Loyalty in titles and build choices

[Heidrek]

Fascinating stuff. the leader of the province directly influences what sort of unit commanders are generated there? This could make it possible to create a "money making province" by placing a number of high accumen untis there under along with a high accument title holder present. You then farm you money grubbing new recruits out to other provinces that benefit from high accument governors.

Likewise, piety, loyalty and very importantly ....COMMAND. No other stat (except perhaps Accumen) has as big of an impact on the game as Command. Farming high command generals means every province they end up in gets harder to take.

One thing I have noted is that some Vice and Virtues seem to go hand in hand. I've seen True Believer and Loyal go hand in hand all the time, in fact it's rare for me to see someone who's got one and not the other. Most of the time they get them at the same time, like Good Runner and Not So Brave.

[sharpshooter]

@ Heidrek - well, I wish it was a simple as that, but it doesn't seem to be. The 2 factors I'm noticing for the stats of new units, apart from command, are:

- the stats of the mostly recently created governors
- the stats of untitled generals at the top of stacks

and

- whether I really needed that unit at all

With command, it seems to be about conquest. If I've taken several provinces in a row, maybe in a couple of regions, new elite units start coming out with command stars - but rarely good acumen.

I've tried to cultivate stats in my new units by this kind of selection, and I get good results with Piety but find Dread more difficult. The titled units, governors and high star generals, don't seem to affect it.

I'm now pretty sure that it's a mistake to only select for Acumen, and that has become less important to why/how I assign titles. Loyalty is less important too, if it's not a problem. This is most pronounced at the start of a campaign where I often find candidates with high Piety or Dread. I'm more inclined to title them now.

I'm also more careful about the stats of untitled units sitting at the top of stacks - at one time I only cared about loyalty here, now I'll take Acumen, Dread and Piety into account.

I'm sure other things go into equation.

For example, I've noticed that the fewer troops I build the more concentrated the stats effect. The AI also seems to have a view about the "appropriateness" of a newly trained unit - why train a Halberdier when a Slav Warrior will give better balance?

My feeling is that the game design "encourages" a minimalist approach that takes all the stats into consideration - and does this through VnV's and new unit stats, particularly for heirs. For example, I now identify the Drinker vice very highly with the overproduction of troops, particularly elite ones, and I may not train anything in the turn an heir is due to mature to avoid it.

Other times I feel like I'm trying to predict the future from looking at the entrails of a goat, and sometimes I'm sure I know nothing about this game at all.

Heh.

[Heidrek]

wow, this really is fascinating.....I wonder how much depth there is to this game that we've never even dreamed about. CA really put their thinking caps on for this game huh.