Valor and routing

**Agent Miles** · 06-14-2007, 14:43

If your unit is getting smashed to the point of routing, it is in serious trouble. To answer your question, yes I have had units perform poorly in combat and lose valour, although this is rare. Analyze your enemies’ forces and know which unit match-ups are to your advantage. Yas Terazawa’s unit comparison tool has helped me a lot. Having a unit hold the line while other units maneuver is a necessary evil. Asking the impossible of a unit isn’t.

**Peasant Phill** · 06-14-2007, 14:59

The valour of a unit is the mean valour of all the men in that unit. Valour is, however, calculated per man. So, your units lost valour because the relative high valour men in those units got killed, thus lowering the mean valour.

**Digital** · 06-15-2007, 02:57

I let my troops, except general unit, rout when they are in a hopeless battle. If you pulled out the usual way and withdraw, you'll suffer more casualties. Try it on completely exhausted soldiers(zero bar) who are walking away and they will actually manage to run for the duration of the routing. A good way for completely exhausted soldiers to escape enemies closing in on them and who are fresher than them.

**General Dazza** · 06-15-2007, 04:24

I usually withdraw as well for above reasons. Am I right in saying that if all your troops rout at the same time it ends the battle, giving you get the auto calc of losses? I hate it when this happens because in my experience, your losses are much worse than if you withdraw your troops.

I've had it happen where I had 3 HA units near the edge of the map looking like they could withdraw without loss, only for one to rout and in turn spook the other 2 who also rout causing massive losses. It was damn annoying.

**History Geek** · 06-15-2007, 07:25

I just lost a battle yesterday, and though I would have loved to say it was in the interest of duing research for the forum, I was actually overrun in the most brutal way.

However, I noticed that vices were only given to commanders that held stars at the beginning of the battle. I had 4, one died - luckily it was only the crown prince

- two were captured and gained the vice 'captured' and the last one escaped the scene and gained 'good runner'. No other commander gained vices.

So is this a random distributing of vices, or a general rule?

/HG

**Ironside** · 06-15-2007, 08:09

Originally Posted by History Geek

However, I noticed that vices were only given to commanders that held stars at the beginning of the battle. I had 4, one died - luckily it was only the crown prince

- two were captured and gained the vice 'captured' and the last one escaped the scene and gained 'good runner'. No other commander gained vices.

So is this a random distributing of vices, or a general rule?

/HG

A general without V&V and/or stars (and titles?) isn't a general, but "captain" and isn't effected by v&v in the same way. He has to lead the stack or being the default general by some other way to start gaining v&v.

**Caerfanan** · 06-15-2007, 09:58

Originally Posted by Ironside

A general without V&V and/or stars (and titles?) isn't a general, but "captain" and isn't effected by v&v in the same way. He has to lead the stack or being the default general by some other way to start gaining v&v.

Oh, a unit leader can gain V&V only if he's general?
Could it be varying according to the vice or virtue? I'm thinking of the "captured" vice. I'm not sure, but I think that several unit leaders can have this (lower morale, higher valour)