Adlertag wrote:We may even consider that Napoleon grew himself his stature whereas Wellington's own stature was given by Napoleon...
Considering Napoleon we could see that his hability was link directly with three paramaters (that are linked with the campaigns)
First part 1798 to 1807 Eagles glory. Small armies (battle with less than 100k soldiers by sides, Small theaters, french % composition of the army (greater part of), opponents inabilities and obsolet tactics and french national support of the war.
Napy = Genius
Second part 1807 1811 Tide reversal. Greater armies, Big and multiple theaters, french % composition of the armies, better opponents tactics and hard learning from the previous disasters. Mitigate french national support
Napy = Genius but with some dysfonctionnement
Third part 1812 1813 The Fall. Ever bigger armies and theaters, 1812 disaster with the loss of the better part of the army and the cavalry. French national support failure (war wearinness). On the other side German national support at his best.
Napy = dysfonctionnement mainly due to his incapacity to delegate to others, and difficulties to find reliable marshall (the two exceptions were : Davout and Lannes and lannes was dead, and Davout somewhat in disgrace in 1812 (look at the position of the I corps at borodino)).
1813 : incapacity to delegate, bad luck and national support gone (in particular the collapsus of the french logistic system who was for part responsible of the disastrous autumn campain)
Last part 1814 : Small area, Small army (french point of view), National territory invade (so national support again but not at his best).
Napy = Genius, but the odds were too big.
So the parameters are :
Area of war size / Army size / National Support
I just remember that it was taken into account in the 1813 Leipzig Campaign game.
The lesser the french national support, the lesser the french leaders initiatives and the greater the allies leaders initiatives.
I think we must tweak the leaders accordingly to this parameters.
Concerning Bluecher we must not forget the positive effect of gneisenau in the management of the 1815 Campain. In fact Gneisenau save the head of bluecher who was rather straight forward.
in 1813 Bluecher was benefiting of the full national support of all the german peoples who were looking to be rid of the french heavy pressure.
Conclusion :
no more powers to the leaders, but a set of parameters linked to the year and perharps to the performance of the player also. Those parameters could be applied at different tests as modifier. Given similar circumstancies (location weather army size and composition), napy should be a super winner in 1805 and be the loser in 1813 of the same battle.