Matrix Games Forums

Is it better to have no sub commanders or when out of good leaders assigning the poor ones to corps?

Any CSC is better than having none (or atleast as good). Having a bad CSC is never detrimental compared to having none.

That is what I was thinking, just wanted to ask.

what is the formula used? when a unit fight, you add army commander bonus + corps bonus plus a CSC taken at random's bonus?

Do CSC assist units in moving? For example, the Corps commander helps artillery with a +1. If he brings in an artillery leader that helps artillery with a +3 that would be good.

Matter of fact, that seems to me to be exactly what subcommanders can do: add their expertise to a branch related problem.

Has anybody seen this happen?

CSC do not help with movement. CSC help with
- committing troops to combat
- firing during combat
- Crusiers against raiders (but not raiders against Cruisers as you cannot attach to a raider)
- Blockading.
- Scouting
- Raiding
- Defending against scouting/raiding
 

by the way can gunboats replace cruisers in the blockade area? (I know, I'm diverging from the topic)

Yes, gunboats can do blockade duty, but like ironclads they're not quite as effective as cruisers. They'll also be more likely to suffer attrition.

Yo definitely want CSC with all your blockade squadrons. Not having one with each (hence the need for two naval leaders per blockade area) will lower the blockade rating. having neither leader, if the numbers are correct, means that a naval unit will be at -2 blocakde value every turn - and 2 is the max to begin with.

Using CSCs is a major hit to the Union blockade effort.