Union Generals Ranks

[warlimont]

I've noticed several Union Generals start the campaigns with rankings of four star General.
With the exception of Winfield Scott and Grant, Major General rank was shared by all Union General Officers.
My question: Does Rank matter for any technical portion of the game? I'm thinking of changing the ranks to MG.

thanks

[Drex]

As has been stated in earlier threads, the four stars,et.al. are not true ranks but represent commands. The Union only had Major generals as the highest rank with their dates of promotion deciding seniority. Later on of course they created the Lieutenant General and full General ranks. BTW does anyone know when the higher general ranks were first used?

[Erik Rutins]

In the game, the ranks represent a combination of command size and seniority. So you have some generals starting at 4 Star rank to indicate that they are the most senior army commander candidates (either currently or for future use) and must be either demoted or fired before others can be promoted to army command. The game uses 4 Stars for Army command, 3 Stars for Corps, 2 for Division, 1 for Brigade, so these are game ranks and can only be mapped to historical ranks if you also include command size and seniority.

[warlimont]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

In the game, the ranks represent a combination of command size and seniority. So you have some generals starting at 4 Star rank to indicate that they are the most senior army commander candidates (either currently or for future use) and must be either demoted or fired before others can be promoted to army command. The game uses 4 Stars for Army command, 3 Stars for Corps, 2 for Division, 1 for Brigade, so these are game ranks and can only be mapped to historical ranks if you also include command size and seniority.

thanks for both replies.
Several further/added questions:
1. Eric, you mentioned 1 star for Brigades. Can a general be assigned to a un-attached brigade/regiment?
2. Does rank have any bearing on success or failure in battle?
and does rank matter with regard to the size of the General's command? In other words, can a Major General even be assigned to, say, an Army or Corps?

[Gil R.]

Generals cannot be assigned to lone brigades. For our expansion pack, we're thinking of making it possible to attach brigadier generals to their brigades within divisions. Such a feature would add significantly to the amount of micromanaging, though, so if we do this -- and this is not a promise written in stone -- we'd make it a game option. And if we do it, maybe we could do it for lone brigades (or, perhaps more importantly, raiders and partisans). We'll keep all of you posted as new features like this get programmed.

As for your other questions, a general has no impact when commanding above his rank. Eric will have to answer whether rank affects performance in battle. I suspect that higher ranking generals get certain bonuses, but don't recall.

[wzh55]

Generals assigned to single brigades sounds fantastic to us lonley guys who sit here all day renaming each single brigade with of course, their personal flags! Is there any way now that we can assign our division commander to a specific brigade when, say, fighting a detailed battle? Seems like I read a brief note somewhere that this is possible. Also, the idea of assigning Moseby or Forrest or some other "behind the lines" raider is helping me get through this trying period in my life, waiting for the next installment of a patch, or dare I say, expansion pack? Thanks as usual for the great games and support.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: warlimont
1. Eric, you mentioned 1 star for Brigades. Can a general be assigned to a un-attached brigade/regiment?

Not specifically. However, if you put 1 star generals into a division, they'll be randomly assigned to brigades in that division. In detailed combat, you can reassign your generals to different brigades using the "G" key, so it makes sense to put any extra 1 stars into divisions rather than just keeping them in reserve.

2. Does rank have any bearing on success or failure in battle? and does rank matter with regard to the size of the General's command? In other words, can a Major General even be assigned to, say, an Army or Corps?

You can always assign a general to a lower command, but he'll always be ranked higher than lower star generals. For example, putting a 4 star in command of a division in a corps commanded by a 3 star will result in the 4 star taking command of the corps. Generals get the ability based on game rank to affect larger size formations, so a 4 star general can extend his effects to an entire army, while a 3 star can only affect a corps. Putting a 3 star in command of an army will effectively leave the army without a commander as he won't have the rank to affect the entire army.

Regards,

- Erik

[Gil R.]

You can reassign generals during detailed battle. I don't have access to the manual right now so I can't check, but it has something to do with hitting the 'g' key while hovering over the target brigade. Perhaps one of the detailed battle experts out there will enlighten us.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: wzh55
Generals assigned to single brigades sounds fantastic to us lonley guys who sit here all day renaming each single brigade with of course, their personal flags! Is there any way now that we can assign our division commander to a specific brigade when, say, fighting a detailed battle? Seems like I read a brief note somewhere that this is possible.

Yes, use the "G" key in detailed combat to shuffle your generals around.

[warlimont]

thanks to all.

I like the "option" of assigning 1 stars to brigades very much.
Any additions such as above are usually accepted easier by the
anti-micromanagers when presented as options.
Personally, I love assigning the proper Generals to their commands.
I'm a history junky.

So far FOF looks like a grand game!