>>1329554
>a tent

An office.

Chill in a comfy seat staring at maps and eating good food. If your side wins the war you become president, if you lose you kill yourself.

>>1329554

In short, they make grand-scale decisions for their troops by all the information filtered by their subordinates.

The orders will be delivered to lower-level commanders like colonels etc. and so on who actually know how to execute these orders with their regiments, companies etc.

>>1329561
>>1329562
>>1329586
None of you have any idea of what you're talking about.
>>1329554
At least look into what different ranks commanded and refine your answer. Corps level is where action seeking goes to die, below depends on the type of brigade or division you're commanding and what army you serve. There's no way army level or above see any action beyond air raids.

>>1329554
Nowadays, with all the modern command and control equipment, you almost never get to leave HQ. Maybe only for inspection n shiet.

The most in-danger high ranking commands nowadays would be admirals. Since they need to be on the boat. And their boats are liable to asplode in war.

>>1330706
>admirals being physically with the fleet

'no'

I can't speak for other wars or combatants but the British lost at least a hundred generals in WW1 (four generals, twelve major g., eighty something brig.). The first one died in Sep 14 already. A third were killed by artillery, some twenty by small arms fire, a couple died by crazy stuff like plane crashes or drowning. A whole bunch also got severly injured or captured.

>>1329554
Rommel was a good general *because* he was close to the action.

>>1330900

>Rommel
>Good general

Meme harder. Good generals don't embark on unworkable attack plans and when told about the logistical troubles involved, blow it off as someone else's problem.

>>1331750

He did alright in Normandy.

>>1331915
You mean, correctly guessing the invasion zone, and then talking himself out of it? Or were you referring to his advocacy of a defensive plan which already failed the last time it was used?

>>1331933

I mean attempting to set up a defensive line along the Orne river, recognising the power of Allied air support and telling Hitler his 'stand your ground' order was retarded and impeded flexible defense strategies.
That's about as well as a general could perform and certainly a long shot from Hitler's indoctrinated cronies.

Also, it's hard to fault Rommel for the fact that due to OKW politics about half the Panzers in Normandy were sitting there twiddling their thumbs instead of denying the Allies their proper beachhead.

>>1329554
The staff does most of the work. A General will be receiving reports and providing oversight, trying to foresee problems or react quickly when one arises. If an issue is ongoing then he will delegate the task to someone with more time and expertise.

>>1329554
Probably a lot of drinking

>>1332086

Yes, I'm familiar with Rommel's disagreement with Rundstedt, and his favoring of keeping the armor and most reserves near the expected landing zones.

The problem is, it's pretty much a repeat of what Sieckenius tried against Avalanche, and that didn't work. Too much naval gunfire,and it's harder than it sounds to push the Allies back, even on exposed beaches with armor.

I've never really seen anything as to why someone would think it would work better this time around.

I was in the us army 82nd airborne. Only saw the commanding general once a year during division review. Never saw him when deployed. I was in the battalion that the command staff belongs to too.