Ludicrous prisoner numbers!

[EatYerGreens]

What good is dread? Does it make people more afraid of you general's unit in combat? Does it make provinces less likely to revolt?

And also, what the heck good is acumen in Kings and Princes, who can (as far as I have been able) never be assigned titles?

DA

Not entirely sure about dread factor myself either. I suspect it helps to quell revolts but it wouldn't surprise me if this was a 'bell curve' kind of thing, where there's a spectrum ranging from 'inoffensive to the point of ineffectual' (revolts likely) through 'respected if not feared' (revolts effectively discouraged) right through to 'inspires sheer terror' (revolts likely again, like the scene where the mob assembles to chase down Frankenstein's monster)...

Acumen in kings? I do wonder if this can have a global effect on your whole economy but I don't see compound increase effects happening, so it's probably academic. See my comment about feather markers below.

Acumen in princes should not be underestimated. The king's younger brothers turn into everlasting generals after he dies and the next-in-line takes over. So, if they're especially good for acumen, review your existing govenors' stats after a succession event and send an emissary to strip titles off the one(s) where you can make the biggest gains.

That's to say it's not simply a case of stripping the title off that ac-3 stop-gap general, assigned on turn one and slapping it on your ac-8 ex-royal. You might get a better payoff to strip it from the ac-5 govenor who looks after your richest province and giving that one to ac-8. You then have a 'spare' ac-5 who can be allocated the title acquired from the next conquest. If that happened to be a particularly rich one, you would't want to give it to the stop-gap guy again...


With regard to the feathers symbols, I've seen a lot of reference to 'I wouldn't give a title to any with less than acumen-4' and I've applied this policy myself, in the past.

However, I've checked the effect of title assignments and found that each feather counts for approximately 10% boost to base level agricultural output, (comparisons made at Normal tax setting), so it's still worth assigning even a low-rated general while you wait for a better one to come along.

With a freshly started Byz campaign, I had 12 titles to assign but only 4 generals rated at 4 acumen and several were nil rated. I spent a long time working out which provinces should go to which person but still left 3 or 4 unallocated (the provinces with the lowest incomes). I had to wait three or four years to get suitable generals for those as Byz kick off with only one training centre.

I'd selected 'Expert' level, just to see if I could cut it and found that you start with only 4000 in the bank. In the end, I concluded that the need for intense building/training activity required in the first few turns, means it is better to have a few duff (sub 4) acumen govenors than leave provinces ungoverned. There is always time to reallocate provinces in later years.

Incidentally, by toggling auto-controlled-taxes, the starting provinces which only had a single unit in them went to 'Very Low' tax rates and manual adjustments showed that this rate is about 83% of Normal, with low being around 93%. So even an acumen-2 general will make up for very low taxation by giving a 20% boost and tide you over until your growing garrison sizes make the higher tax rates kick in.

[Del Arroyo]

How do you reassign titles? Sorry to ask so many questions, but that's one mroe thing I couldn't figure out. Or can't you reassign them?

DA

[Joshwa]

Drop an emisarrie [sp] on him to strip his title

[Marcellus]

How do you reassign titles? Sorry to ask so many questions, but that's one mroe thing I couldn't figure out. Or can't you reassign them?

DA

Drop an emisarrie [sp] on him to strip his title

Just be aware that this can make them less loyal.

[EatYerGreens]

Just be aware that this can make them less loyal.

Yep, that's true. You can always take the precaution of not going by acumen rating alone and paying attention to overall character traits, loyalty especially. Issuing a title can make a potentially disloyal general, who is in charge of a powerful unit, into well-behaved chap so, in turn one, dish out the ones with loyalty bonuses to those which look to need them and then distribute the rest according to acumen qualities.

The 'builder' V&V on the king will boost loyalty ratings by +1 across the board and that only takes a few years of activity if the money situation is okay.

It's near impossible to keep track of who had what loyalty rating prior to issue of a title so I can't say if removal of a title ever sends their loyalty down to lower than it was when the game started. I've never had any bother with title stripping, since the ones with good acumen often seem to be zero-rated as generals, so you can tuck them into a stack under a starred general and this effectively stops the bad apple from inciting a rebellion single handed, which can entail taking an entire stack, under their command, with them.

If in doubt, hover your cursor over the title on their info parchment and the text at the bottom will remind you of the loyalty, command or acumen bonus it bestowed on them.


There are even times when you might want to strip a title off a high acumen governor. Not because they've been bad but because you've recently got hold of a juicy province which has a higher potential output than the one they currently look after. You can't issue them that new title until you've taken the old one off them.

[yesdachi]

@ Del Arroyo: You could also just disband the unit. Not a good idea if it is a good unit but in the beginning of some games peasants and urban militia are the best governor choices because that is all that are available and they get the titles kind of by default. Later if I don’t want to mess around with getting an emissary to them I just disband them and reassign the same turn. Sometimes the $ difference in one turn is worth more than the unit I disband.

[Patron]

Actually, low ranking prisoners were usually just the people who followed the wagon trains which supported an army and other non-combatants.

Occasionally peasants were taken from their homes and forced to march in front of an advancing army, but this didn't happen very often and regulars (fyrdmen, longbowmen) were usually killed.

If there were too many prisoners to handle after a battle and they wanted to ransom them all, I think they would put a sword into each of their legs to cripple them temporarily without voiding the ransom or something. In theory, one man can hold 3000 crippled men in this manner, until his newly conquerred provincial shire riffs come to take them away.