Difficulty effects in battle?

[caravel]

Command stars give +1 morale per star to all friendly units within 50 metres. Once the units go outside the 50 metre boundary this bonus is effectively halved (2 command stars give +1 morale, 4 command stars give +2 morale).

They also give +1 valour for every two stars (excluding the morale bonus).

The morale bonus is separate (not bestowed by valour as is usually the case) because it only takes effect on the field based on the distance from the general and most importantly his continued existence.

This is why a good general is so very important in MTW.

-Edit: Morale on the battlefield is very complex, remember that there is a -8 morale penalty immediately following the general's death. This can cause a catastrophic chain rout if your units are non elites with low base morale.

[bozewolf]

Thanks. I basically know all these things by principle and the obvious ones by numbers (like the 2 stars/1valour bit) since you can see it. But Im mighty interested in the actual numbers that lurk behind most of what the game calculates. It's good to know this stuff. I hate morale penalties on generals. So often a good high-star guy gets ruined because he should be in the looney asylum.

[caravel]

So often a good high-star guy gets ruined because he should be in the looney asylum.

Yes the "good runner" or any of the coward line of vices can ruin a good general and are not easy to offset.

[bozewolf]

In a game with the Spanish I had an uncle, 6-star and high acumen. But he had "coward". So uesless. Then after 25 or so years governing Granada he was down to a "good runner" and after another 20 odd years he had "Utterly Fearless" (although the good runner vice didn't disappear). In the end he also turned out to be charismatic so he was back on 0, lol.


Such a weird game sometimes.

[Martok]

In a game with the Spanish I had an uncle, 6-star and high acumen. But he had "coward". So uesless. Then after 25 or so years governing Granada he was down to a "good runner" and after another 20 odd years he had "Utterly Fearless" (although the good runner vice didn't disappear). In the end he also turned out to be charismatic so he was back on 0, lol.


Such a weird game sometimes.

Ah yes, you've gotta love the contradictory traits this game lays on your generals sometimes. One of my favorites was from a couple years ago when I had a Sicilian prince who was a "Truly Pious Atheist"....

[bozewolf]

Haha, yeah. I see that especially when I go Inquisitor on other factions. Lowish piety generals that have a religious trait can end up being True Believers and Atheists at the same time.

Sometimes seemingly contradictory traits combine to make very cool generals from a character/roleplay viewpoint. Way back when I started playing the game (with the Byzzies, of course ) I had a high ranked general that was a a great warrior, natural leader but also raving mad (the -3 one) and a "Deep Thinker" at the same time. He was also a severe alcoholic and gay. It had so much character. He was my hero general.

[bamff]

I had a high ranked general that was a a great warrior, natural leader but also raving mad (the -3 one) and a "Deep Thinker" at the same time. He was also a severe alcoholic and gay.

I sometimes try to make sense of the weird mess of attributes that get handed out (really just for my own amusement and to add to the 'immersion').

Perhaps, for example, this general being gay was, as a result, very determined to prove himself. If he was a "deep thinker", he more than likely would have been concerned about the repercussions of being "outed", and perhaps in his obsessive attempts to hide his true self, he may well have appeared to be "raving mad". Alternately, his desire to prove himself in the field may well have contributed to this tag - as he consistantly charged at his enemies like a man possessed....

And let's face it, with all of this turmoil going on in his life, is it any wonder that he turned to the bottle?

Okay, I'll go back to my corner now...

[Martok]

bamff:

Yes the "good runner" or any of the coward line of vices can ruin a good general and are not easy to offset.

Indeed. The greatest 9-star commander in the world is useless if his vices cause his men to flee the battlefield right away.

My general rule of thumb is if a general inflicts more than a -2 morale penalty on his troops (*maybe* up to -4 if he's otherwise truly awesome), he gets retired from military duty. (I usually won't disband them, however -- that just comes off as ungrateful on my part. )

[bozewolf]

Oh, I'll disband them like a bunch of cheap Russian hookers...

[caravel]

A coward line general, if he has decent accumen, might make a good dedicated governor. Leave him in a backwater province to suck horse shoes.

[bozewolf]

Well yeah, obviously. I've had plenty of legendary chicken governors with high acumen. I never really consider them "generals", though. Hell, even if he is the most cowardly man in the world, if your acumen is sky-high I'll put ya in charge of my biggest income province as fast as I can disband those Russian hookers...

[m52nickerson]

bamff:

Indeed. The greatest 9-star commander in the world is useless if his vices cause his men to flee the battlefield right away.

My general rule of thumb is if a general inflicts more than a -2 morale penalty on his troops (*maybe* up to -4 if he's otherwise truly awesome), he gets retired from military duty. (I usually won't disband them, however -- that just comes off as ungrateful on my part. )

On the flip side I will take a 4 star general with a +2 to moral over a 6 star no virtue any day!