades become regiments, divisions become brigades, corps become divisions, and finally create a new level of the OOB for corps level command. I see that as the ideal way to implement this without needing to completely rewrite large portions of code. Hopefully, anyway.

 

7 hours ago, Fred Sanford said:

Except there'd be about 4x as many units on the map, with the consequent impact on performance.  Also, historically brigades operated together, but if we had separate regiments used the same as brigades are now, they'd be all over the place.  The game already allows more operational flexibility than historically feasible wrt to command and control.

Furthermore these new regiments would need to fill the same space as the actual brigade units, which would mean a much higher zoom level, which very likely is impossible. Or it would require new bigger (hand-drawn) 3D maps. Overall it would not be worth the effort and at this point so far into game developement, it's just a bad idea.

[Admiral666]

Or you just adjust the size of regiments downward, both numerically and terms of how wide their formations are. The complaint was that regiments aren't simulated. That would be the most straightforward way to do it. If the player wishes to use their regiments in an ahistorical manner, who are we to tell them otherwise? It would mean some reorganisation in OOBs, sure, but that would be required with any implementation of regiments. And the ability to split brigades into regiments could easily result in 4x the number of units on the map as well -- why the backlash? No need to write the code to split brigades if you instead account for regiments in your basic unit structure/OOB.

[A. P. Hill]

14 hours ago, Fred Sanford said:

Maybe if regiments were shown in the Camp only? i.e., performance stats, composition, commanders and all that are tracked on the regimental level, and they player could form, reinforce or disband these regiments in Camp.  The player would also group the regiments into brigades, which would be what gets used in battle, just like now.

I think this makes a lot of sense.   I would only care to micro manage regiments in the camp ... at least that way you'll know who your officers and such could be.  And once you get your regiments shuffled into acceptable brigades, you could form your divisions.

[Kevlarburrito]

On 1/17/2017 at 7:35 PM, Admiral666 said:

Or you just adjust the size of regiments downward, both numerically and terms of how wide their formations are. The complaint was that regiments aren't simulated. That would be the most straightforward way to do it. If the player wishes to use their regiments in an ahistorical manner, who are we to tell them otherwise? It would mean some reorganisation in OOBs, sure, but that would be required with any implementation of regiments. And the ability to split brigades into regiments could easily result in 4x the number of units on the map as well -- why the backlash? No need to write the code to split brigades if you instead account for regiments in your basic unit structure/OOB.

I agree with this. In fact the code is there, it's the same idea as splitting "skirmishers" off from a "brigade". In fact, and sort of comically, the amount of men splitting off as skirmishers are accounting for late war regimental sizes (albeit at the low end numerically). 

I'd really like to see regiments accounted for, not called Brigades.

[Kevlarburrito]

On 1/17/2017 at 5:22 AM, Col_Kelly said:

That would mean changing the whole AI so it could act at a regimental level. Lots of work for un-guaranteed results. I like the idea of a brigade bending to avoid flanking fire however. 

How so? All of the mechanics are already there. The "brigades" we have are already splitting off smaller elements.

[rickdiesel2k]

What I would like (if I haven't overlooked it) is while in the camp, allow us to designate which brigade the division commander rides with. I don't want him taking over for a really good brigadier when there is a colonel leading another brigade.

[rickdiesel2k]

22 minutes ago, Kevlarburrito said:

I agree with this. In fact the code is there, it's the same idea as splitting "skirmishers" off from a "brigade". In fact, and sort of comically, the amount of men splitting off as skirmishers are accounting for late war regimental sizes (albeit at the low end numerically). 

I'd really like to see regiments accounted for, not called Brigades.

At what point are there way too many units to control? A lot of computers may not be able to handle that many units.

[Nox165]

On 1/17/2017 at 2:22 AM, Col_Kelly said:

That would mean changing the whole AI so it could act at a regimental level. Lots of work for un-guaranteed results. I like the idea of a brigade bending to avoid flanking fire however. 

47 minutes ago, Kevlarburrito said:

How so? All of the mechanics are already there. The "brigades" we have are already splitting off smaller elements.

 yeah, I dont understand what he is getting at

 

[Col_Kelly]

You can't just give this advantage to the player and not implement it for AI : would be unfair since the player could outmaneuver every brigade he stumbles upon with much more firepower than a simple skirmishers divide.

Yet  the AI never splits off skirmishers so no the feature is not here just waiting to be modified with a few more lines of code.

Think of how many factors would have to be considered every time a infantry regiment would advance : are flanks covered ? Is the unit in front of me stronger than me ? Should I reattach to my brigade or not given the danger ? Not to mention the impact on performance since you'd have way more units making decisions on the map, imagine synchronizing that into one big battle plan... a mess ! Not impossible but way too time-consuming for the team right now. 

The simple making of a line would have to be coded again as well because of regiments lesser firepower and smaller size (you'd probably need double-lining where regiments are split up). Battle duration would also be impacted (smaller units = lesser damage = impacted flow of battle = different timers for EVERY map...)

These are just a few points but I'm sure many more can be found

[Don't Escrow Taxes]

I'd settle for allowing us to deploy the brigades in something other than just one long line - i.e., double line, like the old Sid Meier games.  

[GeneralPITA]

Perhaps captains could be drawn from the reserve pool and assigned to skirmishers that detach. That would add some depth. 

I like the idea of regimental management in the OOB, but brigade level on the battlefield. 110 brigades at Fredericksburg was plenty for me to manage. I'll probably have 125 brigades at Battle of Richmond/Washington. You propose doubling that to 250? 

If brigades are allowed to split in half mid-battle, can each detach it's own set of skirmishers as well? Now you're talkin about a ton of micro. Skirmishers require more vigilance with this patch. 

[RoverGrover]

1 hour ago, GeneralPITA said:

Perhaps captains could be drawn from the reserve pool and assigned to skirmishers that detach. That would add some depth. 

I like the idea of regimental management in the OOB, but brigade level on the battlefield. 110 brigades at Fredericksburg was plenty for me to manage. I'll probably have 125 brigades at Battle of Richmond/Washington. You propose doubling that to 250? 

If brigades are allowed to split in half mid-battle, can each detach it's own set of skirmishers as well? Now you're talkin about a ton of micro. Skirmishers require more vigilance with this patch. 

Agree. Micro is already harsh. The last thing we need is more individual units.  In management screen is fine, on the battlefield please no. My computer would crush the game no matter how many units are displayed...  my slow reaction time not so much. 

[Nox165]

5 hours ago, GeneralPITA said:

Perhaps captains could be drawn from the reserve pool and assigned to skirmishers that detach. That would add some depth. 

I like the idea of regimental management in the OOB, but brigade level on the battlefield. 110 brigades at Fredericksburg was plenty for me to manage. I'll probably have 125 brigades at Battle of Richmond/Washington. You propose doubling that to 250? 

If brigades are allowed to split in half mid-battle, can each detach it's own set of skirmishers as well? Now you're talkin about a ton of micro. Skirmishers require more vigilance with this patch. 

just because you cant mirco dose not mean others cant, Didnt darth create the whole "innovative command system" for that very reason?

[A. P. Hill]

3 hours ago, Nox165 said:

just because you cant mirco dose not mean others cant, Didnt darth create the whole "innovative command system" for that very reason?

AND ... some of us being really anal, want to command every last man if we can.

[GeneralPITA]

5 hours ago, Nox165 said:

just because you cant mirco dose not mean others cant, Didnt darth create the whole "innovative command system" for that very reason?

I killed 120k men at F-burg on hard yesterday. Micro doesn't bother me, but when we approach 600 individual units it gets out of hand. 

[Nox165]

9 hours ago, A. P. Hill said:

AND ... some of us being really anal, want to command every last man if we can.

Fuck yeah, EVERY MAN EVERY HORSE!