3 Star General Casualties

[jazzbo]

AACW rules provide that 3 star generals are immune to wounds or death in combat. However, there are several instances where 3 star generals were killed or wounded in combat, including A. S. Johnston and McPhearson (killed), and Joe Johnston (wounded). While the risk of either should be small, it should not be zero if you want to stay historical.

Otherwise, I own both AACW and NCP and love both. They fill a real void that the hobby has been struggling with in strategic/operational simulations of both eras forever.

Regards,

Jazzbo

[PhilThib]

We know about it, and we can have a small chance of fatal wound implemented, but the percentage is so tiny that in most cases it will not be noticed

[Pocus]

People keep thinking that 3 stars generals can't be killed in battles. They can!
You can kill a general with 2 methods within the game:

a) stray shot. For game balance purpose, 3* don't roll this one.

b) having the parent unit destroyed. Like you caught the Army of TN and make enough casualties on it that even the army HQ is destroyed. 3* can be killed there.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Henry D.]

He means that only 1 and 2* can be killed or wounded in battle without their parent unit being totally destroyed. 3 and 4* are excempt from that because the majority opion is that this could disrupt the chain of command to much (like when there is only on 3* is present in a region, commanding an army. If he gets killed or wounded, the army instantly dissolves and its corps become independent forces until the player can get another 3* or 4* there to form a new army).

There is merit to this thought, no doubt, but personally I think since the introduction of the the re-deployment rule this argument is no longer as convincing as it was before. Still, if Your army desintigrates due to death/wounding of the only eliglible commander on the spot, that iwould be quite bad, but IMHO realistic, too, and You could teleport a replacement pretty much always immediately in the next turn.

But this issue has been debated quite a few times already and participants could always only agree to disagree...

Regards, Henry

[Guru80]

With the "Teleport" ability I think that all generals should be fair game for death in the field. Honestly, reading Foote's novel has exposed me to just how many generals did get wounded and died during the conflict I think that it should actually be made easier especially for the side that is getting beat as they are more likely to be out in the middle of the gun fire trying to rally their troops.

Also, reading as how when generals were summoned or sent to take over an army or theater how they would ride non-stop through all kinds of weather and get to were they were needed as fast as possible the "Teleport" ability makes perfect sense in that regard. If one 3 or 4* goes down you can have another out there immediatly to take over.

[McNaughton]

The only thing I care about is the AI. If the AI cannot handle it, don't do it!

[Guru80]

The only thing I care about is the AI. If the AI cannot handle it, don't do it!

Oh I agree but since there is already the possibility of that happening (Generals dieing or getting wounded in a high rank) I assume that it can deal with it.

I have lost a commander of the Army of the Ohio on an assault on Nashville and all of a sudden my 1800 strength meant nothing as my corps fled without firing a shot! I mention it because I just recalled it happening reading this thread. Happened in a PBEM game and it cost me big time!

[Bourgui]

We know about it, and we can have a small chance of fatal wound implemented, but the percentage is so tiny that in most cases it will not be noticed

I completely destroyed Lee's army, by death and POW, in the vicinity of Richmond, as he was surrrounded by US troops. Every high ranking general survived, only 2 on 5 1-star general died. It's completely crazy. Everybody (including these general) should have finished the war as dead or POW.

[Eugene Carr]

You can alter a file in the settings folder - Combats.opt a lower number means more chance of dead 1 and 2 star generals.

Looking at the 3 stars in game only AS Johnston and JB McPherson were killed as army commanders the others were killed while at 2 star rank (Corps ) or lower in the case of Lyons. Earl Van Dorn was a Major General when he was shot by an outraged husband!

On the other hand the potential to lose an army commander would be an incentive to keep Corps within the command potential of their commanders.

[veji1]

I think we should get more casualties for generals, but with 2 categories, deaths and injuries. When a general's force gets wiped out we are told that Gen. X is recuperating from injuries in city Y.

This should happen more often, many of the ACW generals got injured : In a big battle with one 3*, a few 2* and 5 to 8 1*, so around 10 generals per side we should have between 1 and 3 casualties, with a majority of injuries.

I would like that in battles where a 1*'s troops are engaged to see him have a 3% chance of being moderately injured (removed for 2 turns), 3% for badly injured (removed for 5 turns) and 3% to die. Add to that an extra roll when the force is routed or when elements under his command are destroyed. For a 2* the chances would be reduced to 2% each (6% overall) with only one extra roll in a rout, while for 3* the chances would be only 1% each (3% overall).

To be honest I would like to have a game where many more leaders get killed and where you have more leaders (à la leader mod) to fill in the slots in case of injury.

we are stuck, for good and bad, with the historical leaders, but it should be possible to play a game where Jackson gets killed in 1861 while Bee gets to become a great corps leader..

[tagwyn]

I recall during Chancellorsville when Jackson was badly wounded and forced to withdraw from the field, Stuart took command of the Corp and did fairly well. Disciplined soldiers, like Jackson's, would not flee the field. T

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[jeff b]

There are exceptions to everything. At Chickamauga, Sheridan along with Rosecrans and quite a few disciplined soldiers did flee the field. Thomas and his men stood their ground, preventing total destruction of the routed Union forces.

Remember when Rosecrans and Sheridan fled the field at Chickamauga it wasn't because of a General's death. It was Longstreet's corp pouring through the hole that (I want to think Gen'l Wood) that was created when Rosy shuffled his line to plug a hole that actually wasn't there.

On the whole I agree that more generals should become causalties. If you look at the ANV after Gettysburg, Lee had to replace a very large number of his 1 & 2 star generals. In the CSA system Longstreet & Jackson were 3-stars and the one was killed at Chancellorsville, and the other wounded at the Wilderness.

[beefcake]

I am curious to know if being wounded in combat cancels any chance for the commander to gain seniority (assuming he survives). I still have my copy of Victory Games' "Civil War" board game. In that game, each general in combat rolled 2d6 to check for wounds or KIA. If they survived the fight and were promotable, you could put them into the pool for possible promotion on the next turn. But if they were wounded, then you missed the opportunity.

There are cases of generals being automatically promoted to by scripted events in Ageod's game. Could the same thing happen as a result of combat casualities? Such as a 1* general being promoted to 2* status for Corps command? Or a 2* general being promoted to 3* star status when an army commander is killed (e.g. Howard after McPherson's death at Atlanta). The commander would have to be eligable for promotion, and you could be forced to pay political points for doing so. But I think this would add realism to the game.

So far in my current campaign, I've only seen a few generals get wounded and one has been killed. Bumping the lethality up for generals would add realism to the game. But I could see it being hard to keep your 1* leaders healthy long enough to earn promotions.

bsz

[jeff b]

I loved the Victory games Civil War game. I think you have a great idea. If a general is killed his ranking subordinate is promoted. I actually think that their should be no political cost if the replacement general manages to carry the day.

[Bourgui]

I totally agree with you., Jeff B. If needed by circumstances during a battle, a general promotion should cost nothing. Moreover according to beefcake, we should have more casualties among generals. During a campaign, playing USA, US troops totally surrounded CSA, commanded by mosty of their best general. Every CSA have been killed or captured and every CSA general but two 1* survived! It's impossible!