Hero Units

[ajaxfetish]

All right. I've heard hero units mentioned in passing in several threads, and I think I've seen a couple in the game, but I don't know any details. Could anyone fill me in on these guys? Especially is there a list floating around of who is available when and how? Or at least some of the big ones.

I would definitely appreciate your help on this one, both for the sake of getting some cool generals up front and also for the role-playing/storyline advantages.

Thanks
ajax

[m52nickerson]

Here it is, your lst of heros.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=24908

[OlafTheBrave]

There is a list over at the numerolgy therad at MTW.com. Basically these are historic generals and it gives their date of birth. Some of them are quite spectacular and seem to always come out at 5 stars while some others are rather lackluster and the only way to spot them is by their names.

[Roark]

Hmm... Barbarossa (HRE) doesn't appear to be in that link...

[AntiochusIII]

Hmm... Barbarossa (HRE) doesn't appear to be in that link...

But Barbarossa is the emperor (and therefore faction leader and "king.") I heard that kings are much, much harder to get than ordinary heroes. With circumstantial problems not found in earning normal heroes, which you just train a unit at the right time and...voila. In fact, I never get a hero-king before.

Though I suggest train a hero in a cavalry unit, preferably knights. Mobile units (with some charging/pursuit power) make good general units.

You can know that a king is a hero (a unique character) from the unique portrait.

[Roark]

I thought Barbarossa was from a different family to the Friedrich line of kings, and therefore only accessible as a faction leader via lack of heirs (and therefore elected) or civil war...

[EatYerGreens]

Like a twit, I tried to post replies onto the referenced heroes thread, only to find that it resides in the Library and I don't have posting rights there. In any case, the thread ended in 2003.

All I was going to say was that I did have a bit of a chuckle at the sarcastic comments against some of the names (press Ctrl-F for 'find on this page' and search for 'prize git' ) and the CA person responsible has left their forum handle in that thread too.

Oh, the closing post about Guy of Gisbourne's 5 stars not 3. I think that has to do with agent's stars relating to valour, as opposed to command. He's also been given a V&V of 'killer1'. I'm not sure what the translation of this would be but you can't see V&Vs on agents anyway. Likely it's something like 'Killer Instinct' with +2 valour, hence the extra 2 stars.

Beware of editing this file to remove what look like typos in the names. They are most likely token characters as substitutes for characters with umlaut, acute, grave, or circumflex accents and so on.

I browsed the HRE heroes since I'm playing them right now and was lucky to see someone replied to a comment about "Lrslingen" with a correction of spelling to Urslingen and I guessed it should have an umlaut on the U.

Just don't ask me how it's supposed to be pronounced!

Lastly, I read somewhere that the dates in the file were implemented in the game in the opposite way to what was intended and what the internal comments say. The confusion is between 'date of birth' and 'date available from'. I forget which way round it needs to be but it's the equivalent of the gap between an heir being born and coming of age. If you're going to add new heroes, you need to take this into account.

What I'd really like to see in the game is a 'hero is born' type message or at least a selector box where you can choose what unit type he's going to be. I was training FMAA and MilSerges simultaneously and had the misfortune of having the HRE's two earliest heroes (de Bar and Henry the Lion) both coming out as MS's. Harumph!

[bretwalda]

What I'd really like to see in the game is a 'hero is born' type message or at least a selector box where you can choose what unit type he's going to be. I was training FMAA and MilSerges simultaneously and had the misfortune of having the HRE's two earliest heroes (de Bar and Henry the Lion) both coming out as MS's. Harumph!

I was luckier: I got them as Mounted Crossbowmen - both from Brandenburg... :) Still, no Royal Knights or some other posh unit. (Though I wasn't building anything fancier at that time so I shouldn't be complaining...)

[lugh]

Yeah I had trouble getting Barborossa in my HRE campaign, so I gave up.
The HRE starts out with a Karolinger royal family AFIAK, but I had difficulty getting the right family onto the throne, and even then (twice!), Barbarossa didn't appear as an heir.

Heroes kick ass though, except some of the starting one's are annoying, like the French one who starts out as a Urban Militia.....

[dgfred]

Yeah I had trouble getting Barborossa in my HRE campaign, so I gave up.
The HRE starts out with a Karolinger royal family AFIAK, but I had difficulty getting the right family onto the throne, and even then (twice!), Barbarossa didn't appear as an heir.

Heroes kick ass though, except some of the starting one's are annoying, like the French one who starts out as a Urban Militia.....

I mostly play HRE and must get Prince Friedrich to the throne, that is my #1
goal . In my last GA campaign I had a small army of 'Friedrich' units only,
and used them as beach assault troops vs the Byzantines .

I got my heroes as men at arms, which was OK by me- I love those tough
swordsmen .

[lugh]

I mostly play HRE and must get Prince Friedrich to the throne, that is my #1
goal . In my last GA campaign I had a small army of 'Friedrich' units only,
and used them as beach assault troops vs the Byzantines .

I got my heroes as men at arms, which was OK by me- I love those tough
swordsmen .

