Why aren't we talking about this??

**Kull** · 07-09-2006, 00:21

Originally Posted by Sdragon

I’d hate to lose a whole unit when the dude in charge is killed. Especially if it's an elite or expensive unit.

Also when he dies of old age!

But here's the "plus"....no more "replacements". Units just naturally replenish. So yes, you lose an entire unit when the leader dies, but over the life of that unit you experience no replacement costs. Probably a wash. It also eliminates (i think...not sure) a lot of the exploits like replenishing a damaged, low experience unit with a high experience one (and essentially winding up with two high experience units). It also prevents the development of ridiculously high experience in units. They'll get as good as they can, but eventually the whole unit dies when the the general does, and the experience goes with it.

Wouldn't it also result in countless 'General killed' messages filling the left side of the screen?

Nope. Think about it. When you fight a battle involving multiple family memebers (on ewither side), and one of them dies...and he's NOT the "Battle General", do you get a message?

Originally Posted by Ludens

It sounds very interesting, but I would like to know more about the pluses and minuses involved. I haven't played BI, so I don't quite know how non-family generals work.

The pluses are just amazing. Scripting and traiting don't work when applied to captains, but they absolutely DO when applied to family members and named generals. So you could implement supply, logistics, give bonuses on home soil and penalties when far from home....Basically the sky is the limit. EB was hampered in this regard since we didn't want to "incentivize" players to use captains instead of generals (and thus avoid all the restrictions) or the reverse whenever the situation would give a bonus to the general instead of the captain. Plus the AI would be completely ignorant and not use the system to it's advantage. All-generals units eliminates the exploit potential and makes a level playing field for all. On the other hand it's so completely different from EB as we know it, that perhaps it's best used/tested as an EB-based mod.

**Ludens** · 07-09-2006, 10:37

Originally Posted by Kull

On the other hand it's so completely different from EB as we know it, that perhaps it's best used/tested as an EB-based mod.

Good idea. I would imagine it increases the already-long between-turn time (more traits to be awarded). Also, doesn't this make it very hard to identify unit types because the unit icon is replaced by the general's head?

**Geoffrey S** · 07-09-2006, 14:37

Also, wouldn't it create instability akin to the reinforcement CTD? If that was caused by family members being checked for traits multiple times after a battle, presumably causing the CTD due to the large amount of traits involved, wouldn't having an all-general army be even worse in that regard?

If you can pull it off it would be most intriguing, please keep us posted on what testing may show!

**Kull** · 07-09-2006, 15:40

Originally Posted by Ludens

Good idea. I would imagine it increases the already-long between-turn time (more traits to be awarded).

Possibly, but I doubt that awarding of traits is a significant time-adder.

Also, doesn't this make it very hard to identify unit types because the unit icon is replaced by the general's head?

Bingo. That's one of the minuses.

Originally Posted by Geoffrey S

Also, wouldn't it create instability akin to the reinforcement CTD? If that was caused by family members being checked for traits multiple times after a battle, presumably causing the CTD due to the large amount of traits involved, wouldn't having an all-general army be even worse in that regard?

Not a problem (theoretically). The issue is not the number of family members in the battle, but the number who are leading armies. I believe traits are only awarded for leading armies into battle, not participating in the fight.

If you can pull it off it would be most intriguing, please keep us posted on what testing may show!

Well, there is no active testing. We ran a few to see if it would even work - and it did. But that was about the extent of it. On the priority list of "things we must do", this isn't even on there. FYI - QwertyMIDX was the guy who came up with the concept and pushed forward on the testing.

**Teleklos Archelaou** · 07-09-2006, 16:26

Originally Posted by Kull

Not a problem (theoretically). The issue is not the number of family members in the battle, but the number who are leading armies. I believe traits are only awarded for leading armies into battle, not participating in the fight.

Didn't realize that. I guess also it would mean that the CTDs weren't happening when at least one of the three (or two if it's four, three if it's five) died in the battle. Would that be correct? If only two are left leading them at the end?

I had a battle yesterday as Epeiros, and I had one general there, outside Sparta. I fought against three KH generals and their army, and then a reinforcement of one KH general and an army came in too at the very end, just as the last unit of the first group routed. But since I killed all four KH generals (and killed off their faction right there I might add, since two of the four were faction leader and heir), I had no problem.

**Geoffrey S** · 07-09-2006, 16:41

Originally Posted by Kull

Not a problem (theoretically). The issue is not the number of family members in the battle, but the number who are leading armies. I believe traits are only awarded for leading armies into battle, not participating in the fight.

You sure about that? I know I've had at least two battles with two armies involved, at least one of which contained more than one family member, which crashed my game when returning to the campaign map but didn't if I autoresolved.

**Kull** · 07-10-2006, 00:18

Originally Posted by Geoffrey S

You sure about that? I know I've had at least two battles with two armies involved, at least one of which contained more than one family member, which crashed my game when returning to the campaign map but didn't if I autoresolved.

If I was "sure about that", I wouldn't have used phrases like "theoretically" and "I believe". However, I've personally never seen a family member who wasn't leading the battle acquire traits as a result of the battle. If you can post screen shots proving otherwise, please do.