Traits for NCOs and officers treated as generals based upon their UnitType

[RubiconDecision]

A while back, I was flirting with the idea of creating a lot more units with the general_unit attribute, who would actually be low ranking officers based upon what their position in the military they were in. So lower units would have certain kinds of traits as noncommisioned officers, maybe being rowdy and ignorant since they've had a hard uneducated life, then progressively better units who are low-level officers, and so on, so you'd have the equivalent of:
1. Sergeants
2. Lieutenants
3. Captains
4. Majors

Anyway what about this?
;------------------------------------------
Trigger 0132_Armored_Swordsmen_Trait
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsGeneral
and EndedInSettlement
and RemainingMPPercentage >= 25
and UnitType Armored Swordsmen
and SettlementBuildingExists >= military_academy

Affects GoodAttacker 2 Chance 100
Affects TacticalSkill 1 Chance 10
Affects Captain 1 Chance 100

So this Armored Swordsmen is designated as a general_unit, moves to create a watchtower but still has enough movement points to get back to a settlement, where a military academy exists, and then will automatically get GoodAttacker 2 but might get TacticalSkill 1, and becomes the lowest ranking captain.

See any problems? Would having lots more portraits on low level officers be confusing? The unit card icon won't be showing up in that slot, so the player will have to be careful and consider who they're sending out and training/deploying, which shows up when they click on the portrait. Should I create UI cards for the Armored Swordsmen officer (general) so that it's clearer what that unit is? I'm unclear what to do because if I don't do anything, the unit will just get a random portrait.

It's a similar issue to dismounted generals and mounted generals using the same random portrait base. If I could designate a portrait, that might be better....

A lot of these varying officers will get field training and may be at the front with settlements lacking infrastructure, so I've thought of using the HighestAttSharedChar piety priest> 3 condition so that if they're near a priest, then they might get some religious traits, or become converted. Or maybe HighestAttSharedChar command named character > 3 for being around a commander and getting benefits from training with him?

What's the nomenclature of the HighestAttSharedChar? I'm thinking in the slot for "piety" that it can be any of the Vices and Virtures and that the "priest" example could have any of the agent types or named character, right?

Because you can have levels of traits, then the Sergeants might have five levels, with Level 1 having no attributes, but it automatically ratchets up as a self-perpetuating trait, and so through time gains some benefits too, kind of like a Master Sergeant who maxes out from the School of Hard Knocks.

So these low level officers would have a lot more Superstitious traits since they're not classically educated, could come from nonnobility, but could rise to become "new men" and hold higher status militarily, but might also be stuck with lower authority, couldn't get to be permanent governors since they can't get ancillary titles, would have wives with less favorable traits, etc.

Some of them could be intentionally created as Sergeants with the general_unit attribute, and then sent where princesses are hanging around and being a nuisance, and thus be charmed away by her and gotten rid of too. Or not, for since he's a designated unit AND a general_unit, then would he be immune from being charmed, since maybe that kingdom can't muster that kind of unit? Or does he become a bodyguard unit when charmed by a princess?

Example, a Legionary unit made during the Augusta reforms is made the lieutenant of his squad. He rises with the Lietutenant status over time, gains some other helpful traits by being around merchants, priests, spies, and his named character commander. He becomes First Spear, but in time due to his many traits becomes Evocati.

So not only is he a Lieutenant, but one that gains with name changes in the character record. Wouldn't this be interesting versus the blank standard units who can't gain traits or ancillaries, for their commander of the squad would become very personal through time. The problem is he's already a "general_unit", but if he's adopted, does he become a bodyguard unit, or stay as the designated unit when he was created? I'm thinking he becomes a bodyguard unit, for any unit that leads a battle and the adoption event comes up is made a bodyguard regardless of their original unit type.

Which means if he's now a bodyguard, then it opens the door to any kind of trait and ancillary that he once couldn't have gained as a Legionary Lieutenant.

EDIT: If this works, then those NCOs or types of lower level officers would have to be excluded from most ancillaries and many traits, for they're not running a military campaign or a settlement. So "not constructive" and similar traits won't enter into it, with specific traits for them, and less likelihood of gaining staff ancillaries like Military Engineer and similar.

It might make it stand out for a "sergeant" unit to get a sergeant ancillary that has no attribute benefits, but merely is a marker to show their status/military title. And so on with the others. The problem with that is you can't remove the Sergeant ancillary, even if they get adopted, but that could be a good thing as a way to exclude those with that "sergeant" ancillary from other ancillaries or traits.

