Mon Nov 04, 2013 1:58 am
The general's Strategic Rating: 3 Offensive capabilities: 1 and Defensive capabilities: 1 The higher in each of these the better and more clear cut your operations will be conducted for that particular force. Higher offensive translates to overall better handling of your troops on the attack likewise for defensive. Strategic is supposed to simulate I imagine the leaders tactical and operational skill EX: General Jackson with a good number confederate troops, and with a high strategic rating can do more with on the field (innovative tactics) than someone such as the inexperienced and single-mind Nathaniel Banks with a low strategic rating. Lets say Jackson is 5-6-4 whilst Banks is a 2-3-1, unless Banks has good subordinates and cohones and secure line of retreat, I'm 'banking' on Jackson beating him or throwing him back in detail (no pun intended)
“In my opinion, Colonel Miles was a drunkard, a coward and a traitor, and if I had the power I would have had the United States buttons taken from his coat.”
Elble, Sigmund-Soldier with the 3rd U.S. Infantry
Elble, an officer on the frontier who knew Miles well