Is it wise to promote a general, such as Longstreet, to his 3rd star--when he will lose a lot of his appealing stats?
At least according to what I've read here, he'll go from a base 5/3/6 with Entrencher, to a 3/2/6 (no Entrencher trait)
If that's accurate under the latest version of beta/quickfix, do people intentionally choose not to promote him and leave him as a corps commander? Or do you just say "Hey, I could use a good defensive army commander to defend Richmond" and suck it up and take the hit to his activation stat?
Really early in a match (April '62)
I never promote Longstreet past his 2*. I have a few reasons...
1) He's got great stats and by the time you could promote him, he'll likely have a few experience upgrades too.
2) You don't really need another defensive 3*. Borry and Johnston start with a 4 and Lee with a 5. They'll all typically give a bonus of at least 1 to all their nearby subordinates.
3) On the topic of subordinates: It doesn't really get better than Longstreet anchoring your line and Jackson making turning movements.
The big thing really is that hit to his strategic rating. An army commander with a 3 can be a tough thing to deal with. (As anyone in blue can tell you!
)
I'd keep him at 2*.
1) He's got great stats and by the time you could promote him, he'll likely have a few experience upgrades too.
2) You don't really need another defensive 3*. Borry and Johnston start with a 4 and Lee with a 5. They'll all typically give a bonus of at least 1 to all their nearby subordinates.
3) On the topic of subordinates: It doesn't really get better than Longstreet anchoring your line and Jackson making turning movements.
The big thing really is that hit to his strategic rating. An army commander with a 3 can be a tough thing to deal with. (As anyone in blue can tell you!
)
I'd keep him at 2*.
My name is Aaron.
Knight of New Hampshire
Knight of New Hampshire
Return to “AACW Strategy discussions”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests