Random Leaders.

[stormbringer3]

I am going to try Random Leaders to add a little variety to my CSA game. Since there are three levels to choose from, which would be the best level to pick? Thanks for any advice.

[Coregonas]

I prefer playing minor random (the first level).
It adds spice to the game, but still some historic feeling.
And you should not be doing unrealistic decisions such as: """I ll not give this leader with low stats x-x-x a command, as tomorrow another with better stats y-y-y is going to arrive"""

Not sure however, but seem to me each level of random helps USA a bit more.

Just tried a couple tests on high levels of randomness. If you go for a lot of random, you get a high chance of many generals getting high strategy bonus. (Well, a lot get even poor results, but on the average, USA is going to have more good commanders than the standard).

- Historic atrrition seems favour a bit CSA

- No redeployment seems favour also CSA

These are my personal opinions, not sure if really true. Not tested enough

[Spharv2]

I prefer the high randomness for one main reason. In the base setup, you have a few good generals who are saddled with bad traits, but mostly, it's bad generals with bad traits,a nd good generals with good ones. If you play with high randomness, then you can have generals with really good abilities but bad traits, or very poor ratings and good traits. I find that that tends to add a lot more to the decisionmaking about who to put in command.

Course, as Coregonas said, the more randomizedit is, the more it tends to help the North. Since I'm usually playing as the South, this isn't an issue for me, and can actually quite improve the game.