Matrix Games Forums

Is anyone using this optional rule? I've enabled it and am finding it thoroughly confusing. Any tips appreciated.

It definitely makes the game more complex. I almost always play with it on, but I kept it off for my first three or four games at least way back when. There's a LOT more leader management with this rule on and once it's on, the additional sub-commanders are not an option, if you don't keep things setup right you're in for some penalties. I'd only recommend this to advanced players who are very comfortable with the game.

Erik:

I am still trying to figure this rule out as well. First question is whether divisional structure is maintained inside the corps. That is, do I need to go through all the trouble of "building divisions" and then placing them in corps? Or do I only need to place some mix of subordinate leaders and units into a corps leader, and the actual divisional structure is abstracted out?

If divisional structure is maintained by the program internal to the corps, do I need to "deconstruct" the corps and then "reconstruct" it each time combat units and leaders get eliminated? This is a lot of messing around and I am just wondering if it is necessary.

Thx,

Paul

ORIGINAL: tran505
I am still trying to figure this rule out as well. First question is whether divisional structure is maintained inside the corps. That is, do I need to go through all the trouble of "building divisions" and then placing them in corps? Or do I only need to place some mix of subordinate leaders and units into a corps leader, and the actual divisional structure is abstracted out?

The structure is abstracted. All you need to do is take a top level leader, fill him up with units and then add enough sub-commanders to help command all the units. Remember that the sub-commanders help out based on their rank, not their command rating.

Thanks, Erik!

After a close re-reading of the rule, I think I understand.

Subordinate leaders:

1) Only help units with a matching unit sub-type
2) The number of units helped equals the star rating plus 1
3) The subordinate leaders help by applying the appropriate speciatly skill (only) to the units they are assigned to help.

If that is right, then the only unclear point is on what basis are units assigned to subordinate leaders when the capacity of the leadership exceeds the number of combat units to be assigned? For example, if you have three two-star subordinate infantry generals, and say, four infantry units, how are the infantry units assigned to the subordinate leaders?

P

ORIGINAL: tran505


If that is right, then the only unclear point is on what basis are units assigned to subordinate leaders when the capacity of the leadership exceeds the number of combat units to be assigned? For example, if you have three two-star subordinate infantry generals, and say, four infantry units, how are the infantry units assigned to the subordinate leaders?

P

When a Unit Commander has only units attached to him, there is a number in brackets that displays how many units are still without subcommanders, so if you had 3 two star leaders they would be able two command 9 units in total, so you're underusing their potential, not a good strategy.

Example: Unit Commander (two stars) with 15 command points. This General can attach up to 15 units, Only Generals with rank two or lower and 15 or lower command points may be attached as Sub Commanders.
Let's suppose he has 15 units attached: 10 inf 5 arty
To optimize the troops leadership you could attach 2 two star inf generals (they would have 6 inf units under their orders), 2 one star inf generals (the other 4 inf units), 1 two star arty general (3 artys under his comand) and 1 one star arty general (for the last two artys).
Of course you can make other combinations depending on your available leaders.

Remember to check how many units are still without Sub Commanders, I find that info most useful since otherwise you would have to be making the calculus yourself.

CSC do really help in battle, if you don't have them and the enemy does you're in for a sound defeat [;)]

Hope this helps.