AGEOD Forums

Should be John. Ed was his son.

Currently:

ranked 2, and Patriot 3.3.3

pol rating of 8.

thoughts:

needs to be able to cmmd divisions, big political manueverer, so we could raise that rating slightly.

raised one illi. regiment...shouldn't be patriot, possibly recruiting officer.

final ratings probably should be closer to 3/1/1 or some combo of 3/1 or 2/ 1 or 2

He was a better than average commander who was extemely selfish, pompous and ambitious. Managed to talk Lincoln into letting him attempt a separate campaign against Vicksburg for a while. He basically borrowed Sherman and his men since he outranked Sherman and Grant was not on the scene. He had a lot of political power and Grant had to be very careful about getting rid of him. I suggest 3/2/2 with patriot and quickangered. He needs a higher political rating but I leave the amount up to someone more familiar with how that works.

agreed, he needs a higher pol value, prolly higher then sigel, so somewhere in the 12-20 range, but like you...i'd rather somebody else assign that.

i can see quick angered, but disagree with the patriot trait. that adds partisans, right? he raised a reg...not partisans.... whats the reasoning for the patriot trait?

Opps. I meant to replace patriot with recruiting officer.

McClernand had gone to Washington on leave in late september, complaining privately that he was "tired of furnishing brains" for Grant's army. Arriving in the capital he appealed to Lincoln to "let one volunteer officer try his abilities." His plan was to return to his old political stamping ground and there, by reaching also into Indiana, and Iowa, raise an army with which he would descend the Mississippi, capture Vicksburg, and open navigation to New Orleans. Lincoln liked the sound of that and took him to see Stanton who liked it too. McClernand left Washinton in late october, armed with a confidential order signed by Stanton and indorsed by Lincoln, giving official sanction to his plan. - Shelby Foote

grant, accding to catton, thought him too erratic for indp command, but a good fighter and leader of men..

what about a pol value of 15, and stats of 3/3/2? and also include a div cmmd?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McClernand

258 USA John A. McClernand ldr_USA_McClernand2 $Recruiting_Officer $Quick_angered NULL NULL 8 20 2 3 General 1 NULL 3 1 0
USA John A. McClernand ldr_USA_McClernand $Recruiting_Officer $Quick_angered NULL NULL 8 10 1 3 General 1 NULL 3 1 0

will a zero for defense make him all but useless? if so, i'd almost rather see him as a 2-1-1 i think

258 USA John A. McClernand ldr_USA_McClernand2 $Recruiting_Officer $Quick_angered NULL NULL 8 20 2 3 General 1 NULL 3 1 1
USA John A. McClernand ldr_USA_McClernand $Recruiting_Officer $Quick_angered NULL NULL 8 10 1 3 General 1 NULL 3 1 1

frank7350 wrote:will a zero for defense make him all but useless? if so, i'd almost rather see him as a 2-1-1 i think

a 0 leader in attack or defence is by far not useless, it is 'neutral', as you need leaders to have command points for your stacks. A stack with not enough CPs can have from 1 to 35 % penalty to combat and movement.