Quote:
Originally Posted by Maqver
If you want the Union to be more aggressive then they need commanders with higher strategic ratings. Most of the time one is active and two are inactive. Even if the Union player wants to attack and be aggressive he (or she) can't do it.
Unfortunately, we will NOT change the "official" vanilla game's Leaders strategic ratings. That subject is closed and not up for debate.
The following is for informational purposes, any further attempt to promote a discussion of changing the Leader stats in the context of the vanilla game will be expunged. (deleted). Read on to understand why.
This topic was an extremely hot item over a year ago and almost led to flame wars, due to several different individuals selfishly wanting their "pet" generals rated higher. Subsequently, it was decided by ALL AGEod programmers, developers, moderators, and coordinators that the original AS DESIGNED statistics would be retained. The only thing that can be changed obviously is new generals that might be added now after the fact. And yes, they have to be new, not just a redefined unit of a pre-existing general.
This does not apply to MODs however. Gamers are always welcome to mod the game for their own and others individual use. There's even an old but popular MOD, which you might find, called the "Leader MOD". I'm not sure if it's totally compatible with the latest official updates however. You'd have to check it out for yourself. Note: The inflamed discussions were in fact started when I wanted to bring the "Leader MOD" changes into the "official" vanilla game files, so as you can see, this was not because I was in any way opposed to changing the Leader stats.
Yes, I should have been more clear. The intention was not to campaign for higher ratings for favorite generals (Gotta love my man Milroy - jk) but to reconsider the idea of making mandatory attacks by the Union, with some sort of penalty applied if they are not attempted, a part of the official campaign.