Moral penalty when general dies

It is way too much no? You loose the battle you are winning when he dies. Yes Generals dead is never favourable in TW, but its effect is a bit too exaggerated now in M2TW.

I guess.

Well if you were being led by an awesome General, and he got killed somehow, you'd feel sorry, wouldn't ya?

What I am saying is that it is sort of realistic, but the morale penalty should be equal to the Generals command stars. If the command stars are really high then they lose BIG TIME morale, if it is low, not really lost...

it is fine for me.. it places more caution on when and how to use the general unit.. waste one unit slot for an idling general, or help out in the battle? When and how is the question.

From another angle, credit should go for the one who target the general and killing him, thereby turning a seemingly hopeless battle into victory.. history has many of such.

Originally Posted by Warluster

What I am saying is that it is sort of realistic, but the morale penalty should be equal to the Generals command stars. If the command stars are really high then they lose BIG TIME morale, if it is low, not really lost...

We're talking about multiplayer so general's don't have command stars

Don't Bring your Chating Rants against me here Deni, or you going on my block list with the other 3 people I stuck on there..

You guys are noobs. If you just make sure your general dies at the very beginning, you don't have to worry about such things later on! :) My general has a very large head, which is easy to shoot. Also, it doesn't help that his family crest was a bullseye.

Originally Posted by {BHC}KingWarman888

Don't Bring your Chating Rants against me here Deni, or you going on my block list with the other 3 people I stuck on there..

For the 50th time you can't have a block list on a freakin forum

Originally Posted by Wolf_Kyolic

It is way too much no? You loose the battle you are winning when he dies. Yes Generals dead is never favourable in TW, but its effect is a bit too exaggerated now in M2TW.

I guess.

Yes, sometimes the impact is too much. But there are different difficult levels. Maybe it depends on that level?

I really haven't notice it though. I killed people's generals in games, only to have them beat me (barley). Other Day, I use a Mongol Army that Magyar Khan used against me, and I fought a IPL member, and I barley beat him. We both had 15-30 guys left,and I killed his General and his's men routed soon after..

Warman you lose anyway, with or without gen


@topic I think its fine, it makes the units with "good morale" more effective. It has a bad influence on peasent-archers or milita units but id say thats the point of it.

A generals death will never make you lose if ur winning at medium diff Probably not even at Very hard diff. You are probably losing/evenly matched when ur gen dies for it to cause you to lose.

I think the reaction to a generals death is fine... i always use a general bodyguard nowadays anyway. Difference between these bodyguards and ones from bi/rome for example though is that there is a chance the general will die first out of the whole unit?! that really never happened until mtw2 for me...
I would charge the flank and BOOM a 21 man unit bodyguard goes down to 19 and the general was one of the casualties...

Originally Posted by }{Huscarls}{Barrett|L|

I think the reaction to a generals death is fine... i always use a general bodyguard nowadays anyway. Difference between these bodyguards and ones from bi/rome for example though is that there is a chance the general will die first out of the whole unit?! that really never happened until mtw2 for me...
I would charge the flank and BOOM a 21 man unit bodyguard goes down to 19 and the general was one of the casualties...

it's cuase his model is the Front/Left Most person. they should put hte gen like directly in the middle in the 2nd or third rank.

Why to be worried about your general's death at all? If your first thought is that you have lost befor the match even started, why to bother if general is going to die anyway? In your mind You have already decided that you are going to lose.

Lao Tze (Tao Te Ching), Sun Tzu (Art of War) and many others. Many are familiar with this books or have even memorized all their quotes and statements, but there are few who ''understand'' them.

I agree that general's deat causing your army to rout is out of balance and unrealistic and on the other hand we should not negelect that there are other important issues and if they are fixed they will bring a lot more realism into the game.

Originally Posted by Aonar

Lao Tze (Tao Te Ching), Sun Tzu (Art of War) and many others. Many are familiar with this books or have even memorized all their quotes and statements, but there are few who ''understand'' them.

What? Sun Tzu's book discusses strategy, not tactics. The Art of War has absolutely no relevance to the moral penalty of a Gen. You should re-read the last part of your quote as you are not one of the few.

The few who understand the where people like Hannibal, Nelson, Julius Caesar etc, not the likes of us.

Good morale troops like DCK will fight on even if your gen dies. So if your troops routed then either your troops had some other morale penalties or you had non-elite (like militia) troops. (or both )

To what extent should a generals death effect a different level of troop though?
With his death should all militia troops be wavering/routing instantly?
Should better/more experienced units such as DCK be able to hold with no immediate effects, and for how long...

Militia should break - it's that simple...

Originally Posted by sapi

Militia should break - it's that simple...

A Gens death should never auto rout any unit automatically.

What if a full strength fresh militia unit is fighting an understrength fatigued unit of a similar type? to have it rout while winning is totally out of balance and unrealistic.

The morale penalty for a gens death should always be linked to other factor aswell.

KenchiNem