Generals not getting command stars?

[Hurin_Rules]

I'm just wondering if this is a bug or a 'feature', but I'm playing my first BI campaign as Franks, and it seems generals almost never get command stars. I mean, I've had zero- and one-star generals win three or four battles and still not get any stars. I think over the whole course of the campaign-- I'm about 40 or 50 turns in--I've had one general get one star once. That's it.

Is it supposed to be like this? It makes the game much more difficult (which isn't necessarily a bad thing).

[Dutch_guy]

In BI your generals as you've experienced, get command stars at a slower rate than in vanilla, no more super gens. after 5 battles.
Now it takes quite some time and hard battles to make a green 0 star general a night fighter ( 5 stars ) and beyond.

It balances the campaign, even the enemy captains are a threeat to your 0 - 1 star general.

[manbaps]

Other than it makes it quite difficult to ever have a night battle, other than the genrals u get at the beginning ive not mangaged to ever to a general trained by me higher enough; their lives arent long enough to fight enough battles.

[Seasoned Alcoholic]

CA addressed the superhuman-cyborg general issue when they released patch v1.2, in order to prevent most (if not all) your family members becoming superhuman 10* commanders. At least the AI now has a good chance of driving you from the field, which helps balance the gameplay.

Looks as though its stayed that way ever since, but not sure if they've tweaked it again before the release of BI. Think it has something to do with the odds of a battle - if you are outnumbered say 2:1 and manage to claim a victory, your general will be rewarded. This may also apply when the odds are even, although I'm not sure how it has been coded.

As you probably know, prior to v1.2 most generals would receive command stars after each battle they fought and / or receiving retinue members as well. So even if you severely outnumbered an enemy say 3:1, and obviously won the battle, you used to receive command stars like theres no tomorrow. The result was superhuman-cyborgs, alternatively known as Caesar Mk I, Caesar Mk II etc

[gardibolt]

I'll have to count up my battles for each general from now on, but I'm nearly through a Frankish campaign in BI and none of my generals other than the ones I inherited at the beginning have ever made it beyond a single star.

[Hurin_Rules]

I agree the generals needed to be tweaked, and command stars were waaaay too commonly awarded, but I think they've gone a bit too far here. I've had no-star generals win two battles and still not get a single star. The first few stars should be pretty easy to get, IMHO.

[Troy Lawton]

I agree here too. I have finished both Lombardi and Frankish campaigns and was lucky to get a star with my generals

[magnum]

Most likely due to the odds. You need not to just win the battle, but to have the odds even or against you. If you have the advantage then it doesn't matter how badly you defeat the enemy you won't get a star.

While it is a lot tougher, I have gotten a few generals up high enough in command to be able to night fight. Perhaps its a triffle overhard but I think its much better than it was.

[Hurin_Rules]

In terms of the odds, is it just base numbers or does troop quality come into play as well?

And is there any way of modding this?

Its kind of ridiculous right now. I've played about 80 turns, won over 30 battles, and gotten 1 (ONE!) command star.

[antisocialmunky]

The experience required to get a command star really should grow exponentially. It would be better that way. Though, in all honesty, most generals are born with talent and don't learn new commanding techniques in the field.

[Saracen_Warrior]

Who says General dont learn knew things on the field. Africanus was only able to achieve that title by learning from battles against hannibal. He took what he learned against Hannibal and was only able to defeat Hannibal due to this. Although since it is really us controlling the General and his army, gaining higher attack values and defense can simulate better drills and training from the general, which he probably wouldnt learn much new things in the field. In terms of gameplay, Exponential would be the best solution IMO. Make it so, your punished for bringing a completely raw general to the field, but if they've fought some rebels, they will have some stars so the difference in rating isnt too bad between a high star generals and your general who has only practised against Rebels.

[Hurin_Rules]

Who says General dont learn knew things on the field. Africanus was only able to achieve that title by learning from battles against hannibal. He took what he learned against Hannibal and was only able to defeat Hannibal due to this. Although since it is really us controlling the General and his army, gaining higher attack values and defense can simulate better drills and training from the general, which he probably wouldnt learn much new things in the field. In terms of gameplay, Exponential would be the best solution IMO. Make it so, your punished for bringing a completely raw general to the field, but if they've fought some rebels, they will have some stars so the difference in rating isnt too bad between a high star generals and your general who has only practised against Rebels.

Yes, that's what I would bery much prefer.

[Atilius]

Hurin_Rules:

In terms of the odds, is it just base numbers or does troop quality come into play as well?

Troop quality, experience, weapon modifiers, armor modifiers, and basic unit morale all contribute.

And is there any way of modding this?

Only by modding the above.

Saracen_Warrior:

Africanus was only able to achieve that title by learning from battles against hannibal. He took what he learned against Hannibal and was only able to defeat Hannibal due to this.

