I have recently come to wonder whether it isn't a rather unhistoric fact that we know beforehand which general will activate and which won't. We may be bothered by generals sitting idle for turns, but we can adjust for that as best as we can by using others that activate. We don't experience real problems because generals just fail to do what they were ordered to. We know in advance there is no use ordering them if they won't activate so we don't.
Wouldn't it be way more realistic if activation would be determined at the start of the turn resolution? All generals would be available for receiving orders, but we would never know which ones would be actually carried out. Corps would fail to advance, leaving neighbouring stacks in the lurch; gaps would open in the line because someone would not move to fill them in spite of orders; all kind of things would happen that would have happened in real war if someone did not act on his orders, but hardly ever happen in the game. In reality, commanders would receive their orders, even acknowledge them, but then fail to move. In the game as it is, they are just not available for (offensive) orders and that's that.
Just my two (Euro-)cents.
[color="Gray"]"These Savages may indeed be a formidable Enemy to your raw American Militia, but, upon the King's regular & disciplined Troops, Sir, it is impossible they should make any Impression." -- General Edward Braddock[/color]
Colonial Campaigns Club
(supports BoA and WiA)
[color="Gray"]"... and keep moving on." -- General U.S. Grant[/color]
American Civil War Game Club