A Sergeant unit then might get adopted into a family but be of "humble origins" and so can't really move very far forward, but other types like a major might be able to move up a little if adopted and gain a limited number of ancillaries like the Runner or Quartermaster.

[Gigantus]

It won't work.

The attribute 'general_unit' designates the unit as body_guard unit. Which means if this is the first unit with that attribute for a faction (list wise in the EDU) then this unit will be the default body guard unit. All other units with that attribute for that faction will be ignored as body guard units - there are no further uses (other then the regular use of attributes in the script as reference) that I know of.

[RubiconDecision]

It won't work.

The attribute 'general_unit' designates the unit as body_guard unit. Which means if this is the first unit with that attribute for a faction (list wise in the EDU) then this unit will be the default body guard unit. All other units with that attribute for that faction will be ignored as body guard units - there are no further uses (other then the regular use of attributes in the script as reference) that I know of.

Are you sure? I wondering because there are the standard mounted units for bodyguards as well as dismounted bodyguards, like this one from Falcom Total War:
type Supreme War Captain
dictionary Supreme_War_Captain ; Supreme War Captain's Guard
category infantry
class heavy
voice_type General
banner faction main_infantry
soldier Aztec_Bodyguard, 24, 0, 1
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, very_hardy, can_withdraw, general_unit

In Falcom, you're right that the Aztecs only have an infantry bodyguard unit, but there are Late model dismounted bodyguard units as well as mounted bodyguard units in a mod like Kingdoms Grand Campaign mod. I don't have KGC currently installed, but I'm pretty sure that England had both the late model dismounted general was a named character as well as the earlier and typical mounted bodyguard generals and late model cavalry bodyguard generals.

It's been a year, but I'm fairly certain I configured a mailed knight as a general_unit, as well as the typical NE Bodyguard too. Both were named characters as I recall, but I didn't get around to configuring the traits for it.

It's too bad if it won't work because I had plans for some of the AOR units having a chance of rebelling since they're not assigned as regular units in a kingdom, so that would be very interesting to see several AOR units lose their movement rates and create rebellion issues for those who used too many AOR units (due to chance flipping on that trait of rebellion).

[Gigantus]

There are two was of assigning a body guard unit:

1. via script or descr_strat - the unit listed first will be the character's body guard unit
2. via EDU - the 'general_unit' is the faction's default body guard unit

Point 1. will be what you describe with late model dismounted general and the other examples

[Withwnar]

Maybe I'm missing a point somewhere but if you make a general_unit recruitable then, upon being recruited, he is a general with that unit type as a bodyguard, no?

[RubiconDecision]

Maybe I'm missing a point somewhere but if you make a general_unit recruitable then, upon being recruited, he is a general with that unit type as a bodyguard, no?

I'm not sure.

Really, the only point is to find a way to make certain military units to be named characters and thus earn traits, and not to have the standard general bodyguard unit be the ONLY one to get traits.

I'd like to show lower levels of the Roman military divisions with a trait by level in their character record, and thus a Legionary could rise up, but probably wouldn't be a very good governor of a settlement. They'd have their own traits, could get sickened by illness, might rebel, might have an ethnic origin (like an AOR unit from Gaul) and hence might rebel, etc. 95 % of the time they'd be regular units, but on occasion they'd perform less well. It would only be for the player, with automatic bonuses and benefits to the AI. The sudden realization by a Gaul unit that "I'm freaking partially responsible for the demise of my brothers. I'm going to rebell!"

Sickness is a constant problem for soldiers due to harsh conditions, but not merely because of the leader of the army. If units could get traits, then they could be sickened or HaleAndHearty and thus that would be one more whole new aspect of field battles in particular. Maybe 2 units are sickened out of a full stack of 20, and so those don't perform as well as the rest.

If it cannot be done in some fashion by the EDU and EDB through regular recruitment, then I doubt that scripting it makes sense, unless a certain Legionary is considered of high enough merit, and so gets spawned back in Rome. He'd be more useful fielded anywhere, but that might be the only way to do it.

I don't recall this being an issue with KGC but only the regular recruitment in the end game resulting in a dismounted general unit with traits, so I'd considered the usefulness of this as a way to show military divisions in multiple mods. Heroic Samurai, or Armored Swordsmen, Roman Principes, or whatever that the players could follow as a man in the field, and if he died then really noticing it becomes they'd been grooming him to rise. You know, someone like Lucius Vorenus, who by a stroke of luck, field commisions, and events might end up a short term senator and bodyguard to Julius Caesar. Or another random one might be a rascal, be responsible for some random misfortune at the Front, and cause issues for Rome too.

