Matrix Games Forums

Perhaps not a bug but I noticed something odd this morning. I fought a decisive battle against the AI using the Quick Combat option. The Union AI had an Army but it was being led by a brigadier (one star) general?! At least that was the general who showed up on the screen at the bottom. The time was roughly March '62 so the Union shold have had higher ranked generals available. Just wondering if there is a problem with how the AI is assigning generals.

It is 1863 in my game and I have yet to see a 3 or 4 star general for the Confederates ( I attacked and lost the NVirginia army, it was lead by a 2star.)

Quick combat displays the three highest ranking generals in the province for each side, so the 1-star was probably not leading the army, was just in the location of the battle.

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Quick combat displays the three highest ranking generals in the province for each side, so the 1-star was probably not leading the army, was just in the location of the battle.

In my battle he was the only Union general displayed on the battle screen and that was the only union force in the province. So it sounds like that army only had a single one star general in it. That still sounds odd to me. No wonder we kicked their butts. [;)]

The union starts with more armies than it has "slots" for 4+ star generals.  They have to build many academies to be able to properly lead all their armies.  Since an officer of insufficint rank does not apply his bonus, there is no reason to "waste" a 2 or 3 star to command of an army - they are better off leading a corp or division where their bonuses do apply.  So, it is not unusual to see a 1 star "leading" a lesser army.  In fact, I do that myself with some regularity.

Ok, thanks. That makes sense.

If only one general appears at the bottom of the Quick Battle screen then does that mean he was the only general in that army/province?