On persoanl combat battle events.

[raven63]

First of all: my favorite mod of all. Fantastic work. Love it.

I find it slightly immersion breaking that whenever I have a character with high martial and I decide naturally to lead my armies with him, I always end up in the situation where I have to either engage in risky personal combat or gain the craven trait.

There are numerous examples of stellar generals who never actually put their life at risk, and yet were not seen as craven because of it. I'd like to roleplay such type of characters. I would like to roleplay a military genius who is smart enough not to put his own life at risk.

Proposed solution 1: A new trait, "Reckless" gives a boost to martial ability and personal combat, but results in the character frequently getting himself in the thick of battle and risking his life in the following way: Characters without the reckless trait have the option to deny personal combat without obtaining the craven trait. Character with the reckless trait cannot do that and have to either engage in personal combat or gain the craven trait.


Proposed solution 2: the personal combat event should only fire if the flank which is led by a character is losing badly. In this case it makes more sense that such a situation should arise.

Also, if I may make a humble request on a related subject, it would be great in future releases if there were other battle events besides personal combat with AI characters.

Thanks guys!

 

[RhaegarTelcontarTargaryen]

I would also add a bit of randomness. To be able to event to sometimes fire, but like in every battle. Especially if you are superior. Like why would you risk fighting if you outnumber enemies 10 to 1, or something. I like being able to fight combats, but I think it should not happen every time. Also it kinda fits to happen more to Vikings, Adventurers, raiders...

 

[evan1119]

Welli I think they have reduced the chance to get the craven trait and if they haven't I agree it needs to be reduced at minimum.

Perhaps a prestige hit is more appropriate and the craven trait can be limited to running away from duels where the martial ability of the two participant are within a range that makes them relatively equal in ability.

Running away from Richard the Lionheart as Phillp August isn't cowardly because it would be suicide otherwise. But one wouldn't expect Richard the Lionheart to run away from Saladin without being accused of being craven.

Or exempt certain characters with specific traits, such as deceitful, misguided warrior, scholar, etc from being penalized for being a bad soldier.

All pagans, especially Norse, should have the possibility of getting the craven trait if they run in battle. So I do think it's appropriate sometimes, perhaps not all the time. But that's a lot of coding so I get it if the Devs feel like it's a time-sink to make it too character specific

 

[EU3NOOB]

Also, on this topic, for the longest time my character would receive battle events, even when he's in Constantinople, sipping fine wine...

 

[Rylock]

Also, on this topic, for the longest time my character would receive battle events, even when he's in Constantinople, sipping fine wine...

Are you sure about that? We had this comment from a tester on Plus, but it turned out their ruler was actually with the regiments even if they were not actually leading the army (or one of its flanks). So their in-world location was with the army, even though they thought their ruler was back in the capital.

If this happens again, you should verify your character's actual location.

 

[Ritmas]

Dueling should be way way more rare, and injuries way more common(well something in between maimed and wounded should be introduced, imho), as in history the generals would only most of the time either lead the charge as a last resort/morale boost or to go in for already fleeing enemy and when they did that, they usually get hurt. Death to a stray arrow is way more common than death in duel or leading charge, so is falling off the horse. Nobility killing other nobility is usually a no no anyway, unless it has something to do with huge rivalries and other precedents.

Now in my Alexiad run Alexios personally slayed the Sicilian king/duke and two sultans of Rum with a dozen of other commanders.

IMHO, leading battles should be a high risk/high reward situation, where is a bigger chance than now to die to unfortunate events, like getting more deadly sickness than now from plague, falling of horse, stray arrows and so on(preferably finding a way around dying to 200men with your 10k stack) but superior prestige gains, formation of friends and rivalries among the commanders, maybe giving claims to ERE throne for greek generals(and other imperial goverments?) that keep winning decisive battles, as emperor/king commander a flat out morale boost should be given + more traits should influence your own troops, something MTW2 did with dread/chivalry(?) system.

I would also like to see martial stats a bit downtunned, maybe removing martial bonuses from the most of the traits and make it pure education and experience driven, while traits give other bonuses such as flanking, morale, damage etc. Being zealous shouldn't improve your tactics, nor should being wroth.

 

[Peter Bond]

I do like this feature, but yes it's almost garanteed if you don't join second and not show up in the battle screen with your portrait. Problem I have is when you retreat while it fires your armie may gain morale thus prolonging their slaughter before finally leaving the site.