Promotions for some Generals....Why?

[GrudgeBringer]

I was reading the leader list (it gives all leaders and what happens if you promote them).

It seems that if you promote Thomas (Stonewall) Jackson that he gains the 'Quick Angered' ability.

From the research on different 'Ability Traits', the Quick Angered ability isn't very good for the General, His Stack, or you as a player.

I made a list of Generals (CSA) that in my opinion should or shouldn't be Promoted (not to be confused with being 'Commendated in Battle').

But on here I see an awful LOT of folks wanting to get T. Jackson a promotion.

Am I missing something about the 'Quick Angered" ability or not reading what it does correctly?

Because I can't see ANY reason to promote him.

Any comments are welcome as he is a MAJOR player and I usually play CSA.

Thanks

[beefcake]

The biggest reason to promote Stonewall is because he's so darn good at his job. Seriously, he's one of the very best corps commanders in the game on either side. Even with the Q.A. trait, you should try to get him into a corps command as quickly as possible.

I know the Quickly Angered trait causes a hit to the Command point totals for all subordinates under that commander, but I can't say that it ever cost me a battle. When I used Stonewall in my CSA campaign, he was always good. In one of my campaigns as the North, O. Howard got this trait when I promoted him to 3* status. I still put him in charge of an army and I thought he worked well in that role.

[Ardie]

T.J. Jackson wasn't the easiest of superior officers...as he had this annoying tendency to court martial his subordinates for whatever reasons...

[W.Barksdale]

T.J. Jackson wasn't the easiest of superior officers...as he had this annoying tendency to court martial his subordinates for whatever reasons...

In fact, when General Garnett had command of the 'stonewall' brigade at the battle of Kernstown his attack was going badly and so ordered a retreat. Jackson was infuriated and removed him from command. Even ordered a court martial. General Lee intervened I believe.

Garnett was still shaken by this blow to his reputation at Gettysburg. He commanded a brigade under Pickett. It is rumoured he was killed within 20 yards of the angle at the head of his fragmented brigade by canister fire.
Interestingly his horse made it back to the Rebel position on the Seminary Ridge.

I think he cleared up any controversy regarding his courage in battle.

[GrudgeBringer]

I DO put 'Stonewall' as a Corps Commander the first turn he's available.

And you correct he is a MONSTER to move if he's dug in and you better buckle up if he Assaults a Town
bacause it's GONNA fall.

But its AFTER he becomes a *** that the trait becomes active and with Lee, Joe Johnston, PT B, and (in a lessor mode) AP Johnson, I see no need to take him out of the Corps Commander and make him Head of an army.

But I am open to listening why I should give him an army as I usually play CSA.

Thanks

[Coregonas]

According to game rules there are 2 interesting reasons to promote Stonewall & give him an Army

1) He cannot be killed as a 3* (the game is made this way)...

2) You need 2 or 3 armies. Using a 5-4-4 vs a 4-2-4, he gives +1 bonus attack point and +1 strategy point to the corps generals ( well not always). And you lose also some CPs, but you ve earned 1 before, from his 5 STR...

But... of course it is not clear in all games if is really better to promote him.

A similar question to this is my fantasy option ... Dont Give Lee an Army !... Lets Give Lee a Corps under Stonewall!! 6-5-5 + bonus!
Up to 9-8-8!!!

[Aurelin]

He can be killed as a 3* by exterminating the stack he's in.

[Jabberwock]

According to game rules there are 2 interesting reasons to promote Stonewall & give him an Army

1) He cannot be killed as a 3* (the game is made this way)...

2) You need 2 or 3 armies. Using a 5-4-4 vs a 4-2-4, he gives +1 bonus attack point and +1 strategy point to the corps generals ( well not always). And you lose also some CPs, but you ve earned 1 before, from his 5 STR...

But... of course it is not clear in all games if is really better to promote him.

A similar question to this is my fantasy option ... Dont Give Lee an Army !... Lets Give Lee a Corps under Stonewall!! 6-5-5 + bonus!
Up to 9-8-8!!!

I did this once back around v1.05. One of my best games ever. By the time Lee was freed up, Stonewall had been an army commander for about two months. Joe Johnston had DC surrounded, Stonewall was seiging Philadelphia, and the BEF had just landed around NYC. Making Lee a corps commander for ol' blue light was just what I needed to push through the DC defenses and win.

I always play non-PBEMs with randomized generals, sometimes Beauregard, Joe Johnston, or Lee will be just mediocre. One time Bory and JJ each had a 2 strat, Jackson had a 7. That was an easy decision.

[Jabberwock]

In fact, when General Garnett had command of the 'stonewall' brigade at the battle of Kernstown his attack was going badly and so ordered a retreat. Jackson was infuriated and removed him from command. Even ordered a court martial. General Lee intervened I believe.

Garnett was still shaken by this blow to his reputation at Gettysburg. He commanded a brigade under Pickett. It is rumoured he was killed within 20 yards of the angle at the head of his fragmented brigade by canister fire.
Interestingly his horse made it back to the Rebel position on the Seminary Ridge.

I think he cleared up any controversy regarding his courage in battle.

He had A.P. Hill placed under arrest during the 2nd Manassas / Antietam campaign. Lee also intervened there.

