ORIGINAL: Johan Grip
Offensive and defensive skill can be gained also but strategic rating cant and it is very important with the monthly turn rate.
It can be done differently: you can have Stenbock start at level 1* with a smaller strategic value (he now starts with a 4) and have it increased each time he gets promoted (to 5 or 6, he now has a 5)
ORIGINAL: Johan Grip
Offensive and defensive skill can be gained also but strategic rating cant and it is very important with the monthly turn rate.
It can be done differently: you can have Stenbock start at level 1* with a smaller strategic value (he now starts with a 4) and have it increased each time he gets promoted (to 5 or 6, he now has a 5)
I am sure his strategic rating is fine as is, it was just a general comment on starting stats of generals and how they matter in the flow of the game.
Efter hundraåriga skiften
våga nalkas till hjältegriften!
Plåna med tårar ut minnesskriften:
hur den störste bland Karlar föll!
Just want to remind that the rating is dynamic according to rank. For example Stenbock is a general at Helsingborg and Gadebusch (rank 3). Early in the game he is a general major (rank 1).
Carl Gustaf Armfeldt was a competent Swedish general, but from the middle of the war. He was generaladjutant 1701. Promoted to major general 1711, commanding the army of Finland 1713. So his entry in the game should be later as it reflects the leadership problems Sweden had at the Finnish front, (Cronhjort and Lybecker).
Just want to remind that the rating is dynamic according to rank. For example Stenbock is a general at Helsingborg and Gadebusch (rank 3). Early in the game he is a general major (rank 1).
I just want to comment the comment about Banér and Spens and their competence. Both was Lieutenant generals in the early operations of the war. Johan Gabriel Banér as Generalissimus of the Holstein-Gottorp army. His defence of Tönningen shows a very skilled commander. Jacob Spens was one of the highest ranked cavalry officers early in the war. He had detachment command during the operations in Courland. Both commanders were about 40 years old when the war break out. Both had health problems and Spens retires 1704. Banér dies 1706, just after he had meet the King who wanted him to take a higher Swedish command.
About the competence of Stefan Löfven I agree [:D]
Also I would not call him charismatic or good population administrator, feared and hated would be more accurate but maybe there is nothing more suitable with the needed effects.
He conducted a one man cultural revolution inside Russia with brutal force, great majority from the peasants to the nobility objected his policies.
Had he lost in Poltava it would have most likely started another rebellion and he very possibly could have not put it down as before.
Efter hundraåriga skiften
våga nalkas till hjältegriften!
Plåna med tårar ut minnesskriften:
hur den störste bland Karlar föll!
Carl Gustaf Armfeldt was a competent Swedish general, but from the middle of the war. He was generaladjutant 1701. Promoted to major general 1711, commanding the army of Finland 1713. So his entry in the game should be later as it reflects the leadership problems Sweden had at the Finnish front, (Cronhjort and Lybecker).
Stenbock also enters as an colonel in the game.
Placing a one star leader in command of a larger force will give you leadership problems even if you dont go over the CP limit.
I think the rank affects the frontage size he can deploy, could be a mute point in defense of Finland but anyways.
In any case Finland, Ingermanland, Estonia and Livonia where historically mismanaged, I dont think anyone in the game is going to do the same mistake.
Efter hundraåriga skiften
våga nalkas till hjältegriften!
Plåna med tårar ut minnesskriften:
hur den störste bland Karlar föll!