Nice work! I try and keep a steady flow of RK from my capital though, in most instances it's more accurate, plus the troops can be used throughout the campaign by upgrading, MAA are usually redundant for me by High,

[EatYerGreens]

Heroes kick ass though, except some of the starting one's are annoying, like the French one who starts out as a Urban Militia.....

I took a screenie of just such a person, when one of my agents (HRE) found him in Brittany.

Lord de Chabannes, Count of Flanders, Grand Chamberlain (L:9 P:9 D:3 C:5 A:9)

But, like you said, he was only a UM unit. As good as he may be, I think he's doomed, I tell ye. (Dad's Army fans will spot the reference).

I've read of the 'Hardball Variations', whereby players restrict themselves to only allowing starred generals or RK type units to be province governors but I've never understood how the game is even playable, like that.

Even when I'm scraping the barrel and using pez, spears and UM for govs simply because they're acumen 4, my Treasury barely ever sees the right side of 3000 for decade after decade. God knows what it would be like with ungoverned provinces.

Only what I see as 'essential' ever gets built and I've rarely built the Royal Court building before Early is just about coming to a close. How much are RK's again 300-odd for 20 men? That's a lot of expense for each governor and I'll bet there's plenty of acumen-1 duffers in there too.

Maybe I just have the wrong policy? Spend 1000 on a keep, right from turn one, another 1000 on turn 9 for the Court, then crank out RK's until I'm virtually skint. Maybe they'll do a better job on the battlefield than the trash troops I usually churn out to begin with?

I must try this, next time.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You need the Royal Court to get the Royal Estate. How do your survive all through Early with NO Knights?

[CountMRVHS]

Sometimes I try that restriction: only "noble" type units get to be governors. What exactly is a noble is pretty much up to my discretion -- but when playing the English, for example, I don't consider a Hobilar unit to be "noble", even though they always have the "Sir" title before their name.

I haven't noticed it to be too difficult or crippling, and it helps me to get into the game a little more. Giving a peasant or archer unit the governorship of a province just doesn't seem right in a medieval game. Usually things start to even out by the time your first generation of heirs lose their claim to the throne and become regular generals. That, combined with some careful appointments to other acumen-increasing titles, and not to mention careful handling of the economy, is usually enough to see me through to the point where I start cranking out the cash.

CountMRVHS

[KSEG]

Does Joan the Arc have an portrait of a man?

[lugh]

@ KSEG She should have a unique portrait, at least she does in the historical campaign

I only ever play with nobility as my Lords. I might make an exception for Lancers or Gendarmes, that kind of thing, later in the game but other than that....
I just like the idea, I especially used to hate it when in a starting army, you'd end up with an ennobled peasant unit leading 3-4 RK, just didn't make sense to me.
Plus it restricts your economy since you have no Governors for the important early years and after that you're stuck with who you want.
I'll also have at least RK leading the army too, even if it takes shuffling troops around.
I play a very cavalry oriented game though, maybe that influences me. On their combat appeal though they easily outclass anything you can build in the equivalent period. Take 2-3 RK up against 3-4 spear and you can win, it takes patience and some "infidel" tactics but you can wrack up some great victories early on.
Actually I thought of an exception, once I had a Crusade that was 1300 strong, all fanatics led by a 4* fanatic, I made him Governor of Antioch, since he took it all by his lonesome .... though he lost about 900 troops!

There is a "hero-creator" in the download section of the main site, I forgot to mention it earlier. I haven't used it though so I don't know exactly how it works.

[yesdachi]

Does Joan the Arc have an portrait of a man?

i think there is an image of her in the show avatars section. link in the upper right area of this very page. there are too many images on the page and i timeout befroe they all load but i think she is on there.

[EatYerGreens]

You need the Royal Court to get the Royal Estate. How do your survive all through Early with NO Knights?

I make sure all the foot troops and archers do all the fighting!

I also make heavy use of spears, making sure to have at least two units in every stack. In my current HRE campaign, I've killed three enemy kings so far, captured a Prince who fetched about 2k in ransom, captured a king for about 10k and it has been the spears which did much of that for me.

It has to be two units, so that I can sandwich the RK unit and stop it from escaping. In one battle, I had a 0-star general in command and he was off in the distance (ie his morale boost no longer in effect) when the enemy king engaged my first set of spears. Couldn't see my second unit but got them to run to the scene and join in. What was 200 men at the start was down to a 20 and a 30 but they still got 'im.

In other battles, the AI has under-used its RK units and, rather than attacking at full tilt, it has held its ground, or marched up too slowly and secondary RK units have simply been shot down by my archers!

It's not as if I have NO Knights, just that, knowing what I'm capable of doing to theirs, I tend not to take any risks with mine. All I have are the king and the princes, as and when they pop up. So I basically use tactics which don't involve cavalry at all, for the first century or so. They are there on the field but they just sit at the back, overseeing the action, conferring valour and morale boost but basically staying out of harm's way unless there's either a dire crisis, or a 'free hit' at chasing down archers and routing troops.

