Why aren't Guderian or MacArthur in the game?

[Alcibiades73]

I saw both luminaries missing from the list of HQs on the editor. Aren't these significant omissions, given that they are arguably the most celebrated German and American generals of World War II? (I think both are a bit over-rated, but they both nonetheless deserve a place.)

[Platoonist]

I don't know about Guderian, but MacArthur is included in the game.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

I don't know about Guderian, but MacArthur is included in the game.

Ah, okay. So I guess he comes via an Event?

[Alcibiades73]

By the way, how much does HQ rating matter? For instance, I got sacked and replaced all HQs with below 6 default starting rating for both Germany and Japan, and I am wondering if this was a wise investment.

[Platoonist]

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73



Ah, okay. So I guess he comes via an Event?

Yup. Lose an archipelago, gain a prima-donna. [:D]

[Platoonist]

ORIGINAL: Alcibiades73

By the way, how much does HQ rating matter? For instance, I got sacked and replaced all HQs with below 6 default starting rating for both Germany and Japan, and I am wondering if this was a wise investment.

That sounds like a wise investment to me if you can afford it. The leader rating number has a major impact on the readiness and effectiveness of land and air units. However, you can't gauge their relative effectiveness all the time since you can't always see what opposing HQ commanders your HQ's troops are pitted against. However, I'm certain even an HQ with a mediocre general in charge is better than none.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: Platoonist


That sounds like a wise investment to me if you can afford it. The leader rating number has a major impact on the readiness and effectiveness of land and air units. However, you can't gauge their relative effectiveness all the time since you can't always see what opposing HQ commanders your HQ's troops are pitted against. However, I'm certain even an HQ with a mediocre general in charge is better than none.

But the million dollar question is what constitutes "can afford"?

[Torplexed]

When playing the UK I always replace Lord Gort and O'Conner with the likes of Montgomery and Brooke by mid-game. Lord Gort is especially bad. Since the UK doesn't usually field a large land army you don't need to keep the deadwood HQ leaders around just to cover the front.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: Torplexed

When playing the UK I always replace Lord Gort and O'Conner with the likes of Montgomery and Brooke by mid-game. Lord Gort is especially bad. Since the UK doesn't usually field a large land army you don't need to keep the deadwood HQ leaders around just to cover the front.

I just checked their ratings, and I'd do the same. Of course, what do you do when you are Italy, and 5 rating is the best - and there is only one HQ even with a 5! ;(

[pjg100]

Invest in C&C.

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: pjg100

Invest in C&C.

I do, but I am not sure if that is sufficient to salvage 4 or even 5 ratings HQs

[Epekepe]

IMO this is balanced very well, play as Allies and you will see, pretty poor HQ:s there too.

[BillRunacre]

The German HQs are set to represent Army Group commanders, and Guderian was one rank lower IIRC.

Which makes including him a bit more controversial and speculative, i.e. people generally think of him as good, but would he have fared so well at a higher level of command?

[Alcibiades73]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

The German HQs are set to represent Army Group commanders, and Guderian was one rank lower IIRC.

Which makes including him a bit more controversial and speculative, i.e. people generally think of him as good, but would he have fared so well at a higher level of command?

I suspected that this was the rationale for exclusion, but it is not very persuasive, given that Guderian was too important. Among other things, he was the theoretical pioneer of blitzkrieg, and he also added arguably the most important element of the invasion plan for France.