[Withwnar]

I tested it and yes, that's what happens. You get a general with that unit type as his bodyguard. You just need to make sure that the default bodyguard unit type - for come-of-ages, adopted generals, etc. - is higher up the EDU list than any of these ones.

But they wouldn't be family, right? Not unless they were later adopted into the family tree.

[RubiconDecision]

I tested it and yes, that's what happens. You get a general with that unit type as his bodyguard. You just need to make sure that the default bodyguard unit type - for come-of-ages, adopted generals, etc. - is higher up the EDU list than any of these ones.

But they wouldn't be family, right? Not unless they were later adopted into the family tree.

Yes, they definitely WOULDN'T be family. They'd likely be Plebeians or Freemen (former slaves) and so of low usefulness as governors and probably not responsible for a commanding a battle (not a routine cavalry bodyguard general), but merely the commander of his unit, in this example a Centurion. So probably never adopted since never the commander.

So it is POSSIBLE, as long as I have regular declared Cavalry Bodyguards at the top of the EDU, but then declared general_units in some of the EDU much lower under their respective kingdoms as JR. Officers or NCOs. Since it's many turns until the Legions show up, then I might make Roman Principes to be such low ranking NCOs, but then after the reforms they cannot be recruited anymore. With traits for lesser officers, then they could have their own bonuses due to being veterans with TRUE experience from confirmed kills instead of merely going up in an experience level, or be a lousy Centurion who didn't gain any traits from poor performance but still a veteran based upon time and minor kills. Such things add HPs in the former, but the latter only more accuracy for bowmen and better offensive/defensive stats.

Say these Roman Principes (and later Legionaries) are led by a poor general. The NCOs might be DiscontentGenerals because of the low experience of the Leadership (say it's a new Faction Leader) or from poor commanders of the army they're in, and so they refuse to fight (reduced movement rates). Now if I could get them to rebel to the SPQR and NOT become standard slave rebels, then that would be perfect, for then this empowers the SPQR.
...
Simulating Decimation in a Principes or Legion

There was a rare Roman practice of killing 1/10 of a unit who had severely disobeyed their commander and the other 90 % kill their brothers-in-arms. There's a command to reduce the strength of a unit:
reduce_unit_strength cartheginians2 10
but you'd have to know the label or assign it by some means. Then make it conditional, and only that one unit. I was thinking about Decimation as a consequence of high disloyalty, since the Principes and Legionaries are not typical named characters and so there would be consequences much stricter to them than a noble named unit.

The other way would be a building that would cause damage by disaster to the inhabitants of that settlement where the building existed. Or a shortcut key if that unit is selected might be the easiest way, which then like the BBB 4.0a Disobedient general results in a change in loyalty, but still needs to have the disaster befall the unit.

;------------------------------------------
Trigger King_pardons ;The King may pardon the general if he comes to court or piss him off worse
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition IsGeneral
and Trait Disobedient = 1
and Trait IDisobedient = 0
and DistanceCapital <= 1 ;he's in the capitol

Affects Disobedient -1 Chance 66
Affects Disobedient 1 Chance 20
....
Also in BBB 4.0a there's affected by Disaster, so maybe this is a way to simulate the decimation with only a loyalty change to show repentance after corporal punishment.
;------------------------------------------
Trigger disasterNormal
WhenToTest CharacterDamagedByDisaster

Condition not HighestAttAdjacentChar Piety priest >= 3
and UnitType Roman_Principes

Affects Loyal 1 Chance 100

How to simulate that CharacterDamagedByDisaster though?
....
Maybe this?
;------------------------------------------
Trigger CorporalPunishment
WhenToTest RequestTrainingAdvice

Condition I_CharacterSelected
and UnitType = Roman_Principes
and ArmyIsLocal
and Trait Disobedient = 1

Affects IDisobedient -2 Chance 25
Affects Whipped 1 Chance 100

If the Request Training Advice Scroll is opened, and the player selects a Roman_Principes who has the general_unit attribute, and has the disobedience trait, then this simulates them under corporal punishment with a 25% chance of altering their disobedience?
A negative value for the BodyguardSize could reduce it, or lower some trait as a result of being whipped, and thus lower the BodyguardSize too.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...d-Size-in-M2TW

Because of this BodyguardSize and PersonalSecurity, and the Roman_Principes being a general_unit, then the amount of troops in that particular unit can vary based upon merit, as well as HP for the Leader of the unit, so being whipped could reduce the level of achievement for that Principes unit, or if it never has a loyalty issue, then that Principes unit could get much larger based upon achievements on the battlefield.

