No Govenor, but still able to build and recruit?

**Sir_Hawkwood** · 12-27-2006, 14:07

I've noticed in a few of my settlements that despite having no Govenor present, I'm still able to add buildings and troops to the queue...

These buildings and troops are being completed in the usual way...

Maybe I've built the town hall line so far, that the settlement is self governing?
Maybe the population has turned communist?
Maybe the settlement is being micro-managed from Westminster and has new "empowerment" targets to hit from a new "initiative"

Maybe its a bug???

Any assistance would be appreciated, as I fell a little guilty when I use it.

Thanks in advance
Best regards
SJH

p.s, Good bowl Warney!

**Soulitaire** · 12-27-2006, 14:14

not a bug. working as designed.
enjoy!

**pevergreen** · 12-27-2006, 14:18

You have: Manage All Settlements: Enabled. You Can Disable it if you wish.

**Flavius Gonzo** · 12-27-2006, 22:56

If you take manage all settlements off, and then individually there's a manage settlement check box on the construction screen you can uncheck, managing a settlement without a governor will work exactly like it does with a govenor, even allowing you to swich between L/N/H/VH tax rates.

**manbaps** · 12-27-2006, 23:47

Yep that little tick box when you're choosing campaign settings is only to set the default state of a town without a governor. You can still manage all the settlements without it ticked and vice versa.

**sapi** · 12-28-2006, 04:22

I'm still wondering why there isn't an option to choose what type of build style the ai uses by default - i really don't feel like going through 60 territories manually :(

**Sir_Hawkwood** · 12-28-2006, 10:57

Thanks for all your help gents.
There is a palm shaped red mark on my forehead right now...

You've also cleared up the "OK, whos been building balistas again???" mystery.

Thanks again
SJH

**Carl** · 12-28-2006, 11:00

You've also cleared up the "OK, whos been building balistas again???" mystery.

ROFL

Most funny, I must say. What have you been doing with all the spares anyway, sending them on suicide missions?

**Sir_Hawkwood** · 12-28-2006, 11:33

Thats right, my balistas and auto-built spear men have always found themselves in my Royal Bait Corps.

I send them against enemy stacks that I want to wind before my real army gets there.

Trying to keep them from routing all the time has done wonders for my gameplay too.

**katank** · 12-28-2006, 15:59

LOL, ballistas can be good in the right situation. Prepatch with passive AI, it's possible to get ballistas to fire down the flank of an enemy. The carnage that results is absolutely hilarious.

Ballistas are also quite accurate so you can snipe the general with several ballistas. They can also allow you to assault in 1 turn. Downing more than the gate is a chore though.

**Sir_Hawkwood** · 12-28-2006, 21:50

I agree, ballistas should not be relegated to "Ye museum of siege engines" just yet.

Never being one to un-necessarily disband units (cant bear to hear that sound of sullen men dragging their feet to the nearest dole queue) I've managed to hold on to a couple of 3 silver chevron Ballista units (turn 148).

The ballista is already the most accurate way of handing out mass casualtys, and is dramaticaly more so when their leveled up.

Perhaps a new thread might be in order to discuss who still has them and would choose them over gunpowder weapons?

Many thanks
SJH

**econ21** · 12-29-2006, 15:38

Originally Posted by Sir_Hawkwood

The ballista is already the most accurate way of handing out mass casualtys, and is dramaticaly more so when their leveled up.

Perhaps a new thread might be in order to discuss who still has them and would choose them over gunpowder weapons?

Check out Forward Observer's post in the "best anti-personnel artillery" thread.

Closing this thread as asked and answered.