If you have the command Points and no other use for them, why not promote generals? Do field Marshalls have any drawbacks?
Any reason not to promote generals into field marshalls in the new expansion
- Thread starter Denkt
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Field marshals don't apply the full bonus from their skills and traits when they just command armies. AFAIK
Marshals can't get further General traits, unless they were already unlocked by the promoted general.
You sure about that? My field marshals at least gather xp for General traits, via the generals below them.
Von Kluge even has the armor officer background allowing him to gather xp for Panzer leader faster. And he starts as a Field Marshall. I think they can still get these traits. Just takes considerably longer then it does for generals.
Well, Fields Marshals did not command a bunch of other Field Marshals in their army group. Nothing more to say about that really.
There's literally no reason. They are just better than generals. For example, as NatChina you can make all of your armies commanded by starting field marshals then make another field marshal the leader of that army group. And they can use all of the traits
According to the defines:
I suspect the second define refers to leaders in the posting of "army group commander", not those with the rank of "field marshal". In which case, appointing an FM as a corps commander might limit assignable trait options. But that's still no worse off than being a general.
I suspect the second define refers to leaders in the posting of "army group commander", not those with the rank of "field marshal". In which case, appointing an FM as a corps commander might limit assignable trait options. But that's still no worse off than being a general.
Ok, to put the info here:
As long as the FM is leading army, (so he acts as general, despite higher rank):
He bestows full benefit of his 'combat' stats and earned traits and genral traits. His marshal traits however do not provide any benefit towards army he is commanding. You can't have high rank FM giving Offensive Doctrine, and all 'FM-generals' running with defensive doctrine giving both the effects. He also earns XP through combat with the same ratio as standard general.
(I ran test where I had both identical number of divisions attack Maginot line for couple of weeks = FM and general got the same XP towards Infantry Leader/Engineer and Terrain Trait. FM leading entire 'army' group got half of the experience they got (so it seems like he is earning quarter of what subordinate generals earn).
Despite what defines above quoted by SeekTruthFromFx - you can assign now up to 4 and 5 traits respectively. (It's Level/2 (+1 for FM))
As long as the FM is leading army, (so he acts as general, despite higher rank):
He bestows full benefit of his 'combat' stats and earned traits and genral traits. His marshal traits however do not provide any benefit towards army he is commanding. You can't have high rank FM giving Offensive Doctrine, and all 'FM-generals' running with defensive doctrine giving both the effects. He also earns XP through combat with the same ratio as standard general.
(I ran test where I had both identical number of divisions attack Maginot line for couple of weeks = FM and general got the same XP towards Infantry Leader/Engineer and Terrain Trait. FM leading entire 'army' group got half of the experience they got (so it seems like he is earning quarter of what subordinate generals earn).
Despite what defines above quoted by SeekTruthFromFx - you can assign now up to 4 and 5 traits respectively. (It's Level/2 (+1 for FM))
- 1
This is not true; in code language, a "Corps Commander" is an in-game general. This doesn't depend on what he commands.
It would be really silly, too. Imagine reassigning a marshal from an army group to an army, will his 3rd assignable skill just disappear? No, that's not how it works.
I think the only downside is that it'll make this mess of a system even more confusing to look at. Other than that, no in-game reason not to.
When you promote them, they "lose one skill point." Whatever that means. I assume it means that the integer value of one of those attributes they have (attack, defense, planning, logistics I think they are?) gets a -1 modifier. I hadn't really paid close attention though to what is happening. Just don't have the detailed knowledge of this engine yet, but it seems quite nice. Shame they cannot implement something more along these lines for their Europa series . . . though obviously not with TANKS! 
. . . the combat, leadership. and unit model is what I mean.
Of course any game is always going to have its peccadilloes. But I'm really surprised at how realistic, in depth and engaging the combat is in this game. I have eternally lamented to utterly ridiculous combats in the EU games.
. . . the combat, leadership. and unit model is what I mean.Of course any game is always going to have its peccadilloes. But I'm really surprised at how realistic, in depth and engaging the combat is in this game. I have eternally lamented to utterly ridiculous combats in the EU games.
Thank you for clarifying this!
But got to ask. A Field Marshall leading an army group. Do his "General" traits apply to armies under his command?
For example. I promote guderian, give him the panzer expert trait. Do tank divisions in armies in his field Marshall group get the benefits?
Same goes for any terrain trait really. If a Field Marshall commanding an army Group pass the boni from General and terrain traits down to troops under the generals under his command?
When you promote them, they "lose one skill point." Whatever that means. I assume it means that the integer value of one of those attributes they have (attack, defense, planning, logistics I think they are?) gets a -1 modifier. I hadn't really paid close attention though to what is happening. Just don't have the detailed knowledge of this engine yet, but it seems quite nice. Shame they cannot implement something more along these lines for their Europa series . . . though obviously not with TANKS!
Of course any game is always going to have its peccadilloes. But I'm really surprised at how realistic, in depth and engaging the combat is in this game. I have eternally lamented to utterly ridiculous combats in the EU games.
They get temporary (90 day) penalty of -1 to all four of the stats (attack, defense, planning, logistics)
Yes, they get half of the benefit of his general and earned/terrain traits and half of his 'skills'.
So Guderian with Panzer Expert (and Panzer Leader) will confer the boni of +2.5% speed to armor divisions, +5% Armor divisions attack and +7.5% Armor divisions defence (which means breakthrough and defense) to all armies under his command. Achtung! Panzer!
Needs a big ole tool tip somewhere saying what trait buffs are actually filtering down
Gotcha! That makes the tool tip for Rommel make sense then. He is a "media whore" or something like that, and his reassignment time is +150% or some such. So I guess, because the media will be fawning all over him if he gets promoted his ability to adjust to the new job will be slower.
Re-assignment is slightly different thing. If you have general/leader commanding one army, and you will then move him to another army he will take some time to adjust and fully embrace his job - during this time his portrait will be greyed out, and you will have small clock icon next to the leader. During this time he provides no boni or abilities. Base time is 15 days, adjusted like in case of Rommel by being 'media personality etc.'
