Traits of Roman Generals

[Horst Nordfink]

I know I'm going to get shouted at here, but to hell with it, I'm going to ask it anyway!

Is there any way to add traits to Roman Generals like you could in R:TW?

I only want to make my Generals more fertile, because I'm having REAL trouble with them having kids. They hardly ever have kids and I'm having trouble with Governers for my provinces.

I tried to add them using their names, as in R:TW, but it can never recognise their name (possibly due to the u's being v's now). Can someone put my mind to rest please?

[Ravenic]

It's something you can only do if EB decides to include it as a feature. Currently, it is not a feature so you cannot recruit general's, sorry :(

[Horst Nordfink]

Sorry, I didn't mean "recruiting" new generals, I meant altering my current generals. By using the consol button (the button to the left of 1) a la R:TW.

[Warmaster Horus]

I don't think that's quite what he asks for...

I believe he's refering to cheating.
So, if I'm right:
-use "give_trait" without quotes
-as a name, use "v" even when it's "u". This gives Lucius: Lvcivs. In game it's written with "v" instead of "u"
-and, the trickiest bit is this: when typing the name Lvcivs Cornelivs Scipio, type this instead: Lvcivscornelivs Scipio.

Hope I was right.

[Horst Nordfink]

That's what I was meaning, thanks pal!

I prefer to think of it not as cheating, but more of stacking the chips slightly more in my favour :idea2::laugh4:

Do the trait and level have any particular requirement for spelling too?

[Warmaster Horus]

I recommend you go through the traits file to see what they are listed as.

[Horst Nordfink]

Don't mean to go on about this but I've found the traits file and found what I think they should be listed as, but I dont know how to write it out on the console.

Any trait I write in it doesn't recognise.

[Warmaster Horus]

Here's an example: you want to give Gnaevs Cornelivs Blasio the trait Consul.

Here's what's to be typed:
give_trait "Gnaevscornelivs Blasio" "Consul" 1

And voila!

[Horst Nordfink]

Cheers pal. Got it sorted now. Thanks for your efforts.

[Zaknafien]

Romans are a faction that purposefully has low fertility. Ideally they'd have no kids at all. This is to keep the Romans from looking like a dynasty.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Yeah, it's not chance that you're not having them (with that faction).

[BozosLiveHere]

You should be able to get normal fertility by going to the console and give_trait "Nameofthegeneral" EBFertile 3.

[Sakkura]

I'm just wondering here - if you are getting too few children, won't the game just compensate by giving you lots of candidates for adoption? So that you still end up with a fairly normal number of generals per province.

[Ravenic]

Doh, I read very poorly. Sorry :(

[bovi]

Yes, the game will offer lots of adoption candidates. It's better since they then are accepted on their merits rather than birth.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

The fertility trait is "EBFertility", IIRC, BTW.

Also, the game will not give you new family members, no matter how fertile your guys are if you already have a similar amount of family members as settlements. And children count as family members for this calculation.

[Ravenic]

better since they then are accepted on their merits rather than birth.

Not most of the joker's I see as Romans. One thing the EB team should really consider is finding a way to up to the numbers of Partrician's vs. Plebian's that come up for adoption. Right now I think the ratio is about 4:6 in Pleb's favor, when it should be more 9:1 in Patrician's favor. If at all possible, also make adoption candidates slightly more...meritable? Most of them suck just as much as any other faction's random adoptee candidates, or the stoners all my daughter's bring home in my Epeiros campaign.

Of course, that may all be impossible to influence in the slightest due to hardcoding and what not. If that's the case, too bad :( I think it should then be considered to increase fertility at least a little. Afterall, noble houses didn't just die out after one guy got Consul or what have you.

[bovi]

You have the ability to reject your candidates, you know.

[Horst Nordfink]

I only got about 2 adoption proposals in over 100 years, and both of them weren't worth bothering with, but I had to accept them because I had too many provinces that had no Governers.

From what I have read about Roman nobility there doesn't seem to be any proof of them not having any kids. Most of them had 2 or 3 kids, precisely to carry on whatever dynasty to which they belonged. That was how they became senators and moved up the ranks, because of who there fathers and grandfathers were.

