Should commanders be killable in quick combat?

[ericbabe]

Should commanders be able to be killed as a random event in quick combat?

[bluemonday]

If you do this, I suggest allowing players to place them on the map, at least in attack or defense (with leaders assigned to defend having a lower chance to be killed). Thus, a leader assigned to attack would get his full bonuses, while a leader assigned to defend would get reduced bonuses. That way players could try and protect important leaders, albeit at a penalty to effectiveness.

[TheHellPatrol]

I never liked the quick battle results when i knew i could do much better on my own, if the battle wasn't big enough you could(would) suffer more casualties than hexwar so losing a leader would be salt in the wound. I think it would also spark endless debate on how often/seldom a leader was killed and detract from the reward of doing the tactical battles yourself which IMHO is an awesome part of COG that i think i will never tire of!

[jchastain]

I think if the poll asked:

Leaders can be killable:

1. In detailed only
2. In detailed & quick
3. in detailed & quik but a config option can turn off any deaths

We might find that this question boils down to those who want deaths and those who do not and an option for whether or not they can be killed at all might be the answer to satisfy everyone.

That said, I still support 1 & 2 star generals being able to die in quick combat.

[Reg Pither]

I voted 'Yes' but only if either changes are made in Quick Combat to allow you some control over them, or use the suggestions that others have made on the forum to enable promotions and replacements of leaders.

Simply allowing leaders to be killed in Quick Combat without changing anything else would be a 'No' for me. [:)]

[Titanwarrior89]

We need something with leaders being able to be killed in quick combat. A button or something if people want that.

Try playing the american civil war without leaders dieing, it would not feel right. Nor would it be historically correct. Well its the same with Nappy wars(less leader deaths as compared too the civil war) but they did happen. Also alot of people I would think will only play the Area movement and quick combat due too the length of the tactical battles.

SO I "VOTE YES" for Quick combat deaths/wounded.

By the way every War game Ive played on this period of history---no matter if its at the grand level or tactical-they use leader causalities.

The way its set now if I ONLY PLAY the area movement and quick combat I never ever have too worry about a leader being or wounded or killed. Come on guys thats not correct and you all know it.[:D]

[Titanwarrior89]

bump![:D]

[jchastain]

Talk about an ambiguous result. [&:]