Losing Brave trait during siege

[kingsword]

So I have this 'brave' ruler besieging a castle, vastly outnumbering with no sally events etc who loses the brave trait, saying "he never knew he could take an arrow in the knee". I got annoyed so I restart. Send ruler to besiege another castle 2000 km away. Again, he loses brave trait. No combat whatsoever. 10 times enemy numbers. What gives?

 

[Boogeyman]

So I have this 'brave' ruler besieging a castle, vastly outnumbering with no sally events etc who loses the brave trait, saying "he never knew he could take an arrow in the knee". I got annoyed so I restart. Send ruler to besiege another castle 2000 km away. Again, he loses brave trait. No combat whatsoever. 10 times enemy numbers. What gives?

The brave trait comes and goes very frequently during wars.

...

Arrow to the knee...

 

[N Katsyev]

Sounds like he's coming to terms with his own mortality.

 

[Gradiant]

He used to be brave, but then he took an arrow to the knee.

*Is shot*

 

[kingsword]

The brave trait comes and goes very frequently during wars.

...

Arrow to the knee...

Well, I've only seen it go so far. In fact, the only traits I got from battling have been ill & maimed. I don't even see why I should ever use my ruler to command troops. Yet to see anything positive coming from it.

 

[Lord Canterbury]

Well, I've only seen it go so far. In fact, the only traits I got from battling have been ill & maimed. I don't even see why I should ever use my ruler to command troops. Yet to see anything positive coming from it.

Because positive stuff does happen (like Brave - I've seen it a bunch). But of course there ARE risks taking your ruler into battle. Arrow to the eye anyone?

 

[Clegane76]

So I have this 'brave' ruler besieging a castle, vastly outnumbering with no sally events etc who loses the brave trait, saying "he never knew he could take an arrow in the knee". I got annoyed so I restart. Send ruler to besiege another castle 2000 km away. Again, he loses brave trait. No combat whatsoever. 10 times enemy numbers. What gives?

Has it occurred to you that perhaps there is nothing 'Brave' whatsoever about besieging or engaging an enemy force that you outnumber 10-1? Perhaps he is losing it because he is a gutless bully, only choosing to show up for confrontations that are a foregone conclusion in his favor.

 

[kingsword]

Has it occurred to you that perhaps there is nothing 'Brave' whatsoever about besieging or engaging an enemy force that you outnumber 10-1? Perhaps he is losing it because he is a gutless bully, only choosing to show up for confrontations that are a foregone conclusion in his favor.

Then why would his knees tremble in the event description? Doesn't seem WAD the least bit.

Because positive stuff does happen (like Brave - I've seen it a bunch). But of course there ARE risks taking your ruler into battle. Arrow to the eye anyone?

Yeah well, he got wounded in a battle when his flank was outnumbering enemy 6 to 1, without getting any positive traits after a dozen battles. What's the going percentage of losing ruler to battle wounds compared to getting positive traits in your experience? 100% to 0% here in several dozen battles with different rulers.

 

[Lord Canterbury]

Yeah well, he got wounded in a battle when his flank was outnumbering enemy 6 to 1, without getting any positive traits after a dozen battles. What's the going percentage of losing ruler to battle wounds compared to getting positive traits in your experience? 100% to 0% here in several dozen battles with different rulers.

I think get roughly two braves to every wounded... but that just what I've seen... the modders could give detailed stats I'm sure. If you want to protect your leader's hide then just keep him out of battle. Sending you marshal can be good. If he gets brave - then yay - if he dies, just get another marshal.

 

[kingsword]

I was doing that but thought I could as well try it out the authentic way (rulers led their armies during the era of course) and see how it goes. Certainly nothing like CK1 so far, I'm rather disappointed with the results.

 

[Lord Canterbury]

I was doing that but thought I could as well try it out the authentic way (rulers led their armies during the era of course) and see how it goes. Certainly nothing like CK1 so far, I'm rather disappointed with the results.

Some rulers led thier armies. If you have a military genius king then by all means throw him into the fray. If you've got a precious king with high diplomacy and stewardship then I would keep him safe in his court - especially if he can't tell his blade from his butt.

 

[kingsword]

Apparently a brilliant strategist doesn't cut it. He just got a blow to the head and went incapable at age 28 after another five battles. ZERO positive traits received.

 

[Lord Canterbury]

Apparently a brilliant strategist doesn't cut it. He just got a blow to the head and went incapable at age 28 after another five battles. ZERO positive traits received.

lol - you are having some seriously bad luck. I hope one day you find a leader capable of taking your armies into battle being overcome with mortal injuries at the mere sight of your enemies

 

[Swuboo]

Apparently a brilliant strategist doesn't cut it. He just got a blow to the head and went incapable at age 28 after another five battles. ZERO positive traits received.

What, did you forget to tell the enemy that the war was to be conducted under the Marquess of Queensbury rules?

In all seriousness, you sent him to war. It's bad luck, but these things happen.