Slitherine

Are they cumulative?
If you are in the zone of more than one - do you get all of their benefits?

Korvessa wrote:Are they cumulative?
If you are in the zone of more than one - do you get all of their benefits?

I think so but let the experts speak ...

Korvessa wrote:Are they cumulative?
If you are in the zone of more than one - do you get all of their benefits?

Good question as I've wondered the same thing

Korvessa wrote:Are they cumulative?

I'd say, yes, too. Never tested it specifically, but nothing made me think otherwise, ever.

Some commanders can be tested easily, e.g. Orde Wingate, who should give an +1turn supply stash to all units within his radius of effect. Or those commanders who give assault or shock bonuses (e.g. Finland's). The effect on the enemy units can be seen directly after the attack.

No. Only one applies, at least bonuses of similar type (like infantry attack for instance). At least back when I tried it a few patches ago. I haven't experimented to see how it decides which to apply though.

Of course it could be a situation where only one bonus *of a type* applies, meaning that maybe you can stack an attack bonus with a shock bonus or whatever. Not sure.

hrafnkolbrandr wrote:No. Only one applies, at least bonuses of similar type (like infantry attack for instance). At least back when I tried it a few patches ago. I haven't experimented to see how it decides which to apply though.

I like it when people disagree, gets me motivated .....so I did a more (or less) quick test .... and I stand corrected: He's right. Only one commander's bonus gets selected.

hrafnkolbrandr wrote:Of course it could be a situation where only one bonus *of a type* applies, meaning that maybe you can stack an attack bonus with a shock bonus or whatever. Not sure.

Doesn't seem so.

It's even worse. After some testing I'd suggest to AVOID overlapping commander spheres of influence altogether:

The unit that the commander is put into gets his/hers bonuses only. So far so good.
But units without commanders and within a sphere of two (or more) commanders only receive the bonuses of one of those commanders. And it even doesn't have to be the one with the "strongest" stats. Meaning for example, that the bonuses of a high range commander with good defensive stats could be "overridden" by the comparably weak stats of an offensive commander's sphere of influence.

And I also haven't "experimented to see how the game decides which to apply". Probably goes by the ID or the position in the list of the commanders.txt

Note: I did this test with land commanders only and just assumed no bonuses are transferred between naval/air/land commanders by default.

So, thanks for this question. It's nice to know now.

Interesting topic. I didn't know that, I just assumed they stack. But it does make sense that you can't have two commanders of the same rank commanding a common unit. I would propose following change:

- each commander will be riven a rank (1, 2 or 3 stars), ranks do not change
- commanders of the same rank do NOT stack
- commanders of different rank DO stack

This gives the scenario designers a way to balance commanders and also an interesting mechanic for players to play with as it matters where you assign your commanders. If you do it poorly you will lose your potential bonuses, if you assign your commanders properly you will be rewarded with better stats on your units.

What do you think?

Mojko wrote:What do you think?

However it may be changed in the future, just don't make it too complicated.
What's wrong with multiple commanders coordinating troops in the same area of operations? Just "stack" them all.

I think "programming-wise" stacking the bonuses would be easiest. But would that give the player too much advantage since the AI usually have no commanders at all?

CoolDTA wrote:I think "programming-wise" stacking the bonuses would be easiest. But would that give the player too much advantage since the AI usually have no commanders at all?

Sure, but isn't that the purpose of commanders and specialisations anyways?
For example, the Waffen-SS I & II specs combined give you about 18 land CP more per mision. If that's not a huge advantage, I don't know what is.

Still, I say "stack 'em". You could then choose to scatter them all around on the battlefield or group them for better effect (which up until now, I've always though they did )

GabeKnight wrote: Sure, but isn't that the purpose of commanders and specialisations anyways?
For example, the Waffen-SS I & II specs combined give you about 18 land CP more per mision. If that's not a huge advantage, I don't know what is.

Like you needed all those advantages. I wonder why the designers don't give the AI any commanders. I remember PzC had some nasty ones in some scenarios (Grand Campaign). Okay, they would be killed but that happened in PzC, too.

GabeKnight wrote:Still, I say "stack 'em". You could then choose to scatter them all around on the battlefield or group them for better effect (which up until now, I've always though they did )

I also prefer the stacking.

CoolDTA wrote: I wonder why the designers don't give the AI any commanders. I remember PzC had some nasty ones in some scenarios (Grand Campaign). Okay, they would be killed but that happened in PzC, too.

Agree, they should be used more often in the vanilla scens. But don't forget the cutie commander of the "Night Witches" in Panzerkrieg...

GabeKnight wrote:But don't forget the cutie commander of the "Night Witches" in Panzerkrieg...

She sure is unforgettable.