Recrutable Generals

[Iolaos]

wrong. Very much so too. They simply need be Nobility. How many of Alexanders, or Romes, or Persian, or whatever nation's generals were from other nobility. Especially Rome. They were recruited from the Nobility (most often), and didn't have to be in your family.
Honestly I like it. It's realistic. Though I think have a loyalty issue. If they are left alone with the same troops for too long, then they just may rebel.

also could we script in something so that the general doesn't vanish when dead, but instead gets replaced by a new general? i hate rebuilding the whole unit for a general.

[Xpartacus]

Now that the engine is settled (BI) i think we could revive some discussions, this one is worth it. I'm totally against the use of recruitable generals because only the human player will recruit them, the AI will NEVER attempt to recruit one. But, if we create a series of traits and ancillaries that can cause some sort of "penalty" for recruiting this units (ok not penalty but restric how "far" their political and military achievements can be -I'm thinking about they tending to have traits that gives less loyalty?-) we might have a good option here.
The second problem i see is that this recruitable generals will take unit slots (i don't know how many we'll have left when faction's rosters are finished).

[Asgaroth]

I say no to recruitable generals as this is not historical...As primo(Magneto) said :

I think it is quite unlogical, generals weren´t recruited - they were born in the right family or worked themselves up.

[ahowl11]

I agree, no recruitable generals. You must play with the cards dealt to you, meaning if you have only a few generals or crappy generals you gotta survive. Maybe don't send your generals into the melee so much.. recruitable generals just make it easier on the player