John F. Reynolds

[frank7350]

254 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds3 $Fast_Mover NULL NULL NULL 4 5 3 25 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

271 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds2 $Fast_Mover NULL NULL NULL 4 4 2 16 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

296 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds $Fast_Mover NULL NULL NULL 4 4 1 7 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

Perhaps he should have the artillerist trait? Reynolds commanded the 3rd artillery following his graduation from West Point.

Also widely considered one of the best Union corps commanders. Perhaps the stats for Reynolds 2 should be raised to all 5s?

Lincoln did offer him command of the army following Hooker, but Reynolds refused unless granted complete autonomy from political interference. Request denied...and Meade was promoted in his place.

[rickd79]

I'm not sure there is enough of a body of work at Corps and Army (obviously) level to bump him up to 5's. I like the 4's for "Very Good Commander." Personally, I would drop him to 3's for offensive and defensive at the army command level (I think its fair to assume he would have been "Good"....but "Very Good" or "Superb"...who knows, especially with all the political garbage he would of had to put up with as a Yankee army commander)

[marecone]

Gifted commander

Although most of the general staff of the army believed that General Reynolds would be the best choice, he refused when his demands of complete autonomy from political interference were denied. Maj. Gen. George G. Meade was promoted in his place.

Charismatic

The loss of General Reynolds was keenly felt by the army. He was loved by his men and respected by his peers.

He was best as corp commander so I suggest 5|5|5 at corps level.

I agree that we can reduce his numbers a bit on army level

Maybe some other traits...

[frank7350]

i think with somebody like reynolds tho, we have to imagine what might have been... i think the levels as set by the designers are solid. i wouldn't be opposed to bumping him up as a corps commander ...or adding artillerist and charismatic either:


254 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds3 $Fast_Mover [color="Red"]$Artillerist $Charismatic[/color] NULL NULL NULL 4 5 3 25 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

271 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds2 $Fast_Mover [color="Red"]$Artillerist $Charismatic[/color] NULL NULL NULL 4 4 2 16 General 1 NULL 5 [color="Red"]5 5 [/color]

296 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds $Fast_Mover [color="Red"]$Artillerist $Charismatic[/color] NULL NULL NULL 4 4 1 7 General 1 NULL 5 [color="Red"]5 5 [/color]

[Korrigan]

I have some problem with this proposition as this would made him one of the top 3 Union generals, and I don't feel enough evidence have been proposed.

Reading this forum I may already have something like 6 or 7 best CSA/USA/ACW generals according to Lincoln/Davis/Lee/Grant...
Don't forget these guys were as much involved in politician manoever as in military... They had their friends and ennemies, so let's give the priority to military facts.

Bearing this in mind, can you elaborate your case more strongly?

Notes:
Don't forget that the scale is different between Strat (average= 3) and Off/Deff (level 1 is a bonus), so 4 is already really strong.

For the artillery trait, I think we should only take in account generals who have demonstrated a superior talent in using artillery. To have begun his carrer in the artillery is an hint, but it might not be sufficient.

[rickd79]

Well, lets look at the evidence:

Corps command:
Fredricksburg - I would give him a B+ for his performance here. Certainly, this unit made the most progress and delivered the most punishment of any Federal Corps on the field that day (however, part of this success has to do with some poor Confederate deployments - see A.P. Hill thread). Had his superiors thrown in some reserves on this flank of the battlefield, things might have gone differently. I doubt the North could have won the battle, but it might have been a less-one sided affair.
Chancellorsville - Not very applicable....The I Corps was held in reserve.
Gettysburg - I would give him a B+ for his performance here....he certainly got his Corps to the field and deployed in a timely fashion, thus slowing down the Rebel assault and buying time for the rest of the army to show up and have some favorable terrain to fight a defensive battle. Unfortunately, he was killed very early in the fighting. From there on out, much of the credit for the I Corps performance has to go to guys like Doubleday, Newton, and the fine units in the Corps that were able to take and deliver such incredible punishment.

Does this warrant ratings of 5 across the board? In my opinion, for Corps command, probably not. Certainly not for Army command. His colleagues certainly thought the world of him, and he may very well of earned those ratings if he had survived, but it seems a bit of a leep to assume this.

As far as the artillerist trait is concerned, I would agree with Korrigan...there doesn't appear to be enough evidence of his expertise to justify this. Maybe the "charismatic" trait would be more appropriate given the respect he seems to have garnered from his fellow west-pointers.