[GrudgeBringer]

Lee a Corps.....Hmmmm, interesting.

I think I may try that next game.

Thanks for all the input guys!!!

[Ardie]

In fact, when General Garnett had command of the 'stonewall' brigade at the battle of Kernstown his attack was going badly and so ordered a retreat. Jackson was infuriated and removed him from command. Even ordered a court martial. General Lee intervened I believe.

Garnett was still shaken by this blow to his reputation at Gettysburg. He commanded a brigade under Pickett. It is rumoured he was killed within 20 yards of the angle at the head of his fragmented brigade by canister fire.
Interestingly his horse made it back to the Rebel position on the Seminary Ridge.

I think he cleared up any controversy regarding his courage in battle.

Well, I didn't know that those 2 Garnetts were actually the same person. Yeah, I remember his dying scene from the 1993 movie.

Didn't Turner Ashby have some kind of "quarrel" with his boss, Jackson too?

[Jabberwock]

Well, I didn't know that those 2 Garnetts were actually the same person. Yeah, I remember his dying scene from the 1993 movie.

Didn't Turner Ashby have some kind of "quarrel" with his boss, Jackson too?

That was mainly an administrative issue. Everyone and their brother wanted to be in Ashby's regiment (7th Virginia Cavalry), so he had 27 companies. Jackson tried to reorganize it and shift some troops to other regiments. Jackson wound up backing down when Ashby threatened to resign, but he did try to block Ashby's promotion to brigadier. I believe he did reorganize that regiment after Ashby's death.

Also, Jackson may have been upset with him over the poor scouting at Kernstown or lack of discipline at Winchester, but I haven't seen any records stating either as a fact.

[pepe4158]

Yeah from what little I know of history thats all correct that Jackson was a hard man to serve under...fallouts with AP Hill and Garnet, Garnet rode a horse up cemetry ridge (to be the first confederate to engage in Picketts suicide charge), the only rider, since Jackson tried to have him court-martialed for cowerdce and then Jackson got himself killed leaving the charge unresolved and a stain on Garnet's honor....so the quick tempered seems appropriate.....still even so whatever complex attributes this game uses he is the only general I can seem to count on to always move and attack when I need one.

[pepe4158]

Hmm more n more Im moving towards randomized leaders is best...its seems to scripted and no replay value with fixed historical stats.....I mean to really immerse yourself in either presidents position seems better to play randomized stats...every game is fresh and new and that was the real challenge of each president to find out who really could lead.

[Drambuie]

Bit of a bump - what does random leaders actually do? Change their attributes and special abilities?

Also - can leaders gain more specials from experience or are they hard coded?

[Jabberwock]

Bit of a bump - what does random leaders actually do? Change their attributes and special abilities?

Also - can leaders gain more specials from experience or are they hard coded?

It changes their ratings. The special abilities are coded. They can get a different set of abilities when promoted, because there is a different model for them at each level.

[arsan]

Bit of a bump - what does random leaders actually do? Change their attributes and special abilities?

Also - can leaders gain more specials from experience or are they hard coded?

Randomization change the atributes. The special abilities are fixed for what i know.
With experience, leaders algo can gain better attributes, just like units.
I think each star of experience gives them and increse o +1 on one attribute. The order (i think :siffle is: first deffense, second offense, third strategic.
Regards!

EDIT:
As usual, i was mistaken
This is how it works, acording to teh AACW Wiki

Strategic ratings do not change because of experience.
A leader’s offensive rating is increased by +1 for each even level of experience (2, 4, 6, etc.)
A leader’s defensive rating is increased by +1 for each odd level of experience (1, 3, 5, etc.)

[Drambuie]

Cheers .... it's a shame specials can't be randomised as that would make each set of leaders even more diverse.

Anyway thanks for the info!

[pepe4158]

Yeah the traits randomizing too would be awsome....but like that the others traits do mix up quite a bit.
For example I usually want to sack McDowell....this very newest game I am playing the computer rolled him a 6-5-6....(no sh*t really)....duh think im gonna sack him...no-way jose lol
Knowing the other traits arent completly randomized gives me a little heads up on the computer cuz if Jacksons comming at me I better hunker down
Hmmm also...isnt that att-def-n Admn pts?...that was the standard gaming proto-type always used but I quess I better crack opeen the manual n check

[pepe4158]

I was reading the leader list (it gives all leaders and what happens if you promote them).
It seems that if you promote Thomas (Stonewall) Jackson that he gains the 'Quick Angered' ability.
From the research on different 'Ability Traits', the Quick Angered ability isn't very good for the General, His Stack, or you as a player.
I made a list of Generals (CSA) that in my opinion should or shouldn't be Promoted (not to be confused with being 'Commendated in Battle').
But on here I see an awful LOT of folks wanting to get T. Jackson a promotion.
Am I missing something about the 'Quick Angered" ability or not reading what it does correctly?
Because I can't see ANY reason to promote him.
Any comments are welcome as he is a MAJOR player and I usually play CSA.

Thanks

Im with you here Grudge...quick angered...hmmm -4 command points to the stack, 'EEEK!'
Kind of funny to read thru n see exactly what these traits do