Allocation of Leaders

[Goodmongo]

I was wondering how best to use some of the better leaders. Here is a scenario. Let's say I have a corps leader that is 5-3-3. I also have 3 division leaders that are 5-3-3, 4-2-2 and 4-1-1. Finally I have 3 other division leaders that are 3-3-3, 3-2-2 and 3-1-1.

Ignore that I can have 4+ divisions in a corp and instead for this scenario assume I can only use 3 divisions. Also all divisions are identical in units with 17 elements of whatever choice you want, but they are all the same.

I can place the 5-3-3, 4-2-2 and 4-1-1 in the corps and use the 3-X-X as independent divisions or reverse that and use the 3-X-X in the corp and the others in independent divisions. So what would be better?

It was my understanding that the corps leader provides the stats used and activation chances are higher all around by placing the 3-X-X inside the corps.

This then leads me to my next observation, question. If the above is accurate and let's say my corps leaders are all crappy with either 3-1-1 or worse 2-1-1 then wouldn't it be better to use three individual divisions with 4-X-X skills and act in unison? Keep them in the same area and chances are you can get all three to attack at the same time. While not perfect isn't this potentially better then putting them in a crappy corp?

[Durk]

You are balancing activation, that is movement, versus battle winning. Your analysis is correct if movement speed and activation are the primary concern. However, in battles the game system devolves upon an interesting method which typically picks upon a single division as the focus of any single battle. So if you embed ally your lessor leaders as divisional commanders within a corps, they may contribute to the corps defeat.
Because of this, if I must have an independent division act, I select a strong division leader and put him with enough division leaders with a lower (ie higher) command number until he has no command penalties.

[Goodmongo]

Yes I selected based on activation. As far as combat stats they would be the same. A 4-3-3 vs. a 3-3-3. The defense and attack are identical but the lower activation goes into a corps because I thought the activation for the corps would be based on the corps leaders activation.

So having the 4-3-3 as an independent division gives me a better chance of having that division and the corps active.

I guess another way to ask this question is does the activation rating of divisions in a corps matter or does only the activation of the corps leader matter?

[Durk]

Only activation of the Corps commander. That said, you do know the Army commander also influences activation

[Goodmongo]

Only activation of the Corps commander. That said, you do know the Army commander also influences activation

Yes I do but I wanted to make it simple. My idea is this. An activated unit can partake in offensive battles and can be moved to plug holes or to protect stuff. So this came down to having a corps active and maybe 1 division active vs. a corps and 2 or all 3 divisions active.

So as long as the combat capabilities weren't impacted I thought that moving the higher activation leaders out of armies and divisions would be a good way to accomplish this. Seems it is.

[Durk]

Yes, good plans and thoughts. However, moving your 4-3-3 to division and substituting a 3-1-1 in the corps does mean the corps looses a bit of combat strength. But you do have the right idea.

[Goodmongo]

Yes, good plans and thoughts. However, moving your 4-3-3 to division and substituting a 3-1-1 in the corps does mean the corps looses a bit of combat strength. But you do have the right idea.

Just to be clear I wouldn't. I have identical leaders except for the activation number. So it would be a 4-3-3 vs a 3-3-3. And a 4-1-1 vs a 3-1-1.

The followup would ask if I should place all my high attack/defense leaders, regardless of activation in the army/corps or spread them out. So my corps would have the 4-3-3-, 3-3-3 and 3-2-2 while the individual divisions would have 4-2-2-, 4-1-1 and 3-1-1. But most likely that would be more of a tactical decision on if I want a powerful corps and weak divisions or if I need more of a balance with decent divisions.

[Durk]

You get it. That said, I loved "Splitting Heirs" but I am not so good at splitting hairs I just look at the main concept.

You are not going to win battles with good divisions in the same region as corps. So put your battle winners in the corps except for your high initiative division leader.

[Goodmongo]

Idea wasn't to put them in same area as the corps. Often you will find a few stacks of division size or smaller running around wrecking your rail lines or taking a weekly guarded town. These divisions with a high chance of being activated are used to handle those situations. They are meant to fight other divisions or to guard a town being threatened. By being activated they can move more often as I play with the option to stop movement for non-activated leaders.

[Durk]

Gotcha. Makes a good pursuit unit. I do not play AI, which it sounds like you are doing. When I am opposed by a player who likes those small guerilla type tactics, I usually get my 4 and 5 initial leaders and a very small division, especially a cavalry leader and a purely cavalry division as they can nail any annoying force.
Guarding towns I do with a single unit, not a division, inside of the town. Then one of my mobile divisions rides to the rescue.