BUG: FIXED: Leader bug - Villars

[unmerged(18425)]

Currently the important French leader Villars (ID: 09015) has a start date 1685 and af death date of 1725. These are both wrong.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude-Louis-Hector_de_Villars

Villars only commanded a French army with a high rank in the War of the Spanish Succession, before that he had mainly a diplomatic role. (Though wiki does mention him being mesire de camp in 1674). All in all, his first major action as a high ranked leader was in the War of the Spanish Succession.
So, I suggest to set his start date to 1701 (The start of the war of the Spanish Succession).
Villars also died only in 1734 (not 1725) and still participated in a war that year (War of the Polish Succession).

Therefore, I suggest for Villars:

historicalleader = {
	id = { type = 6 id = 09015 }
	category = general
	name = "Villars" 
	startdate = {
		year=1701
	}
	deathdate = {
		day = 17
		month = june
		year = 1734
	}
	rank = 3
	movement = 4
	fire = 5
	shock = 5
	siege = 1
	dormant = no
}

 

[Norrefeldt]

Also supported by the facts in Columbia Encyclopedia.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

STARTING DATE

Well, he was a soldier long before the Spanish war of succession, but held no higher independent command. Apparently mainly because Louvois, the minister of war, disliked him. But Villars was born as early as 1653 and the text says he served under Turenne who died in 1675. Thus we can conclude that Villars early on embarked on a military career. And from the text we also see that he kept on doing it for some years (under Luxembourg etc).

At the outbreak of the great succession war Villars was around 48 years old and it can be assumed his skill was not something that just suddenly dropped down from heaven into his head and turned him into the master of war.

But perhaps we have a standard for having them as leaders in EU in the period when they had

"higher independent command"?

But no rule without exceptions, and in the case of Villars an earlier start date than 1701 clearly is reasonable. He lived in France at that time and no doubt such wise grey eminences as ourselves would have used his skill earlier than did Louis XIV.


END DATE

As for the end date, well that is obviously his death date, as he died when having the highest command of the French forces in war.

 

[unmerged(18425)]

But no rule without exceptions, and in the case of Villars an earlier start date than 1701 clearly is reasonable. He lived in France at that time and no doubt such wise grey eminences as ourselves would have used his skill earlier than did Louis XIV.

EU2 simply lacks a good standard for a start date, but it's reasonable to have him start when he commanded an army of at least 1,000 soldiers in real life too, since that is more or less the minimum size in game, right?

So, 1701 seems to be the best date for me, since Villars simply did not command armies before that date, according to the sources.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Eh, 1000 men is hardly an army.... And he surely had more men than that under his command before 1701

Am I misunderstanding something?

 

[Tonioz]

referring discussing of russian leaders, we set the standart of independant commanding. Commanding of one corpse were not enough for the start date.

 

[unmerged(18425)]

Well, there is no real standard in EU2, but we could adopt one for changes we propose in the bug forum, here.

Villars only commanded a cavalry regiment before 1701, and according to wiki this means "a few hundred soldiers up to 2,000-3,000 soldiers, depending on branch of service and method of organization". In other words, it looks like we don't really know how many soldiers he commanded before 1701.

So, a start date before 1701 seems to be a borderline case to me (it can be justified if you want), but since he also was inactive for a long time after him commanding this cavalry regiment till 1701, I still would say that 1701 is the best start date.

 

[Norrefeldt]

EU2 simply lacks a good standard for a start date, but it's reasonable to have him start when he commanded an army of at least 1,000 soldiers in real life too, since that is more or less the minimum size in game, right?

referring discussing of russian leaders, we set the standart of independant commanding. Commanding of one corpse were not enough for the start date.

I think the key should be independent command, and that mostly solves the matter of minimum size by itself, as very few units fought any independent battles. Otherwsie 1000 sounds like a good minimum. As Tonioz said, commanding a corps isn't enough just by itself, in the case where another had the supreme command.

 

[Rythin]

I think one's superior leadership skills and capability of commanding forces into the battle can only be shown if you are more-or-less independent in your decisions. After all leaders in EU2 are an important factor that influence the outcome of the battle in a significant way - it's not about arrogant noblemen without tactic sense who command regiments because they paid for it, it's about generals.

So 1701 sounds reasonable.

 

[Norrefeldt]

We seem to agree on 1701-34. Just as in AGCEEP.

 

[AndrewT]

OK, done, thanks.