Matrix Games Forums

Hi,

So, can anyone who has experience with the game or system give me a little primer on what strategy should be used when assigning commanders? For example at the start of Trappenjagd there are about 6 Soviet commanders available. they range in cost from about -10 PP to 10 PP. I think that I read in the manual that some of the leadership attributes don't matter (i.e. have no effect) if commanders are assigned at a level higher than army level (assuming they aren't directly commanding any combat units).

So, what is your thought process when deciding whether to replace any commanders with the 6 in the pool and what officer type you would want to replaced (i.e. at what level and by level what attributes are important to upgrade if replacing a commander)?

Thank you.

I'm also interested in advice on this. Commander stats don't move up or down depending on hows its going. would it just be based on offensive or defensive stats and cards? What ever the situation calls for? I just thought of something, is there a compare window for commanders like there is for units? If not, might be one for the wish list, i'll have to check. Interested to hear the feedback on this.

+1

I would also be great if there was a spreadsheet of all commanders and their attributes for quick comparions.

cheers

More than in most other wargames, the performance of a HQ depends both on the officer in charge and the staff. Even with a mediocre leader, you can quickly get a good percentage modifier by playing Personnel cards.

Based on my limited experience with the game thus far, the Personnel card is on the long term the most valuable High Command card because it gives a permanent bonus (an increase in HQ experience) that doesn't require another card to be played. You do need to be careful about adding replacements to a HQ as it will lower their experience rating. I'd say that as long as the staff is full strength, a HQ doesn't need a full infantry complement for example because it will generally be behind the frontline.

It also seems command points are in a way more important than the other ability ratings, unless there's a really big difference. Keep in mind that none of the abilities matter until cards are played. If you can play a card every 6 turns and it gives a 30% bonus (a theoretical example), or a card every 4 turns that gives a 20% bonus, I'd pick the latter because even though the leader is somewhat worse, he can play cards more often. I'd guess that most if not all of the leaders that give a reasonable amount of command points also have good ability ratings, but still.

This is what I think about when looking at whether to replace officers.

Command points should be the first thing you look at as they allow cards to be played more often.

For Soviet Front commanders you want officers with a high Organization ability because the results of most of the strategic deck cards are dependent on the officer's Organizational skill. All the other abilities are irrelevant for Front commanders unless you are assigning combat units to Front commands and I never do that.

For Soviet Army commanders, you want good Audacity, Determination and Charisma abilities. These abilities determine the effectiveness of offensive, defensive and morale action cards.

Also make sure they can command the amount of staff at the HQ or you will incur penalties.

I also check what cards each officer can play as they are not always the same.

Finally there is an opportunity cost to appointing lots of new officers as you will not have the points to play Regime cards.

Bear in mind that a General is only as good as his staff. You want a combination of a good general with an experienced staff. As ComradeP above said the Personnel card is excellent for increasing staff experience.

I'm slowly coming to grips with this stuff thanks for the replies so far. I read a sentence in the manual that baffels me. I'll bold it in this quote from the manual.

"This means that generals are limited by the quality of their
staff. You can have an excellent general, but if he lacks the
means to adequately command his forces it will not matter.
However, an experienced staff combined with a good general
gives outstanding results!
Officers in Army/Front command do not give combat bonuses
to their staff when supporting battles of front-line units."

What does that last sentence mean?

if there was a spreadsheet of all commanders and their attributes for quick comparions

Sorry dont agree.

If we have exact knowledge of the commanders attributes and his satff it wouldnt be very realistic. Humans are unpredictable. I wouldnt want to boil the game to a battle of spreadsheet crunching that will suck the fun out! Read their bio and how they preformed historically thats all the High Command had to go on.

I suggest increasing the bio information for each commander and hiding the stats.

[&:] not sure addressing same thing.

A list of all officers and their abilities and statistics would be helpful. This data is already shown in the game as a pop up per each officer (see 9.4, 9.5 in manual). Not sure if data changes per each scenario though.

I cant see being able to look across all my officers in a spreadsheet is realistic?

ORIGINAL: starbuck310

I cant see being able to look across all my officers in a spreadsheet is realistic?

I would suggest then that you don't look. You have all the power. The people who do wish to look will be able to download it and use it as they see fit. That way everyone is happy.