Hint: Pushing the limits of the editor

[orendel]

Just finished my Wagram OoB and encountered the following problem:
Both armies are very big (French CEH=271!). The French had more than 500 guns on the battlefield. This is much more than the editor would allow. I found the following solution to add this many guns nevertheless:
- Add your batteries as normal.
- Once you reach the limit the troop option "Line foot artillery" does no longer appear.
- Go to the batteries you just added and edit them: Set their gun count to zero. This way you have new points to spend on more batteries and the option "Line foot artillery" appears again.
- Add more batteries.
- After you have added all batteries you need, set the gun counts back to their normal numbers.

This also works with other troop types and could be useful for creating big cavalry clashes.

[Count von Csollich]

Nice idea orendel!

Have you actually tested your OoBs with this configuration?..do they work?

thanks for the info in advance!

CvC

[GrosPaul]

I wonder if that trick doesn't reveal a bug.

So, actually, we could have as much artillery on km² than during the 1914-1918 war?!

Horrendous! I hope I misunderstand.

[orendel]

Yes, the OoBs work (try yourself: http://www.histwar.org/forum/index.php/topic,4062.msg55005.html#msg55005) and no, it's not a bug, just an unofficial way to work with the editor.  
And I don't know how the gun density was in WW1 but at Wagram there were more than 950 guns on both sides...

[Ras]

[..] and no, it's not a bug, just an unofficial way to work with the editor.  
[..]

You're circumventing the quota rule. Gamers call this an exploit.
It's similar to your cloning of regiments by renaming them.
If you would use both techniques to create an Order of Battle to play against a human it would be extremely unfair. (I'm not saying this is your intention)
If this was the world of Total War you could be certain that many people would do exactly that to win. Having more cannons than the enemy with the same CEH gives you a decisive advantage. I would like to see this fixed so I don't need to worry about it.

It's nice for making scenarios, though.

[orendel]

You're circumventing the quota rule. Gamers call this an exploit.
It's similar to your cloning of regiments by renaming them.
If you would use both techniques to create an Order of Battle to play against a human it would be extremely unfair. (I'm not saying this is your intention)
If this was the world of Total War you could be certain that many people would do exactly that to win. Having more cannons than the enemy with the same CEH gives you a decisive advantage. I would like to see this fixed so I don't need to worry about it.

It's nice for making scenarios, though.

Just some remarks:
My only interest concerning the editor IS making historical scenarios. It should be possible to create every historical scenario that happened in the real world with the editor. I really hope that this doesn't get "fixed" as long as anybody works on historical OoBs, Wagram would not have been possible without this "exploit".
BTW, you don't get guns 'for free' with this method. The CEH rises with every gun you add and you have less points to spend on infantry and cavalry.

[Ras]

Just some remarks:
My only interest concerning the editor IS making historical scenarios. It should be possible to create every historical scenario that happened in the real world with the editor. I really hope that this doesn't get "fixed" as long as anybody works on historical OoBs, Wagram would not have been possible without this "exploit".

I hope you don't misunderstand me here. I agree with you that it would also be a problem if you couldn't make "unbalanced" historical scenarios. I don't want to take that away.

BTW, you don't get guns 'for free' with this method. The CEH rises with every gun you add and you have less points to spend on infantry and cavalry.

Yes, the CEH rises but the quota is ignored. You could argue that artillery is worth more than the infantry for the same price.
I need to look into it closer to confirm that.
But my alarm bells are ringing when I look at this from a gaming point of view.
If I want to, I can build an OoB with only "Excellent" quality units by renaming/cloning the best. Then I'll add some more artillery than my opponent. It doesn't matter if I have fewer men, the quality of my troops will be better.
Do you see my point or am I too paranoid?

[orendel]

I can see your point but I'm personally not much interested in MP gaming. That's why I'm maybe somewhat naive on this matter. 
I just fear that there will be the day I could create an OoB for Leipzig and the Allies can get just some 200 guns instead of the 1400 they fielded.
BTW, I'm sure that the creator of the Borodino scenario that comes with the game made the same 'exploit' - otherwise it would not have been possible to give the Russians 634 guns. 

[Gunner24]

I'm not sure I like the sound of this, but I've not spent much time on the OOB editor yet - so I better say no more.

As far as MP is concerned "random" OOBs work very well indeed, no need to spend many hours making OOBs when you can produce them in a few minutes.  They can then be changed around a little during deployment if the players taking part want to re-asign units from one Corps to another.