Strictly speaking, it's not as if I can't afford the Royal Estate, it's just that I'd rather spend the money on the swordsmith, getting FMAA cranking out (175/60 and 45pa maint is a bargain, for what they can do) and advance the spearmaker for feudal sergeants, who will steadily supercede my basic spears.

So I'm something of a 'low budget' operator. The Royal Estate is on the 'luxury items' list and I'll usually build it once the trade network has got off the ground.

I think that, the next time I start a campaign, I will try and alter this policy, build the thing asap, see how much of a difference it makes to have the RKs around, not be afraid to take risks with them and see what my finances are like after replenishing any losses.

I have this sneaky feeling that it's sheer troop numbers which deters the AI from attacking me, half the time. When it can get the edge in numbers it will attack but it doesn't appear to be fussed about the quality of my troops. In other words, a stack swelled by 500 peasants will put it off attacking, though they wouldn't put up much of a resistance in an actual fight. Therefore, I have to question the deterrence value of smaller numbers but better quality troops. On the other hand, if it encourages the AI to attack and I slice it to pieces with knights, then that would be very satisfactory indeed.

[lugh]

I have this sneaky feeling that it's sheer troop numbers which deters the AI from attacking me, half the time. When it can get the edge in numbers it will attack but it doesn't appear to be fussed about the quality of my troops. In other words, a stack swelled by 500 peasants will put it off attacking, though they wouldn't put up much of a resistance in an actual fight. Therefore, I have to question the deterrence value of smaller numbers but better quality troops. On the other hand, if it encourages the AI to attack and I slice it to pieces with knights, then that would be very satisfactory indeed.

I'm pretty sure that's the case allright. The only problem arises when you're neighbour is just naturally obnoxious and invades anyway crushing the 500 peasants....
I probably rely on cavalry too much, might try an infantry heavy set up like yours for my next campaign. At this stage it's too easy to cut up massive AIearly armies with just cavalry, especially if you can get your hands on a few merc HA.
They will suck up every spare peice of gold you have though as low strength RK are shot to peices in short order, where say half strength spears have a good chance of reaching the enemy lines.

[EatYerGreens]

I probably rely on cavalry too much, might try an infantry heavy set up like yours for my next campaign.

GL & HF with that. (Good luck and have fun, as the MP regulars say).

Typical mix for me will be 2-3 archer, 2 spear, 2 UM, any available pez as 'filler' and the general. Add pairs of MilSerges and 2-3 FMAA per stack as and when each type becomes available. That will give you a good mix of pin, flank, slugfest, armour piercing and defensive units, with the peasants restricted to either using their speed for chasing routing archers/pez only (like you would with cav!) or trying to make use of 'local outnumbering' to sway a meleé in progress by coming in on the flank and rear and using their charge factor.

I was able to get mounted sergeants into production well ahead of the RK's and, once these are added to the mix, the archer-heavy opposition armies didn't stand a chance.

Even before then, I'd had considerable success with capturing prisoners. The HRE's cashflow was dismal (at least the way I was running it at the time) but the constant fighting I've had to face has worked wonders in supplementing the trickle with huge wads of cash on a regular basis.

I have now built the Royal Court (1170's) and built a couple of extra RKs (with stars on them, a bonus I really could have done with, earlier on) but it has to be said that it's the ransoms which made it affordable in the first place. Previous experience, as the English, involved a lot less combat, minimal ransom earnings and, perhaps down to the sense of building priorities, took a lot longer to reach the RK stage, thanks to relying mostly on annual income levels to decide what was affordable.

All the same, I can see how the initial 6000 (Hard) can accommodate a keep on turn one and the Royal Court 8 years later, albeit at a location predetmined by the wherever CA chose to put the Royal Palace.

They will suck up every spare peice of gold you have though as low strength RK are shot to peices in short order, where say half strength spears have a good chance of reaching the enemy lines.

I couldn't agree more. The AI's sense of priorities in what to fire arrows at seems faultless. Each knight shot down could mean as many as 10 men not killed and another 10 not captured, never mind the 'economic damage' in hitting an expensive unit.

[ajaxfetish]

I never use peasants when I can avoid it. Their abysmal morale and readiness to run away seem to harm my armies more than their numbers help. I'd rather fight outnumbered with better troops (getting more kills & valor per unit and sometimes some nice virtues for generals) even if I get attacked more for the "apparent" weakness. My only purpose for peasants is cheap garrisons in interior provinces.

[EatYerGreens]

I find 60 UM's just as good at maintaining local province loyalty as 100 peasants. The difference in initial training costs will pay for itself in under 8 years (30pa maintainance for UM versus 37 pa for peasants) and, even if indifferent when called into a combat situation, at least they're not quite so indifferent as the pez.

I got away with using them in the HRE campaign only because they come out at v1 from Provence and the +2 morale (plus whatever the general may confer) can make all the difference between 'lose 5 men, then rout' and usefulness as rout-chasers.

That's the exception and I hardly need to repeat the rule...

[Roark]

Yeah, my HRE armies have been extremely sword-heavy, with maybe a unit of RKs and Mounted Xbows.

I'm too obsessed with Swabians to bother grooming and distributing my Royals as much as I normally would.