When to allocate provincial titles??

[YAKOBU]

Hi everyone http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

I have a little question on when to allocate provincial titles with command stars.

On earlier threads I've read the following:

1st star - 1 victory
2nd star - 2 victories
3rd star - 4 victories
4th star - 8 victories

Does it matter how you allocate the provincial title? E.g. If I have a 0 star general and I allocate a 2 star command title I believe he would then need 12 victores for his 4th star; whereas if he fights 3 battles first and then I allocate the 2 star command he would still get his 4th star thus saving 9 victories. Is this reasoning correct? If it is I want to delay handing out the best titles until my generals are quite highly rated.

Any comments gratefully received http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

[Imperial Buffoon]

Actually, I think the nb of victories refer to base stars and titles add to that base command rating so that it doesn't matter when you allocate titles.
The other thing is that you may want to allocate them earlier because of the income boost and also because governors will tend to get good governor virtues if they move around a bit.
If they don't, you can always take the title away, it won't be too bad unless your influence is low.

[Maedhros]

awarding star titles can give you a quick boost. if you are going to fight a close battle, or if you have no effective commander in a strategic or threatened province this can quickly pick up your defensive/offensive power.

When you go campaigning they help. I once dropped a +2* on a lvl 7 gen. He completed the campaign quickly, and cleanly.

[motorhead]

Combined a few dev posts:

Quote[/b] ]eat cold steel
Programmer
Group: CA
Posts: 312
CA, UK Posted: Jan. 20 2003,11:16 AND CA, UK Posted: Jan. 20 2003,12:37
The number of battles won minus battles lost is use to calculate the command. The number needed to advance is double each time. 1 to command 1, 2 extra battles to command 2, 4 extra battles to 3 and so on...

* how do bad v&v (lazy: -1 command) reflect?
* a 4 star general has to win 32 battles ( 6 star) to get to 5 star?? --> a normal general
* only needs 16 victories to get to 5 star.
* Am i correct?
The command modifier is added on after the calcuation.


- in my experience this applies to +command titles also - i.e. the modifier is added after the base command calculation.

[Tricky Lady]

Quote[/b] (motorhead @ June 11 2004,15:39)]* a 4 star general has to win 32 battles ( 6 star) to get to 5 star?? --> a normal general
Perhaps a bit of a stupid question, but do the victories that 'upgrade' your general's command always need to be against an enemy outnumbering your forces?

For instance, you 1000 against enemy 500. You win. No bonus.
You 1000, enemy 2000. You win. Bonus attached.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-lost.gif

[motorhead]

Quote[/b] ]Perhaps a bit of a stupid question, but do the victories that 'upgrade' your general's command always need to be against an enemy outnumbering your forces?

For instance, you 1000 against enemy 500. You win. No bonus.
You 1000, enemy 2000. You win. Bonus attached.

- a victory is a victory. I've seen my general gain a star with a regular victory, then immediately lose that star when he loses his next battle.
- I have had games where I could have sworn I should have picked up a command for a victory but didn't. IIRC there was a thread awhile back complaining about this happening on occasion. It may be one of those bugs that comes and goes.
- Winning against the odds gives you a chance to pick up one of the +command virtues.
== Attacking/defending where the enemy outnumbers you up to 2:1 puts you in the running for skilled attacker/defender.
== Attacking/defending where the enemy outnumbers you by more than 2:1 means you can pick up the risky attacks or last stand +command virtues.

[RedKnight]

Excellent thread Yak and mh... right, there's recently been some discussion here (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=19231) on that... thanks for that clarify on skilled vs. risky, mh...

I have to beg to differ with the devs (lol)... I was in the thread I just linked to, and started keeping an eye on things... I just had a general win his 6th star, and there's really no way this guy has won THIRTY TWO battles. I doubt I've had that many in the whole game. I hope someone will take pen to paper, and really track this.

The power of 2 rule that Blodrast mentioned in the linked thread would mean that the number of battles needed (new rank = 2 ^ (rank1-) ) is:

# 2^(#-1) RT
--- --- ---
1 1 1
2 2 3
3 4 7
4 8 15
5 16 31
6 32 63
7 64 127
8 128 255
9 256 511

RT, the running total, shows the total wins. All numbers are net wins.

Is anybody trying to track it by hand?

[motorhead]

@Redknight - i've never tried to track the wins/losses of even a single general, at least not beyond his 3rd star (4 wins). I'm a bit stat-happy ( http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-mad.gif ) but not that dedicated. With your general who got his 6th star, are you positive there were no +command titles/virtues involved?? A 4 star general with expert defender will show up as a 6-star (when defending) but his base command is just 4-star (8 victories). The game will announce your general has gained his sixth star...blahblahblah but it's not _really_ his sixth star.

[katank]

yep. also, he can be a hero (usually 4*+).

titles for +1 from many provinces or +2 from const. and trebizond along with constable's, marshalls etc. can all influence command

[RedKnight]

darn, I thought I had checked that... but he's Earl of Denmark, which is +1 star, but he has no other virtues that add to command. Winning 16 battles is within the realm of possibility. Hmm...