The only man I can think of who was a "new man" and worked all the way to Consul was Cicero.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Our game can't represent all the senatorial families - Roman "new men" in our game must also represent men from non-starting families, of which there were a number.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I only got about 2 adoption proposals in over 100 years, and both of them weren't worth bothering with, but I had to accept them because I had too many provinces that had no Governers.

From what I have read about Roman nobility there doesn't seem to be any proof of them not having any kids. Most of them had 2 or 3 kids, precisely to carry on whatever dynasty to which they belonged. That was how they became senators and moved up the ranks, because of who there fathers and grandfathers were.

The only man I can think of who was a "new man" and worked all the way to Consul was Cicero.

Pompey and Marius are two others, in any case, Romans have low fertility in order to increase adoptions, if you aren't getting adoptions you may actually have too many governors already.

The ratio is roughly 1:3 family members : provinces.

[Zaknafien]

And, as you'll see with the new Roman family system we previewed a couple months ago, your dynasties of Roman families will have a little more depth, and the more prominent members of the Roman nobilitas and patricians will be featured.

[Ravenic]

You have the ability to reject your candidates, you know.

Very true, but while turning down the tenth Dull/Uncharismatic/Langorous Plebian I begin to wonder how the Roman's managed, historically.

[Zaknafien]

good shoes, and attitude.

[Horst Nordfink]

Pompey and Marius are two others, in any case, Romans have low fertility in order to increase adoptions, if you aren't getting adoptions you may actually have too many governors already.

The ratio is roughly 1:3 family members : provinces.


Marius I will give you, but Pompeys father was a consul, so Pompey was not a new man.

Regardless, you make a good point.

[Zaknafien]

socially Pompey was considered a provincial nobody and a new man despite his father's recent consulship. Both were new men, as it were. The definition of nobilitas applied, but they were no noble family of old nor any distinguished bloodyline. They were Italians, in fact and not Romans. Much like Marius.

[Horst Nordfink]

Agreed.

Pompey forced the senate to give him the Consulship after his victories in Hispania, despite being 7 years too young to run. So I don't think it made too much difference in the long run.

[sgsandor]

I kind of like the roman dynasty thing like the Scipios. For some odd reason they are just the family name i like the best. I would def like to see more of them and about them

[Kirill]

Here's an example: you want to give Gnaevs Cornelivs Blasio the trait Consul.

Here's what's to be typed:
give_trait "Gnaevscornelivs Blasio" "Consul" 1

And voila!


I tried this but after I push ENTER it wasn't work!Consol said : don't find this character or something similar:(
Please help me I want a Consul to my Marian reform...:sweatdrop:

[Atilius]

Roman names changed in 1.0. They now all share the same surname ("Romanvs"), and several internal character names now map to the same display string. For instance, if you see "Appivs" this indicates that the internal name is either Appivs, AppivsA, AppivsB, ...., or AppivsK.

[Maeran]

Things have changed in the Roman naming system since this thread was posted. Now all Roman 'family members' have a hidden surname (Romanvs, I think) and their screen name comes from the gens trait.

Also, their first names have letters associated with them. This prevents the game mechanics being confused by which Caius is Cauis Attilius and which one is Caius Cornelius. The game will actually refer to CaivsA Romanvs and CaivsB Romanvs.

There isn't a way to divine which letter your target FM has, other than trial and error.

:EDIT: Attilius beat me to it.

[konny]

Is it possible to ask for his internal name by trait? That is, when his name is "AppivsC Romanvs" can he be given a trait "Internal Name: AppivsC Romanvs"?

[Atilius]

No, because there is no way for the trait system to determine the character's internal name.

[konny]

I see. Thank you.

[Atilius]

Roman names changed in 1.0. They now all share the same surname ("Romanvs"), and several internal character names now map to the same display string. For instance, if you see "Appivs" this indicates that the internal name is either Appivs, AppivsA, AppivsB, ...., or AppivsK.
I hope you'll all pardon me for quoting myself, but I'd intended to link to Marcus' excellent trick for determining Roman characters' internal names when I posted the above. Unfortunately, I couldn't remember where it was at the time; it's here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1813707&postcount=198).