I feel an urge to quibble coming on...
It's true Scipio was at the Ticinus (accompanying his father, a consul in 218) and served as a 19 year old tribune two years later at Cannae in 216 BC. But he didn't face an army commanded by Hannibal again until Zama in 202. From 210 to 205 he commanded the Roman army in Spain; I think it's much more likely that he developed his command abilities there.

[Saracen_Warrior]

That still proves my point. He gained valuable experience in the field. Actually, if you look at his Army at Zama, he definetely learned a lot from Hannibal. He knew jsut how to negate Hannibals elephants. Scipio had a flexible army capable of some maneuvering in the heat of battle. Scipio realized that the Romans lost to Hannibal because he used terrain and maenuever to his advantage. Scipio took this knowledge and practised in Spain. Through his battles he learned knew things and became a more competent commander.

[Atilius]

I can think of three simple ways to make getting command stars harder:

I'm simplifying a lot by considering only the Good Commander trait, but these would apply in general to most traits affecting Command.

(1) Decrease the battle odds threshold for getting a victory that will count toward getting an additional command star. In RTW 1.3 this is 2.25. If you win a battle with battle odds less than 2.25:1 in your favor, you get one "point" towards an additional command star.

(2) Increase the number of "points" required to get each additional command star. In RTW 1.3 it's 1 for the first star, 2 for the second, 4 for the 3rd, 8 for the 4th, and 16 for the 5th. Addtional stars would have to come from some additional trait or ancillary.

(3) Decrease the chance of earning the "point". In RTW 1.3 it's always 100%.

Don't have BI myself so I can't tell you what's going on. In RTW all this stuff can be dug out of the file export_descr_character_traits.txt, I assume the same is true for BI. Lots of stuff in there though.


Saracen_Warrior:
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding, I'm not arguing Scipio didn't earn valuable experience in the field, I'm arguing that this just didn't have a lot to do with Hannibal. He certainly couldn't have learned how to deal with elephants from Hannibal: at the Ticinus and at Cannae there weren't any. If Scipio was at the Trebia he would have learned the wrong lesson - Hannibal put his elephants on his flanks with the cavalry rather than in the center as at Zama.

[Hurin_Rules]

(1) Decrease the battle odds threshold for getting a victory that will count toward getting an additional command star. In RTW 1.3 this is 2.25. If you win a battle with battle odds less than 2.25:1 in your favor, you get one "point" towards an additional command star.

Thanks Atilius, but is there any way of knowing in-game when the odds are beyond 2.25? I mean, you said its not just numbers, so you can't just add up the troops, but does the game display the odds at all so you can tell whether you'll get the command star or not?

Thanks for all the info, BTW.

[teja]

That is an very interesting post Atilius.

As I made the same experience described above when useing to play Barbarian fractions in BI. Actually I play the Sassanids and am get promoted with traits and battle stars much more often. Maybe nearly as often as in regular RTW games.

I can imagine that any fraction that can use to become a Horde get a penalty to keep their battle skills at a low level. While using to be a Horde, I made many battles with my big armies. When promoted normally, I would have got lots of battle stars for many generals. If I am right, this is made to help those fractions not to be able to form a Horde. On the opposite it is annoying, because generals with so many battles will not get promoted and this is not changing a bit after your Horde settles down!

traits:
After you settle down with your Horde, you are forced to build up your cities and form a real army. In conclusion you have to use money you made while looting in Horde mode. You are forced to spend much more money but your actual income over a big time. This IS still affecting your generals. If you leave them in a city when you end your turn, the very next turn you will earn nasty traits that affect your administration and monetary skills. Stay out of your cities in this phase of the game!
Same for religious penalties: A pagan general that is used to be the governor of a Christian city with big improvements (as cathedral, monastery and so on) will start to loose his fait into his own religion. Same goes for Christian governors in highly improved pagan cities – or more likely in Zoroastian cities! It is better to avoid this when possible, which is often not.

[Hurin_Rules]

Interesting comments Teja. So you think it is related to faction, and the factions capable of turning into hordes have a tougher time getting stars?

[Atilius]

...is there any way of knowing in-game when the odds are beyond 2.25?

Sure. When you're about to enter combat the Battle Deployment scroll comes up: the one that allows you to look at the enemy army and gives you the options to engage, auto-resolve, or withdraw. In the middle is a pair of crossed swords with a blue and red bar below - the size of the blue relative to the red is supposed to give you a rough idea of the strength of your army compared to your opponent's. If you hold your mouse over the bar it will say: Army Strength Ratio 2:1 (or 3:5, or 4:3, you get the idea). This ratio gives you the odds, though there is some rounding done to get two integers.

Anyway, the odds value I've been talking about is just the first number divided by the second. So, in RTW 1.3 a general always get a point towards
an additional command star if he wins a battle in which the Army Strength Ratio is 9:4 or less.

I'm interested in what you find out about this.

[teja]

Interesting comments Teja. So you think it is related to faction, and the factions capable of turning into hordes have a tougher time getting stars?

That is exactly my experience! My Sassanid generals get commandstars much easier but my Goth ones. For example: While in Horde mode my leader of the Vandals fought ~10 and more battles, not counting sieges and got no single promotion in form of commandstars. I used a fresh, young general with no single commandstar when he comes to age then to fight nearly the same number of battles and won no star too.
As Sassanid I get promoted. I did not count the numbers of battles I fought, but some 'blank' new generals got commandstars while fighting Rebels!

For example I killed completely with a Vandal unexperiend general in 2 battles alone against 3 enemy peasant units any enemy with no pormotion. I did the same with a Sassanid general and got 1 commandstar and 1 positive trait.

[Hurin_Rules]

Anyway, the odds value I've been talking about is just the first number divided by the second. So, in RTW 1.3 a general always get a point towards
an additional command star if he wins a battle in which the Army Strength Ratio is 9:4 or less.

I'm interested in what you find out about this.

Great, thanks so much Atilius. I'm going to try fighting some rebels with my zero star generals at less than 9:4 odds, and I'll let you know what happens.

I've also found this thread that I started at the Com helpful:

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...ID=32091.topic

[teja]

Another really good help to improve your generals apart of Atilius good points can be found here at the board. I guess you already know it but it fits perfectly into the topic of general improvements. It is almost related to RTW without BI. However we already pointed out some differences above.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=45969

I like this thread really much because it answers most questions and gives a good view about the trait system.

[Hurin_Rules]

Thanks Teja,

That's a great thread-- very useful.

[Hurin_Rules]

Ok, i've tried and I'm getting really, really frustrated.

Playing on VH/VH, I have found it almost impossible to get a 1:2.25 or lesser ratio and still have any chance of actually winning the battle.

Example: There's a rebel army with 1 unit raider cavalry, 2 peasants, 2 levy spearmen and one Saxon keel spearman. Now, I have my one general unit. If I take anything other than one or two barbarian peasants with me, I have less than 1:2.25. If I take virtually ANY other single unit with me-- e.g. just my general's cavalry and one other unit (I've tried with francisca heerban, archers, etc.) I can't actually win the battle. I've tried again and again. How in the world do you win a battle with such brutal odds?

Grrr.

It seems like one has to be better than Alexander to get a single star in this game. That just doesn't seem reasonable to me.

[Atilius]

Hurin_Rules,

Just to clarify: the odds need to be less than 9:4 in your favor, so you can have an army strength better than double your enemy's and still be able to trigger the event that helps you get battle stars if you win. You don't need to be outnumbered (4:9). In fact if you are heavily outnumbered and still manage to win (your battle axe smoking in the black blood of the troll-guard of Gothmog) you will get some additional goodies such as "good risky attacker" or the like.

[Hurin_Rules]

Hurin_Rules,

Just to clarify: the odds need to be less than 9:4 in your favor, so you can have an army strength better than double your enemy's and still be able to trigger the event that helps you get battle stars if you win. You don't need to be outnumbered (4:9). In fact if you are heavily outnumbered and still manage to win (your battle axe smoking in the black blood of the troll-guard of Gothmog) you will get some additional goodies such as "good risky attacker" or the like.

AHHHHHH. That makes SOOOOO much more sense. Thanks!!!

I'll return when I've tested it more thoroughly then.

BTW, that story about Gothmog's troll guard is the reason why I adopted my name :)

[Hurin_Rules]

Ok, I tested out a few things tonight.

First I played as the Franks. I fought several battles against rebels with a general that did not have the 'confident commander' trait. I did have a problem in that although I could get 'clear' victories, I couldn't for the life of me get a heroic victory. In one battle, I took two sword heerbans, an archer and my general against two peasants, two spear levies, one saxon keel and the enemy general. The odds were lower than 2.25 to 1 (I think they were actually 2:1 or 1:1. No matter how brutally I beat the rebels-- in one battle I destroyed every unit and soldier they had (309 men), at the cost of 5 casualties on my side. This only qualified as a 'clear' victory. I never got the 'confident commander' star.

Then, getting increasingly frustrated, I fired up the old RTW and played as the Brutii. I fought one heavy peltast, one cavalry archer and three peltasts with a couple of equites and a couple of archers. The battle odds were again below 2.25:1. Here I wasn't at my best and took maybe about 20 casualties, and the enemy general and a few soldiers managed to escape. This qualified as a 'clear' victory, and I didn't expect to get a star, but lo and behold I did get the 'confident commander' trait.

What does this tell me? Well, the sample size is obviously too small for any scientific conclusions, but it seems to me that it IS much harder to get stars in BI, especially as the barbarian factions. Again, I've played my entire Frankish campaign and only had one commander once get one star. I have no idea if this is a bug or by design. But it does seem odd. Perhaps Tela is right, and barbarian factions that can go to horde just don't get stars as easily.

One question: any one have any information on how the quality of the battle (average, clear, decisive or heroic victory) is calculated? It seemed like I could not have done any better as the Franks-- killing an entire army of 309 troops at the cost of 5 men on my side! Why did this not qualify as an heroic victory, I wonder?