jnels80 wrote:thanks for the info
Longshanks wrote:Just to make it clear, you don't have to promote Lil Mac and give him an army if you don't want to, at least in the campaign game under 1.16. So, I almost never do. There are better generals to lead armies I think, and Mac is a pretty good trainer, so I let him do that. There! I poked the hornet's nest! Let the McClellan defenders emerge!
Durk wrote:So why use Lyon if his values are no better than Hooker?
Ol' Choctaw wrote:I am pretty sure that Lyons is a 5-
Hooker has a 4- and Lyons is already in the west.
longshanks wrote:same here if i don't get him killed first.
Ethan wrote: Anyway, when you promote Lyon to 3-star general, his strategic value decreases to 4.![]()
Ol' Choctaw wrote:I didn’t notice that!
Well why the heck would that be?
They couldn’t very well know what kind of army commander he would have made, had he lived. He made his first star in 1861 and died in July.
He was never promoted past the first star so did we have someone channel what he would have been like with 2 and 3 stars?
wsatterwhite wrote: While you're right that there's no way to know for sure, Civil War officers generally fell off a bit the higher they rose and the more responsibility they had placed on their shoulders.
Ethan wrote:Yes, that is logical and I had already thought about it. But note that there are many generals who don't lose strategic value when they promote.
Longshanks wrote:Since we have no way of knowing what Lyons would have turned into: Halleck?
Ethan wrote:Because Hooker is better as a 2-star general than 3-star general. I think he would be unprofitable, at least IMHO. I like Hooker as Corp commander.
Later, when other generals arrive, they may replace Lyon.
Return to “AACW Strategy discussions”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest