I really hate those magically ever respawning bodyguards...

[Julianus]

However, I can't help utilizing them alot for those immortals are so handy:shame:
Some people even raise an army almost exclusively consists of bodyguards.
If it's hardcoded so there's not much we can do ( I believe so ), although it's totally unrealistic, then how about just reduce the number of general's bodyguards so they would not have a substantial effect on battle?
For example, a Roman consul should have a bodyguard of 16 lictors, a praetor 8, etc (correct me if my memory fails me ).
If you want to protect your general, just use any troop you prefer to do it.

And this way we can solve another problem which bothers us I believe, that it costs too much time for a general to move across the map.
If we make the bodyguard not so overpowered, then we can just give the general enormous movement points, so a roman general can arrive at the front line in Spain and start commanding battles immediately in one turn when elected in charge of that province as proconsul or praetor in Roma city, and return to Roma when his term expires to get another position allot to him. This can reflect the fact that a general with his attendant can move very quickly while a great army must march much more cautiously and so much slower.

[Cute Wolf]

I think not... yes, the bodyguard maybe "magically" respawned, but that respawning was rather emulating your FM hires / gathers their bodyguards in their own exspense. and furthermore, the 0 upkeep in most bodyguards reflect that they paid for their own (except mercenary generals).

No, the bodyguards in EB are allready small, and giving infantry based bodyguards (such as KH, Sweboz, or Saby'n) smaller unit size will give another exploits for human player to get their enemies FM easily killed by instant (heavy) cavalry charge..... But I did support if their unit size could be somewhat capped (only 30 cav bodyguards in maximum, infantry capped at 50)

[Julianus]

Generals much later did have their considerable private bodyguards maintained at their own expense, such as Belisarius, but I'm not sure if it is common with generals living in EB era.
But it is true that with a minimal bodyguard enemy generals may fall easy preys to human players, don't know if generals in M2TW engine still love suicidal charge into the front of pikemen, if they tend to stay with their main force, then perhaps it is not so easy to hunt them down.

[Cyclops]

I think the FM bodyguards help counter the early-game lack of elites.

While there was an evolution in fighting styles across the EB period, the TW solution of "elites only appear from elite barracks in the biggest settlements" makes for good gamelplay (a gradual ramping up to sexier deadlier units) rather than good history.

So if you ask "where are my Spartans/Tarabostes/Kinsmen Cav/whatever on the first turn" the answer is "well you can't make any but your FM's have a few. Its not perfect but its acceptable.

[Darius]

Would it be at all possible to adjust the rate at which the Bodyguards are replenished to something a bit slower?

[A Very Super Market]

I believe it's tied to Influence.

Or is that just size?

[seienchin]

I sometimes have generals who dont respawn their loses, guess their influence is less than 0.:book:
But beeing able to replenish your heavy cataphrakt bodyfuard in sweboz lands and not beeing able to recruit any levy or peasant at the same time is just rubbish. :furious3:

[Fluvius Camillus]

Bodyguard number is tied to personal security.

Something which annoys me more are the AI BG values. They have 37 for a normal FM, I have 25. My faction leader hopefully gets to 55 if hes really good, the standard AI faction Leader has 62... Now that can be really annoying when you have to fight 3 Hayasdan Arkah's in the late period...:skull:

~Fluvius

[Rahwana]

Bodyguard number is tied to personal security.

Something which annoys me more are the AI BG values. They have 37 for a normal FM, I have 25. My faction leader hopefully gets to 55 if hes really good, the standard AI faction Leader has 62... Now that can be really annoying when you have to fight 3 Hayasdan Arkah's in the late period...:skull:

~Fluvius

Not soo annoying since AFAIK, the Hayasdan didn't do their elite training frenzy (they just become poor backward nation on my campaigns)

But My lastest campaign with Pontos sugest that my leader can get 62 men on his bodyguards... he just have 10 influence and many security traits... however, he only had 3 star :furious3:

[Foot]

I never use my bodyguard in battle except if I am about to lose for this exact reason. For me they unbalance the game too much, and their force on the battlefield makes the early game far easier than I would wish it to be.

