promoting generals

[Spruce]

some generals are "prone" to "suck big time" when you promote them.

Like general Hood - he can be a great division command general. But If he saves the day for the confederacy - and he becomes promoteable - you better not promote him.

I think this "bad general" after promotion is a great idea and concept. I support that fully - but it should be random.

At least it should be an option to have "random bad generals after promotion".

[Grotius]

What happens if you choose the "random generals" option? Does this randomize the effects of promotion, too?

[Winfield S. Hancock]

If you have random stats on, it will randomize the leaders stats for his next rank, adding to the uncertainty of how well he will handle bigger forces after he has been promoted.

[HMSWarspite]

I have never played with random on: are you saying that it doesn't randomise the starting stats? Having to find the good leaders to start with is a fun historical trial! Although it does tend to give the Union an advantage, if McC or McD suddenly turn out to tactical geniuses!

[Spruce]

this is going of the topic. so I'll take my stick

I was talking about having the "bad general after promotion" to be random applied to all generals - if you promote a general. And to have the option to have this random thingy for general promotion. So if you want to have a small chance that your generals lose quality after promotion - you can put this option on.

I'm not talking about "random generals stats".

[Winfield S. Hancock]

I play with the slight randomization option on. That way, there is some uncertainty and you can get some pleasant and unpleasant surprises, but Lee and Grant will always be good overall (perhaps a little worse than normal, perhaps even better) and McClellan and McDowell will still be weak overall (Little Mac is 1-1-3 and McDowell 2-3-2 in my current game, giving McDowell a career as a somewhat useful corps commander in 1862).