Which is a better strategy?

[stormbringer3]

At the game beginning, before you can create divisions, there some leaders like Longstreet which have attatched brigades. There are a lot of 3-1-1 style generals that do not have a brigade attached. However, they will be inactive a lot. You have a lot of brigades that you could attach to these generals. The combat brigades by themselves are always active. So, is it better to leave these generals "empty" or attach a brigade to them.
Thanks for any opinions.

[Longshanks]

Attach 'em if u like.
you can always detach if needed.

[Durk]

stormbringer3, I think what Longshanks is telling you is that there is no advantage either way.
I put the brigades with leaders for the minor feel of better leaders. But what really matters is when you get to build divisions.

[Longshanks]

Correct, Gen'l Durk!!! Hard to type a longer, more eloquent message from a phone on a commuter train!

[stormbringer3]

Thanks for the info.

[Captain_Orso]

Wrong

It took me a while to find this but I did. The right answer is: the stack commander gives 5% per skill point to all units in the stack; the unit (divisions and brigades are units) commander will give an additional 3% per point to the unit. The words of the masters: Leader and independent division

[Longshanks]

Okay, but that's offset easily by the fact that "3" commander will be inactive half the time, whereas the unit without the leader won't be. Hence, my original answer.

[stormbringer3]

I have another question along these lines of discussion. I you have a stack with leaders who have attached combat units and also "empty" leaders, I think that only the leaders who have combat units attached can have a chance to increase their combat stats. Is that correct?
Thanks.

[Captain_Orso]

Okay, but that's offset easily by the fact that "3" commander will be inactive half the time, whereas the unit without the leader won't be. Hence, my original answer.

Hi Longshanks,

I was actually aiming at Durk with that . Duck the next time okay ?

Myself, once the October Revolution (divisions my be built :wacko I rarely combine leaders/brigades just for that reason, especially if hardened activation is in affect, otherwise it will kill any freedom of movement you might have ever thought about. I'll actually build mini-divisions as the Union instead.

But before that and especially with those huge CS brigades and Longstreet & Jackson, etc. I would go with putting them in charge of brigades.

I have another question along these lines of discussion. I you have a stack with leaders who have attached combat units and also "empty" leaders, I think that only the leaders who have combat units attached can have a chance to increase their combat stats. Is that correct?
Thanks.

I can't remember having an empty leader gain experience. In fact, even in Rafiki's example from my link of having one leader as division commander and a more senior leader as stack commander, I can only remember the division commander gaining experience and getting suggested for promotion, unless the stack commander was also the division's corp commander. I may have just forgotten though. Anybody with another experience may pop-in S.V.P.

[GraniteStater]

OK, whether it's that useful or not (all observations are AFAIK/IIRC):

* Everything else being equal, it's better to have a Leader. In the docs, there's a statement about leaderless units having move/fight penalties; perhaps slight or modest ones, but, EEBE, a 'led' unit will perform a bit better.

* Army (I think) and Corps (pretty sure) commanders can benefit from an Aide de Camp, but the Aide has to be a 4 Strat, I believe. Gives a boost. The Aide cannot be a Div or Bde commander.

* CPs! Even without a Div or Corps stack, double up (or triple up - or more) your * Leaders to form "loose Divs" with little or no CP penalty. ** leaders can form "loose Corps". No, these are not true Divs or Corps and accrue no associated benefits, but you can whittle down CP penalties with more than one Leader, and **/*** do very nicely in this role. Note that there is a limit to this, diminishing returns operate here.

And remember, EEBE - yes, there are definitely times when a leaderless stack has advantages and don't hesitate to use them, but, in general, EEBE, your'e slightly better off with a Leader.

[Jim-NC]

IIRC - you can only go upto 8 CPs when not in a corps/army. If you have extra generals, you can ensure an active general as the most senior (but you need 5 or more to make this work).

[GraniteStater]

Yeah, that's the limit - and a good tip, too.

[Captain_Orso]

You guys make my brain smoke

So let's break it down.

• A unit's strength is determined by all those do-jiggly values (Offensive Fire, Defensive Fire, Initiative, Range, Rate of Fire, etc, etc,) you see on the Unit Detail Display that you see when you click on the NATO symbol of the Unit and appears to the right of the Unit Display, which doubles as the Mail Box -- or message log -- when not viewing a Unit/Stack, and is listed on the Unit in the lower right just above the Unit Name.
• Each Unit has a Command Cost, which can be seen in the Tool-Tip of that Unit in the Unit Display. In general about 1/2 Command Point per element Rounded-Up. This is only a Rule-of-Thumb™ and many units have higher and lower CC than 1/2 of their elements RU.
• Leaders provide Command Points to the Stacks they are in: Manual:Army organization.
• The strength of a Unit is reduced by 5% per CP less than the CC of the Unit/Stack.
• If the Unit/Stack has it's CC met it will receive a 5% bonus to its strength.
• If a Unit -- remember, divisions are Units -- additionally has a direct commander -- per definition, all divisions do and brigades combined with a leader also -- the Unit will receive another 3% strength bonus.
• If a leader is 'Inactivated', in other words, his Unit/Stack Display shows a brown envelope, the entire Unit/Stack has a 35% movement penalty. Additionally, if in a region with enemy Military Control (MC) the Unit/Stack will receive a malus to its strength depending on the enemy MC.
  [INDENT]This however also means that inactivated leaders of a Unit/Stack defending in a region completely controlled by their side cause no malus as long as they remain in a region in their sides control, which makes them just as effective while defending as if they were activated[SUP]1)[/SUP].[/INDENT]

So for defending unit, having leaders is a great advantage as GS has stated.

If you are using Hardened Activation Rules you will however have the problem of having these Stacks lock-up completely about half the time, which prevents you from moving them at all or breaking out single units to go into Offensive Posture to attack raiding enemy units. Irregular units will not go to Offensive Posture when entering a region with >5% enemy MC. All other Units will, which will cause them to attack your defenders, who will then also benefit from defensive terrain and entrenchments.

1) The mobility of units plays an important role in Frontage, which AFAIK will therefore also be affected by units lead by inactivated leaders.

[Jim-NC]

Is that what that burning smell was?

I thought the unit bonus of 3% was per Off/Def rating point (of the commander). Thus a 3-1-1 gives a +3% to attack and defense, while a 5-4-1 gives +12 to offensive, and +3 to defensive.

Also, the corps commander (if there is one) gives +5% per rating point.

This last was discussed in the forums a while back (don't remember which thread, but it's out there).

[Ethan]

A very interesting report, Captain_Orso.

[Captain_Orso]

Is that what that burning smell was?

I thought the unit bonus of 3% was per Off/Def rating point (of the commander). Thus a 3-1-1 gives a +3% to attack and defense, while a 5-4-1 gives +12 to offensive, and +3 to defensive.

Also, the corps commander (if there is one) gives +5% per rating point.

This last was discussed in the forums a while back (don't remember which thread, but it's out there).

Hi Jim,

yes, you are right. I brain-farted on the 3-1-1 leaders. You can find a link to one discussion in Post #6... or right here Leader and independent division

[Captain_Orso]

A very interesting report, Captain_Orso.

Thank you, thank you, thank you