[frank7350]

ok...so lets lose the artillerist trait, add charismatic, and keep him at the original ratings?

[Korrigan]

New proposition:

254 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds3 $Fast_Mover $Charismatic NULL NULL 4 5 3 25 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

271 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds2 $Fast_Mover $Charismatic $Gifted_Cmd NULL 4 4 2 16 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

296 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds $Fast_Mover $Charismatic NULL NULL 4 4 1 7 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

Note:
Sorry, no ability for "Falling asleep on the battlefield"

[frank7350]

what?? wheres pocus? he's gotta code that one in!!!

Looks good to me

[Pocus]

that or I code a good blockade system.

[frank7350]

hmm....tough call.... but after much deliberation, i vote for the....blockade system

[Korrigan]

[color="SeaGreen"]254 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds3 $Fast_Mover $Charismatic NULL NULL 4 5 3 25 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

271 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds2 $Fast_Mover $Charismatic $Gifted_Cmd NULL 4 4 2 16 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

296 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds $Fast_Mover $Charismatic NULL NULL 4 4 1 7 General 1 NULL 5 4 4[/color]

OK

[runyan99]

Ah now that the thread is unlocked, I can argue the Charismatic issue. Sure they said his death at Gettysburg was a hard loss, especially for his fellow officers. But is that really enough to give him the Charismatic trait? I don't think so. If we want to reduce the number of Charismatic leaders in the game, we need to differentiate between the truly extraordinarily Charismatic leaders like Lee or McClellan, and the merely respected leaders like Reynolds.

If simply giving him a 5-4-4 score isn't enough respect for Reynolds, maybe he would be eligible for the Gifted_Cmd trait instead (or Good_Cmd).

By the way, why is he a fast mover? Just because his corps got on the field at Gettysburg on time? Was there anything else?

[frank7350]

runyan- saw your similiar comments on hancock...and while I don't agree with you on hancock, i can see your point with reynolds. i wouldn't object to giving him good admin army and/or good admin cmd in place of charismatic and fast mover

[Korrigan]

I propose

254 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds3 NULL NULL NULL NULL 4 5 3 25 General 1 NULL 4 4 4

271 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds2 $Good_Cmd NULL NULL NULL 4 4 2 16 General 1 NULL 5 4 4

296 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds $Good_Cmd NULL NULL NULL 4 4 1 7 General 1 NULL 4 3 3

Rational:
Well, he had some fumbles as a division general, and I tend to think good Generals learn from experience. I gave him a lower strat value as a army leader because I try no to be overoptimistic with the "migh have beens" and because he would have asked for autonomy, thus he should be less easy handled by the player. Your thoughts?

[frank7350]

korrigan... i like the rationale for lowering the strat rating at higher levels, but i'm not sure if i agree.... reason being that yes, reynolds would have sought more autonomy....but by lowering the strat ratings, reynolds may not move..or be delayed in his movement. the counter is that his autonomy may permit him to move when the player doesn't want him to...to take the iniative on his own. and lowering the strat rating doesn't account for that. right?

[Korrigan]

Well, as we can't simulate Reynold pissing off the player by takin initiatives, we simulate Reynold pissing off the player by refusing to take some orders from time to time.

[lycortas]

This is a man who fought in one battle as a division commander and one battle and a few minutes as a corps commander. I am happy his peers thought the world of him but we are rather overrating him.

254 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds3 NULL NULL NULL NULL 4 5 3 25 General 1 NULL 4 3 3

271 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds2 $Good_Cmd NULL NULL NULL 4 4 2 16 General 1 NULL 5 3 4

296 USA John F. Reynolds ldr_USA_Reynolds $Good_Cmd NULL NULL NULL 4 4 1 7 General 1 NULL 4 3 3

[pepe4158]

I am having a little hard time following the thread, maybe cuz Im A.D.D. lol...but you did choose on one right?...just curious?

[Brochgale]

Well, as we can't simulate Reynold pissing off the player by takin initiatives, we simulate Reynold pissing off the player by refusing to take some orders from time to time.

I can testify to this as CSA - Although are you sure Generals dont take intiatives on thier own - Just had Johston and Jackson combine thier Corps in one of the games I am running and though outnumbered about 2.5 to 1 they whip McDowell - I thought they would flee but did not - as had settings on avoid combat. When fight started I thougt I was going to lose 2 Corps - yee haa!