Rear-area unit x Combat unit x Assault unit
Posted: Sat Aug 07, 2004 10:24 pm
I was very curious to find out what "best fit to command a combat unit" means. From my tests, it seems that these designations don't have anything to do with either leadership, inspiration or administrative abilities, but only with:
Assault unit: aggressiveness > 50 and combat skill > 50
Combat unit: aggressiveness > 40 and combat skill > 40
Rear-are unit: everything else
The wording is very confusing, though, as a leader with great Leadership and Inspiration that is best fit for an "assault unit" may in fact be best fit for a command HQ in order to multiply the effect of his leadership/inspiration to its units.
I would see "best fit for rear-area unit" and "best fit for rear-area headquarters" as in fact meaning "these guys are unfit for combat".
By the way, I didn't test, but I believe that "rear-area headquarters", "front line headquarters" and "assault headquarters" work on a similar way; I think the only difference is where the leader lists (major/minor ground units or headquarters lists).
Comments/remarks/corrections are always welcome - I would hate to get that stuff wrong.
F.
Assault unit: aggressiveness > 50 and combat skill > 50
Combat unit: aggressiveness > 40 and combat skill > 40
Rear-are unit: everything else
The wording is very confusing, though, as a leader with great Leadership and Inspiration that is best fit for an "assault unit" may in fact be best fit for a command HQ in order to multiply the effect of his leadership/inspiration to its units.
I would see "best fit for rear-area unit" and "best fit for rear-area headquarters" as in fact meaning "these guys are unfit for combat".
By the way, I didn't test, but I believe that "rear-area headquarters", "front line headquarters" and "assault headquarters" work on a similar way; I think the only difference is where the leader lists (major/minor ground units or headquarters lists).
Comments/remarks/corrections are always welcome - I would hate to get that stuff wrong.
F.
