You get it sometimes with the Byz ... the king has an extreme amount of starts ... but the heir recieves 0.
Is he effectively recognized has having more than 10 stars? or 10 stars? Because I usually just kill them off, don't take the risk
You get it sometimes with the Byz ... the king has an extreme amount of starts ... but the heir recieves 0.
Is he effectively recognized has having more than 10 stars? or 10 stars? Because I usually just kill them off, don't take the risk
noramis,
I think it really is 0 stars. Apparently game does it on purpose to annoy us
Seriously I think it is to stop factions getting too powerful - 9 star generals coud win with peasants, probably.
Personally I think it's a small bug - It wants to give him 9+1 star and that becomes 0.
The heirs are usually still kick-ass governors of your rich provinces, so don't kill them off. After a while you don't need your king to be a strong fighter anyway.
Nope - no sig what so ever.
It usually happens in the Byzantine game - after a whole string of excellent kings and princes with extremely high general ratings, it just bogs down.
"It ain't where you're from / it's where you're at."
Eric B. & Rakim, I Know You Got Soul
At least once it happened to me. One biz. heir had 0 stars but 6 valor. It seemed odd but I remembered someone mentioning here this 'no stars/yes stars' bug. So I sent him to a medium risk province. But when his dad kicked the bucket the 0 star prince became an 8 star emperor. But one of his siblings had the same situation and never developed any stars.
It´s an odd bug.
A king with 7 stars give the best heirs, its quite logical i think, imagine having a 9 star king having 5 sons with 9 stars heh, so when your king gets over 8 stars he usualy has some stupid sons with 0 stars not more then 1-2 though the rest are quite good still..i doubt its a bug
No, I mean the bug where you get a heir with 0 stars but when he becomes emperor he has 8 stars.Originally Posted by [b
Hasnt happend to me so i dont know about that lancer63
In all honesty it may be an undocumented feature.
However it has never been changed in any of the patchs and it seems intentional as a method of balancing kingdoms.
Note that a prince will typically have +/- 2 stars from the King. 10 or more = 0 stars. These guys can still be useful. A king is for ruling it is the high star unlces that should go to war.
Our genes maybe in the basement but it does not stop us chosing our point of view from the top.
Pape for global overlord!!
Funny how two swapped letters can make a sentence difficult to undersatnd
I garee with the meaning though.
Nope - no sig what so ever.
It seems to me that "bug" is indeed pretty useful to balance the game, otherwise the Byz would keep getting tremendous heirs for the entire game.
Not that those fellows cannot be defeated by an human player but other AI factions have a lot a troubles dealing with those fellows.
Usually the IA Byz have something like two generations of top class general and that is pretty much it. It would be quite enough for a human player to become almost invincible but the AI has a tendency to waste those by retreating too often.
Moreover the Byz armies are mostly made of peasants and Slav warriors who are easily routed. If you can check the kharpatoi with spear units at the start of the battle, the rest is no that difficult: rout the peasants, deal with isolated the kharpatoi, they will be just like stuck tanks without infantry support (a lot easier with arbalesters and halberdiers).
To go back to the topic, yes there is a "10 star-bug" but it is a good bug. It happened to me yesterday when my nine stars Argonese king had a zero-star heir but that really does not matter since I have 4 nine-stars general with no bad v&v. Moreover during the period during which your king has nine stars, any elite unit you produce will get between one or three stars. Find the general that gives a bonus to moral, add two titles and he reaches 6 stars without having been through a single battle. Pretty sufficient to defeat anything controlled by the AI if you ask me ...
Sorry to disappoint all the hungry bugseekers out there, but this isn't a bug.
Just because your king has a large number of command stars, there's no reason for his heirs to have the same level of generalship. If the king has a high influence, this will *tend* to mean that his sons/new generals follow his lead, but this isn't always the case.
Gentlemen should exercise caution and wear stout-sided boots when using the Fintry-Kyle Escape Apparatus. Ladies, children, servants and those of a nervous disposition should be strongly encouraged to seek other means of hurried egress.
The formal bit: Any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of The Creative Assembly or SEGA.
10 is not a special number for the computers.
You can expect that your 255 stars general to have 0 stars heirs
I think something like this is hardcoded, that the 9 stars emperors are likely to have 0 stars heirs.
There could be a discussion, is there better to have som 4-5 stars heirs for example, not only 0 star heirs in this fall.
Wether it's a bug or not is of no consecuence to me. I just wish it happened more often. I mean the game is full of multistar, inbred,only three upper teeth royal morons. It's dood to see a guy born royal but nuttin special up until the time when he becomes king. And it is like superman taking off his shirt. Super-9star-King Tan, tan, tan I know it happens. I saw it once and it's nice.
I remember seeing the reverse of this in an HRE game - my 3 star prince became a zero star King - oh no it's super-moronQuote[/b] (lancer63 @ Nov. 19 2003,11:01)]And it is like superman taking off his shirt. Super-9star-King Tan, tan, tan I know it happens. I saw it once and it's nice.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks