Stephen D. Ramseur

[rickd79]

Stephen D. Ramseur:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_D._Ramseur

214 CSA Stephen D. Ramseur ldr_CSA_Ramseur NULL NULL NULL NULL 1 1 1 40 General 1 NULL 5 5 1

1. Very aggressive brigade commander...he did well at Chancellorsville and Gettysburg...he did VERY well at Spotsylvania, helping to plug the gaping hole in the Confederate line.
2. 5 for "strategic" and "offensive" puts him ahead of some of the greats...I would drop him to 4.
3. 1 for "defensive" puts him a bit low in my opinion (this is mostly based on his work as a brigade commander at Spotsylvania)....I'd bump him to at least a 2.
4. For a little flavor, you can make the argument for the "Strong_Morale" trait (battle hardened individuals). Additionally, as Chris suggested, if there is ever a "Lead from the front" trait, he would also be a good fit considering how often he was wounded (see wikipedia entry).

My suggestion:

214 CSA Stephen D. Ramseur ldr_CSA_Ramseur $Strong_Morale NULL NULL NULL 1 1 1 40 General 1 NULL 4 4 2

[Korrigan]

214 CSA Stephen D. Ramseur ldr_CSA_Ramseur $Reckless NULL NULL NULL 1 1 1 40 General 1 NULL 4 4 2

[Korrigan]

I'm thinking changing "Reckless" to "Aggressive", it should be more meaningful. What do you think?

[Chris0827]

Overly Aggressive fits better. All commanders should be aggressive at times. The problem is taking it to far.