Blank spaces

[caravel]

Now I'm not sure about that one. I don't think so. I think that 9 is 9 and that command bonuses don't increase it any further. The command stars wraparound issue occurs with some heirs coming of age with 0 stars, when the faction leader is a 9 star. I'm sure that this has no other effect. If you've played as the Byzantine a lot you may have noticed this.

[Caerfanan]

Now I'm not sure about that one. I don't think so. I think that 9 is 9 and that command bonuses don't increase it any further. The command stars wraparound issue occurs with some heirs coming of age with 0 stars, when the faction leader is a 9 star. I'm sure that this has no other effect. If you've played as the Byzantine a lot you may have noticed this.

Oh, OK. Had I been the programmer, I would've done that. 0- = 0 / 9+ = 9

Uh, well I might be missing something about the heirs though... I've seen that the heirs usually are High command if the king has, but is there some official rules about the heirs stats when they come of age?

Edit: err, I'm still unifying great britain under my sword/axe/spear (chose weapon)... Haven't played a normal campaign for ages!

[Martok]

Uh, well I might be missing something about the heirs though... I've seen that the heirs usually are High command if the king has, but is there some official rules about the heirs stats when they come of age?

Not really, no. A faction leader with good stats will on average have sons with good stats, but there's no way of predicting exactly what they'll be. It's partially randomized, with the faction leader's high stats merely improving the odds of what his sons' stats will be.

[Deus ret.]

It's partially randomized, with the faction leader's high stats merely improving the odds of what his sons' stats will be.

With the most important stat being influence here. You can get an astonishing heir out of a mediocre monarch who has 9 influence; the other way round the same may happen and you get a worthless bugger from a king with awesome stats but 2 or 3 influence.

There seems to be a limit, though. Even kings with deplorable stats between 0-2 (including influence) won't get heirs which have even lower stats , i.e. closer to 0 on average - exceptions permitted of course.

I second Caravel in that 9 command remains 9 with an active general. Bestow command-boosting titles upon him or let him gain nice virtues - he never won't have more than 9 stars. The only case where a wraparound takes place are heirs to an already skilled, high-influence monarch. .... Never tried what kind of heirs such a 'wrapped around' king does produce, though, given that his own unit has a valour bonus of 5 for 10 command stars.

Btw speaking of command: Does anybody know how exactly the system works when the progress to the next command level is interrupted? E.g. if I need 128 victories to gain an 8th star and after 20 or so I lose a battle (and a star, accordingly), do I have to do the whole 64 victories to attain the 7th star again? Or are the 20 already won counted in?

[Martok]

With the most important stat being influence here. You can get an astonishing heir out of a mediocre monarch who has 9 influence; the other way round the same may happen and you get a worthless bugger from a king with awesome stats but 2 or 3 influence.

Quite right. I meant to emphasize the importance of influence earlier, but I forgot.

There seems to be a limit, though. Even kings with deplorable stats between 0-2 (including influence) won't get heirs which have even lower stats , i.e. closer to 0 on average - exceptions permitted of course.

I second Caravel in that 9 command remains 9 with an active general. Bestow command-boosting titles upon him or let him gain nice virtues - he never won't have more than 9 stars. The only case where a wraparound takes place are heirs to an already skilled, high-influence monarch. .... Never tried what kind of heirs such a 'wrapped around' king does produce, though, given that his own unit has a valour bonus of 5 for 10 command stars.

Yeah, as far as I've been able to deduce, a 9-star general won't gain additional stars for any virtues he possesses (skilled attacker, etc.), but it won't drop him back to 0 stars either. So it's a glass half-full situation.

Btw speaking of command: Does anybody know how exactly the system works when the progress to the next command level is interrupted? E.g. if I need 128 victories to gain an 8th star and after 20 or so I lose a battle (and a star, accordingly), do I have to do the whole 64 victories to attain the 7th star again? Or are the 20 already won counted in?

In your example, I believe those 20 victories count towards your general regaining his 7th star. I'm by no means certain of this, however, as I've only rarely - if ever - managed to fight enough battles for a general to get back one of his stars.

[Caerfanan]

Oh me head... In that case I don't see any "loop" situation. I heard (read) people talking (writing) about a "bug" making some stats "loop" from 9 to 0. It's not directly for the king, but neither for the heirs, then? Or have I misunderstood?

[Ironside]

Oh me head... In that case I don't see any "loop" situation. I heard (read) people talking (writing) about a "bug" making some stats "loop" from 9 to 0. It's not directly for the king, but neither for the heirs, then? Or have I misunderstood?

The command one is for the hiers, the accuman too I guess (never seen it on this trait), the piety one caused by a bit too many jihads affects the king (well sultan, Can be tested if 9 piety kings that wins a crusade get 0 piety), the influence one affects the king, but here he regains it by himself.

All clearer now?

Btw speaking of command: Does anybody know how exactly the system works when the progress to the next command level is interrupted? E.g. if I need 128 victories to gain an 8th star and after 20 or so I lose a battle (and a star, accordingly), do I have to do the whole 64 victories to attain the 7th star again? Or are the 20 already won counted in?

Haven't lost enough with good generals to be certain (I don't think I've lost a star on a veteran commander), all I can say is that one loss doesn't usually matter much, but if it's the same as in Shogun, multiple losses hurts badly, but the 20 victories will be counted in and work as a buffert for 1-2 losses before you'll lose that star.

In STW you could have negative command, though I'm not too sure on the maximum nor what the limits were the limits either way.

I suspect it was up to -7, but getting more than -3 is practically impossible (first you must lose, then the general mustn't commit seppuku).