ORIGINAL: rhinobones
Obviously quite a bit of effort has already been put into this project, so I hope it isn’t all written in stone. I have a few comments and suggestions which may help to improve the product.
1. The term “Tactical Skill” is used in the criteria. I can just imagine those hard core TOAW-heads having a fit using “tactical” in an “operational” game. Maybe just shorten it to “Skill”.
The game is operational, but resolution of combat is tactical - based upon all sorts of tactical factors, like armor thickness, armor penetration, naval armor, shell weight, rate of fire, etc.
2. Offensive Tactical Skill and Defensive Tactical Skill. Don’t think two categories are needed. After all, either a commander is, or isn’t, good at positioning troops for maximum effect. Suggest you combine these categories into one category such as Battle Management. This would describe the commander’s ability to plan, execute and manage a battle in both defense and offense.
Some commanders are better at one or the other: Longstreet was a defensive specialist while Jackson was the opposite. If you think they should always be the same, then you can just make each the same.
3. Organizational Skill. This is good. To me it describes the commander’s ability to combine weapon systems, formations and supporting elements into an effective fighting force. Eisenhower.
It directly affects the commander's control of his units that are beyond his command radius. Plus, good organizers retain more of their tactical skill as they are promoted. Finally, poor organizers suffer supply difficulties.
4. Initiative. This is good although I would rename it as Aggressiveness. This describes the commander’s drive to take the fight to the enemy. Patton vs Lucas Clark.
It's the ability to act independent of a superior's command radius. Even if that action is to run for it.
5. Charisma and Political Strength. These are qualities which come into play in Parliament when a command is lobbied. I doubt that the troops on the battlefield care much about how the command was granted and I would drop them from the list.
Charisma is a commander's ability to prevent his units from routing or reorganizing - or to recover from those states.
Political Strength represents how difficult the commander is to remove from his command or promote/demote.
8. Standard Model. Good that you have a baseline for assignment of values, but I think Napoleon might be too remote in history and surrounded by too much mythology to make a good standard. Suggest you select someone more recent, someone people may find familiar. General Schwarzkopf might be a good choice. Give him straight 100’s across the board and have the rest compared up or down accordingly. Actually, I think a scale of 1 to 10 would be better as an evaluation tool than 1 to 100 and 1 to 1000.
There are plenty of examples. Nevertheless, the ratings aren't the important part. Getting the name right and the picture right are far more important.
9. Whatever you decide to do, I think you’ll need to provide a definition for each category. Definition should include a thorough description of what is being evaluated and a method for quantifying the evaluation.
I did - in the Word document I included in the attachment above.
