Quote Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
Just something that I think every C-in-C should have to face up to. However, you're right in that excessive micro-management wouldn't make for particularly enjoyable gameplay. (....) Well, in that case, if valour/honour represents battle experience then shouldn't the valour level decline over time as those soldiers grow old and get replaced by younger, inexperienced ones?
Point taken. But I still maintain that it would be rather difficult to keep track of: imagine hearing just before a large battle that your best unit of warrior monks has just retired. And that wouldn't be realistic either: instead they would slowly lose effectiviness as soldiers become older. Or they should be downgraded to militia units, like the Romans did. And how are you going to do this without springing nasty surprises on the player? I'd hate to be the programmer who would have to find a way to implement it.
In reality, generals had much closer ties with their troops and they would realise that after fifteen years, their super-elite no-dachi probably has lost some of its shine. But we are not as close to the troops so the player wouldn't realise that. And frankly, I don't see me acquiting myself with the record file of every single unit in my army. Too much work, too much detail to take up in a few moments. Face it, we are not as close to the troops as the generals.
To get back to my point: units weren't decommisioned, they were 'refreshed' with new recruits. Perhaps the best way to simulate this would be to have high-honour units gradually lose honour as they grow older. This way the proces won't be as much of a surprise to the player, though he might wonder what happened with that high-honour samurai-unit he had had from the beginning. But that still leaves problems with what the starting honour of the recruits must be: zero, or same as dojo in province, or same as dojo were units comes from? Or would they be trained by their more experienced brothers-in-arms? If so, to what level?

We can also assume that not all recruits are of the same quality and the best units only accept the top level new recruits. That would be okay.
That is also possible, but I do not think talent can make up for experience. Not entirely, anyway.

I share your opinion about God games, but do not think it relevant.

Ah, so it can be done then? That was the impression I got. I was just using the wrong terminology. Rebuild, upgrade, it means much the same to me.
For clarity: if you build a unit in MTW, you are stuck with it. Feudal knighst stay feudal knights and never become gothic ones. But you can add weapon / armour / morale / discipline / valour upgrades to the unit later. This is called upgrading (or retraining, because the unit would also gain new soldiers to replace casualties), and was already present in Mongol Invasion.

There is one exception: the bodyguard units (royal knights / ghulam bodyguards) could be upgraded from their 'early' to their 'high' or 'late' forms: this was done by retraining them.

Your remark about Crecy, except for being horribly irrelevant and off-topic, is also incorrect . At Crecy the French knights stayed mounted. You are probably refering to Agincourt.