Better to have the best general in a division or outside (but still in the stack)?

[herm]

Ok, I usually have (at least) 2 generals in each stack. One of them I make into a division and the other is there to get the command points up.

What I wonder then is, is it best to have the better general in the division or outside? Or is there no difference?

[Rafiki]

In, definately. The division benefits from his offensive and defensive ratings, 5% per point, IIRC.

[herm]

In, definately. The division benefits from his offensive and defensive ratings, 5% per point, IIRC.

Ouch, and here I have been reasoning that the general outside was in "overall" command or something and it would be better if he was the best of them. Guess I have some reorganizing to do, thanks

[Rafiki]

If the division is part of a corps, the corps commander provides 3% per point (dunno if this applies for cmmanders of independant stacks too),

So, if it's a small stack (with a division or two), the best generals should command divisions, but if it's a large stack, with some divisions, the overall benefit will be larger with the better general commanding the corps, since his bonus (albeit smaller) will be applied to more divisions/units.

[aaminoff]

If you want your independent division stack to avoid the dreaded "inactive" state, it is important that the general in command (which I believe can be either the division commander or the other one, depending on seniority) has a high strategic rating. So sometimes I will try to pair up a senior high-strat low-combat general as stack commander with a junior low-strat high-combat general as division commander.

[Grotius]

Is it gamey to reshuffle commanders in a region on a given turn -- e.g, switching inactive generals with active ones -- in order to activate more units?

[Rafiki]

Kinda, isn't it?

I have myself, on occasion, when assaulting a city and having the corps commander inactive, seperated out a division with an active leader and assaulted with that (if I'm fairly confident that is still sufficient for the capturing the city), but it doesn't feel entirely "ethical", I'll admit.

[Crimguy]

Is it gamey to reshuffle commanders in a region on a given turn -- e.g, switching inactive generals with active ones -- in order to activate more units?

I guess it is if you're switching them over and over again. Nothing wrong with sacking a general in favor of another though, is there? Even if their tenure was shorter than Pope's.

[Sheytan]

why would it be gamey? if a leader is inactive he is "indisposed" and another leader if available would assume command. If your commander has the trots so bad he cant lead, then someone else would imo. let me understand your arguement, what your saying is if a leader is commanding a unit, or units, and is inactive, the stack should not move or take action? why? if a leader is inactive how does that compell you from using your stack?

regarding leaders one thing I noticed and someone else commented on in another thread is this, if you have a division for example, and have a single leader in command, you will notice a 10% penality typically, if one star general, add another general and the penality is gone, now move the unit, I havnt tested this with infantry divisions only cav, but the stack will move slower IF it has additional leaders attached, the cav division I tested moved at 2 days a province with one leader and the 10% penality, the stack with 2 or more leaders took 4 days to cover the same distance. I suspect this is specific to cav only the 4 day move pulse appears to be the infantry move rate.

[Grotius]

I am genuinely uncertain whether it's gamey; that's why I posed my question. I don't feel strongly about it one way or another; I was just curious whether there's an emerging consensus about it. I see arguments both ways.

[hattrick]

In, definately. The division benefits from his offensive and defensive ratings, 5% per point, IIRC.

Can this be confirmed?

I thought that leaders ratings of divisions had no impact on combat in a Corps?

[Rafiki]

I think Pocus was the one who said this, but I can't find the post right now.

[Pocus]

yes, but this is 3% per rating, when embedded into a unit (division or brigade). 5% is for stack commander. And this rating is ONLY used within the elements of the unit commanded by the general. I'm not talking of adding all ratings of all the generals of a stack there!

[Rafiki]

Thanks for clearing it up, Pocus

[Hobbes]

If a Brigade with and embedded leader was also in a Division I assume the
Brigade would not get the 3% multiplier from the Brigade AND Division leaders?
If not who's modifier would be used - the Division leaders?
Cheers, Chris

[Rafiki]

Have you tried adding a brigade with an embedded leader to a division? I haven't tried it, but my guess would be that you won't be able to, on the grounds that you can't have 2 leaders in a division.

(I have no idea; this is just what seems most logical to me, but that might not amount to much )

[Hobbes]

Nope - I'm at work so I've not been able to try it

[gbs]

Have you tried adding a brigade with an embedded leader to a division? I haven't tried it, but my guess would be that you won't be able to, on the grounds that you can't have 2 leaders in a division.

(I have no idea; this is just what seems most logical to me, but that might not amount to much )

You are correct. I have tried this and you cannot have a brigade with an embeded leader inside a Division. The brigade gets the silver stripe just like a division which lets you know it can't be embeded inside the division.
A brigade without an embeded leader can be part of a division and brigades with imbeded leaders can be in a Corp, just like divisions can.

[Le Ricain]

You are correct. I have tried this and you cannot have a brigade with an embeded leader inside a Division. The brigade gets the silver stripe just like a division which lets you know it can't be embeded inside the division.
A brigade without an embeded leader can be part of a division and brigades with imbeded leaders can be in a Corp, just like divisions can.

You can, of course, un-embed the brigade leader and form a division with the brigade's other units around the old brigade leader or another.

[blackbellamy]

Pocus: assigning a leader to Army or Corps command should cost money and stupify them for a turn just like the Divisional command assignments.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[blackbellamy]

...plus it prevents people from keeping several two-star guys in a Corps and using the activated guy - currently you can make this switch on the fly