Foot

[Ludens]

Would it be at all possible to adjust the rate at which the Bodyguards are replenished to something a bit slower?

Unfortunately not.


Bodyguard number is tied to personal security.

According to the Ludus Magna thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=47146), it's tied to security and influence, but this is for R:TW, not M2:TW.


For example, a Roman consul should have a bodyguard of 16 lictors, a praetor 8, etc (correct me if my memory fails me ).

I am not sure if the lictors had a role on the battlefield. Roman generals weren't supposed to join the fighting anyway. Also, following this reasoning the Hellenistic kings should get a full complement of hetairos to accompany them. That would not be fair to the Romans.

[Julianus]

I am not sure if the lictors had a role on the battlefield. Roman generals weren't supposed to join the fighting anyway. Also, following this reasoning the Hellenistic kings should get a full complement of hetairos to accompany them. That would not be fair to the Romans.

Lictors may not actually fight alot, but they apparently followed the consuls nearly everywhere they went, battlefield no exception.

In the life of Marcellus by Plutarch, when he went headlong into his doom by falling in to Hannibal's ambush, he went to view the place "taking with him his colleague Crispinus, and his son, a tribune of soldiers, with two hundred and twenty horse at most, (among whom there was not one Roman, but all were Etruscans, except forty Fregellans, of whose courage and fidelity he had on all occasions received full proof,) ... " and there were five lictors captured alive by the enemy.

So we can see at least Roman generals didn't have any private bodyguard. When he was commanding a set battle, all army were his bodyguard, when he left his army to do some reconnaissance etc, he took whatever troops he deemed most handy, usually cavalry. And only the lictors always followed him, even when they were not necessary, as in Marcellus's death, doing some reconnaissance didn't really need lictors to show his authority at all.

And according to what I learn from Plutarch, Greek city state generals didn't have bodyguards maintained by themselves either, no matter how rich or powerful they are, thought I'm not familiar with barbarians.

Yes, Hellenistic kings surrounded them with large number of hetairos, and often charged with them. But there're already hetairoi independently existed in game, they do not need to be in the same unit as the general to protect him, although I admit that it's a little tricky for the AI to do it, maybe we reduce only player's bodyguards, leave the AI's alone. Not sure if the kings maintained their bodyguard hetairoi at their own cost, even so replace those elite horsemen are extremely difficult, let alone in enemy territory or some newly conquered cities. So the kings have a large number of hetairoi bodyguard which can recover to it's full strength anywhere almost in 1 turn is not so realistic I fear.

[antisocialmunky]

Um.... isn't it also tied to base bodyguard size of the unit? I've seen 160 sized KH BGs but only 100 sized cav BGs.

[Ludens]

So we can see at least Roman generals didn't have any private bodyguard. When he was commanding a set battle, all army were his bodyguard, when he left his army to do some reconnaissance etc, he took whatever troops he deemed most handy, usually cavalry. And only the lictors always followed him, even when they were not necessary, as in Marcellus's death, doing some reconnaissance didn't really need lictors to show his authority at all.

Interesting. Still, Goldsworthy argues strongly that Roman generals were not supposed to fight at all, so unlike Hellenistic kings they would not be attached to a combat unit.


And according to what I learn from Plutarch, Greek city state generals didn't have bodyguards maintained by themselves either, no matter how rich or powerful they are, thought I'm not familiar with barbarians.

I don't know much about the Greek poleis in EB's time, but the tyrants of earlier ages did have personal "mercenary" forces. These also doubled as the city defence force, as the tyrant was essentially the government. With Celts and Germans, an important noble would have a group of bondsmen that owed allegiance only to him. The size and quality of a nobleman's warband was a good indication of stature.


Not sure if the kings maintained their bodyguard hetairoi at their own cost, even so replace those elite horsemen are extremely difficult, let alone in enemy territory or some newly conquered cities.

I don't think there would have been a difference between the king's purse and the state's treasury, so yes, the hetairoi would have been maintained at the king's cost. Also, keep in mind that while you pay no upkeep for bodyguards, you do pay 200 mnai per turn per general.