Fans suggestion thread for future releases

[Cruin]

Arjos, you arguments are well thought and well made, and if you will allow me, I withdraw my objections. Allow me also, to make the following observations.

{ The point is that running away from danger was, among all the cultures in the mod, something akin to a crime. It unmade social status, it was often met with executions, exiles or falls from power. Such an important aspect cannot be left out from a project such as ours, centered so much on historical accuracy...}

In the main, this is true, at least for the rank and file. I'm not so sure the same rule applied to the generals, though, who played in a more complex political arena. They would have to walk a tightrope between the hints of cowardice and accusations that they needlessly threw away the lives of their troops. This applied just as much in the period of EBII as it does today, and to all the cultures therein – some historians have a tendency to portray the people of history as primitive, less sophisticated, and less politically apt than the people of today. We need strive to avoid this tendency


{any levied man, political enemy, disgrunted/tired soldier etc would look even at tactical retreats as a sign of weakness and would lose faith in their general}

See, now that is what I wondered – at least for the disgrunted/tired soldier – seeing as the trait gives a -1 moral penalty. Would a tired soldier rally more to a general who had fearlessly led him into battle, however the battle was going, or would he be more inclined to trust a general that had demonstrated that he cared more for the lives of his soldiers than some possible slight to his own reputation? I admit it is a bit of a toss-up.

{hell even setbacks by Alexandros were met by doubts}

Initially I thought this was one of your best points. It certainly stopped me up to think. Now, though, I am rethinking it – I'm not sure they were doubts about his courage. More the opposite – that he would take them into death and destruction without fear or regard. So this, actually, is an argument against the inclusion of the trait.

{Do note that our trait is doubtful courage, you are the only one rethorically referring to it as cowardice.}

Oops! -- Please forgive me here. I was referring to it as the “Coward” trait because that is what it is called in the code (the first level giving the “Doubtful Courage” tag to the general). I did not mean to try and bolster my argument by giving it any extra weight of stigma by the term “coward”. I actually thought the term “Doubtful Courage” was very well chosen for the first level of the trait, and had, in itself, a certain poetry.

Anyway, aside from the niggly-naggly doubts mentioned above, I still think your arguments were well made, and in the balance, win the day. I am mollified by at least knowing your reasoning for including the trait, and I don't think it is quite as silly and childish as I did before.

Slàn liebh,

Cruin.