Reorganizing the Allied command structure in 1944

[Grotius]

It's now January 1944 in my campaign game (as the Allies against the Axis AI), and I'm pondering how to reorganize the Allied high command. I want to make changes that roughly resemble the historical chain of command, but I'm not quite sure what should report to what. Right now, for example, almost nothing reports to SHAEF, and Ike is still in Africa. I assume it's up to me to rearrange things? Or will the game automatically change some command relationships for me as time progresses?

I actually hope it's up to me, as that's more fun, but I would appreciate some guidance on how to set things up. Thanks!

[marion61]

Which leader goes where is up to you. Usually I put 21st BAG and 12th US AG under Shaef, and then have my armies depending on where they are on the front reporting to the AG's. I put Monty into 21st BAG and Bradley in 12th AG and of course Eisenhower in Shaef.

[Grotius]

Thanks. That sounds sensible. Bradley died on the first day of my campaign, so I'll have to find someone else.

One other thing I'm wondering: as described in the manual, the leader-check system seems to depend most heavily on the lowest-level leaders. That is, when my Corps commander checks a skill, he has a reasonable chance of passing it. But if he fails, his commanding officer (say, at the Army level) has a smaller chance of passing the same check, even if he has a higher skill in the checked stat. (Maybe I misunderstood the manual?) If that's the case, shouldn't one's best leaders be at the Corps level?

[dereck]

I know it's not 100% sure each time but if you look in Wikipedia and type in the division you should be able to see some information about it's history which may mention where it served (Europe, Mediterranean, Pacific, etc).

[MisterBoats]

I intend to put Patton in charge of 12th AG, as I despise Bradley. I know Bradley has good stats in the game, but I just cannot give him the command. I'd like to have Terry Allen as a corps commander, and possibly Ted Roosevelt, Jr. They were legendary in the Big Red One. I might even put Marshall or Brooke in as SHAEF commander, just to see what might happen. I'm very happy to have the freedom to do so.

[Erik Rutins]

The Corps commander has the largest impact, but on far fewer units. The Army and Army Group commanders have a potential impact on far more units and can help with corps commanders that aren't as good. A good chain of command from top to bottom makes for better results.

[Omat]

Hello

I just look for high admin ratings for higher HQ. So would do the same. Patton has a "low" admin rating so I "use" him only for armys.

If you advance suppelies problems can slow you down.


Omat

ORIGINAL: meklore61

Which leader goes where is up to you. Usually I put 21st BAG and 12th US AG under Shaef, and then have my armies depending on where they are on the front reporting to the AG's. I put Monty into 21st BAG and Bradley in 12th AG and of course Eisenhower in Shaef.

[mariandavid]

As far as I can tell the game leader stats are pretty accurate: Bradley of course is rated as an army group commander, Patton as just an army one (note that US/UK historians generally rated Patton as inferior to Simpson, Patch, etc but that was of course before the movie came out and hagiography followed). Have not got there yet but suspect the real issue at high level command will be when Alexander leaves in 1944.

[paullus99]

Patton may have been an egomaniac, but he did one hell of a job motivating his troops...

[mariandavid]

I was afraid my glib comment would divert! Seriously though everything I have read about the company level down of the 3rd Army indicates that he was hated by his troops (recollect he ordered and enforced that rank stripes and badges be painted in white on the front of the helmet and worn into battle -let alone the imbecility of insisting on scarves). Most if not all of the praise came from senior armor officers in the years after he died - he being mythologized during the great budget wars of the late 1940's to justify a strong army against an even larger air force.

And getting back on track - it is not the 'over' of Patton that I object to, rather it is the consequent 'under' of the very great US generals that fought in Europe, notably Simpson especially as I am discovering that leader ratings are more significant that in WitE - fewer units per leader?

[MisterBoats]

As with WITP and MacArthur, I had to swallow my personal feelings and look at the numbers. Patton stays with 3rd Army and Bradley gets 12th AG. At least I can override Bradley's lack of strategic imagination. Ike's, too.