It's very powerful to give traits to some units. Like VenerealDisease as a possibility for a Roman_Principes in a settlement with a brothel.
;------------------------------------------
Trigger VenerealDisease_trigger
WhenToTest CharacterTurnEnd

Condition EndedInSettlement
and UnitType = Roman_Principes
and Trait HaleAndHearty = 0
and RemainingMPPercentage = 100
and SettlementBuildingExists >= brothel

Affects Drink 1 Chance 1
Affects Gambling 1 Chance 1
Affects Girls 1 Chance 1
Affects VenerealDisease 1 Chance 1
...

EDIT1:
One beneficial aspect might be that having some NCOs (Sergeants) and low ranking officers is that these units are not immortal anymore. When you create a standard unit, then they are endless and continue to gain experience, and this is highly unrealistic.

With some low ranking units, what happens is the leader of that unit can die, just as the standard bodyguard unit can die (even with HP additions), and so that unit might continue to fight on after the battle, but is generally disbanded at the conclusion of the battle. The exception with standard bodyguard units is those cavalry might have enough notoriety during the course of the battle for an adoption event. But with low ranking unit officers, they're not leading the battle, the general is, so that unit is disbanded.

So say this is a Roman submod with Centurions. Those guys get limited traits (illness, better command ability, HP modification, traits as ancillaries like a Centurion with a Runner or a Scout), but that's all. They will turn a certain age, and the engine will notice them, and so if a bride is available, it will be from the family members, so say NO, otherwise that low ranking unit will get married into family.

They might be charmed by a wandering princess, but then that's the problem of that father-in-law, not you, as they're not suited to be administrators. I'm guessing they become typical bodyguard generals if adopted.

It's too bad they can't get married (if optional) as that means that they would have children, and I wonder if their sons might then also be whatever their father was as a unit? One Centurion father results as a son who follows his father's footsteps as a new Centurion.

Daughters of the Plebeian Centurion would be useful as new brides. Because I've configured them as named characters, and created ordinary marriages with traits (upon marriage a random assortment of mostly helpful WifeIsFertile, WifeIsWise, WifeIsCharming, etc traits), then the Plebeian Centurion's daughter who becomes a bride would be treated the same, but maybe since her father has inheritable traits, then that FormerCenturion trait would have to be taken into account to perpetuate the Plebeian ancestry as well.

[I wonder about the source of brides because the engine sometimes comes up with a random bride, but also deals from the family tree's daughters who come of age. So if the name of the bride is offered, and the name doesn't match up, then the question is where does she come from? If a typical cavalry bodyguard unit (general) is married but not adopted into family, then he still has children which don't show up in the family tree. There's not a good way to keep track of which non-family generals have children, for until their son get's adopted, they won't show up at all. This makes for some scribbling on scratch paper to remember who did and didn't have children, and in what numbers.

So it might be that you'd marry off the Centurion if there wasn't any daughter's name that could be matched up with the family tree or your own notes from nonadopted generals (who would be default Patricians).]

One of the intentions of low ranking officers was to demonstrate that there existed some lesser nobles and they rose up and were recognized as valuable and created new nobility. So the EDCT might work in tandem with allowing marriage of some randomly created brides who end up founding these "new men" who become new nobility.

Such things happened worldwide, like Toyotomi Hideyoshi in Japan who rose almost to the highest levels of governance as a military leader.
http://books.google.com/books?id=b-a...0japan&f=false

So this could be an interesting way, a low level unit rises up, and he or his sons end up finally through luck becoming the FactionLeader.

Because there are slots still available in the EDU, then some Legions might not be designated as general_unit, but some would be intentionally made that way, so you'd have the old and the new way to see what happens.

[Emperor of The Great Unknown]

This is a most interesting idea, but there are a few problems. One big problem is that the royal family might suffer low birth rates due to the ratio of settlements to named characters being off.

Also this could be exploited by the player and be hard to work with the AI, for instance the AI might use a unit labeled general_unit differently in battle. Also careful use of assassins by the player could mean that you could kill half of the enemy army before battle.

Also traits triggered in battle only affect the commanders not the secondary generals, so performance in battle would only apply to the commander. This is a major roadblock in this system.

Also armies would replenish themselves in 1 or 2 turns which would make blitzing easier. Although it is interesting and I hope there is a way to make this work. It would make for a more realistic way of how levy's were raised by local nobles in the middle ages.