AGEOD Forums

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*.

I'm trying to work in how much benefit he'd still show as a defensive guy in a clear region with his 3-star frontage bonus vs. the 2-star.

That's the only upside I possibly see for the moment.

Oddly enough, he has yet to improve on any basic stats but I've got him these two promotions w only 5xp.

soloswolf wrote:
3) On the topic of subordinates: It doesn't really get better than Longstreet anchoring your line and Jackson making turning movements.

They are the Hammer and Anvil.
Lee in command and J.E.B Stuart supporting they make the strongest team in this game.