Intel Report vs. actual Army Size discrepancy?

[guidon101]

Playing on USA (MG), just finished Fredericksburg.

 

Going into Fredericksburg, Intel Report showed 58-68k manpower. During the battle, the AI deployed around 60k on the field.

They took 15k casualties, got reinforced around 5k after the battle.

Now going into Stones River, and the other minor battle, the Intel Report shows 45-55k. But Stones River reconnaissance report shows the enemy fielding an army of 70k+...

 

So I wanted to ask why such a huge difference between the Intel Report and the actual numbers on the field?

I think it's reasonable to say the Intel Reports are inaccurate, but I thought I read in several Steam and other forum posts that the AI army is supposed to be effectively capped at the Intel Report army size? I've seen this one or two times in earlier battles, but the discrepancy was smaller in scale, like maybe 5k over. This time it's nearly 20k+ difference.

WAD or bug? If WAD, can someone explain the relationship between Intel Reports on manpower vs. actual Army Size on the field?

 

[quicksabre]

As far as I know, there is a minimum enemy army size for each battle. That minimum will be hit regardless of the size of the enemy army in the intel report. If the army size in the intel report is higher than the minimum, though, the AI can scale up its army to field additional troops based on your army size and difficulty settings.

[The Soldier]

That should not be happening under any circumstances, the enemy's fielded army being bigger than what was listed in the Intelligence Service.  It's a bug.

[JonnyH13]

Quicksabre is right.  An extreme example of this is to bring down the enemy army reserve to 0.  The enemy still has an army, just the minimum size.

[The Soldier]

26 minutes ago, JonnyH13 said:

Quicksabre is right.  An extreme example of this is to bring down the enemy army reserve to 0.  The enemy still has an army, just the minimum size.

The enemy army reserves should also never be brought down to zero.  Ever since you did that in testing, sterner implemented a minimum army size for the Intelligence Service - meaning after a battle, if the army size is lower than some number, the enemy will get enough reinforcements to bump it up to that number.  Despite my best efforts to reduce the Confederate army to nothing all the way to Richmond, they never did get to 0.

[guidon101]

2 hours ago, The Soldier said:

That should not be happening under any circumstances, the enemy's fielded army being bigger than what was listed in the Intelligence Service.  It's a bug.

I really hope what you're saying is true and that bug will be fixed. It's quite game-changing and very misleading otherwise.

For the time being, what quicksabre described is basically what appears to happen in every campaign, which is unfortunate and makes the Intel Reports seem like a gimmick.

@The Soldier also, LOL at the signature! "Confederate infantry were armed with kevlar and M16s." is exactly how I felt in Fredericksburg. Turns out every single one of their infantry brigades was carrying Harpers Ferry rifles...shudder to think what the next battles will be like from this point... 

Incidentally, throughout this Union campaign so far, all those quotes have been humorously close to the truth.

 

[The Soldier]

I have a feeling this bug is done on a case-by-case basis, so it might take a while to fix every known bit.

And my signature actually relates to how UGG was at some point or another, from our local Mr. Mercanto.