Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Is the game confused ?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Is the game confused ?

    Hey all,

    I just started a new Grand campaign as England, 1.3 + Retrofit

    All is good in england thus far as i am in turn 9 and have already taken Antwerp,Bruges,York,Rennes and Borduax [Rebel settlements] But upon taking Antwerp my faction leader incurred + 2 dread, i thought this was weird considering i have only occupied the city and have not executed any prisoners or anything of that nature.

    I think the game has trouble distinguishing the difference between being merciless and chivalrous, becuase i was gearing him for chivalrous yet he got + 2 dread ? :hmmm:

    Anyway, thought id'e have a whinge about it. hehe
    Signature by Lucarius.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Is the game confused ?

    well people get dread for winning for some reason
    i think its like "winning first"
    and it might be how many people you killed or captured in the battle or something
    --- Theseus1234
    Suum cique (To each their own) -Motto of the Kingdom of Prussia

    The Crown of Aragon AAR- The Iberian Supremacy
    Quote Originally Posted by Justice and Mercy View Post
    My opinion is 100% objective. That's how I'm so right all the time.
    ^Human hubris knows no bounds.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Is the game confused ?

    I think the winning first trait relies on the odds of the battle. If it's hugely in favor of your army, you're more likely to get that trait.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Is the game confused ?

    If you bully much smaller forces with much more superior forces you gain dread, albeit not massive amounts. Has something to do with their being no such thing as Chivalry when you are always killing the underdogs.

    On the other hand, when I had one of my generals spend his life-time fighting back the Mongol hordes, where he was always vastly outnumbered, he became one of my most dreaded generals. You will eventually gain a lot more Chivalry if you stick to no executions, occupying settlements, and fair taxes.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Is the game confused ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kennylz View Post
    If you bully much smaller forces with much more superior forces you gain dread, albeit not massive amounts. Has something to do with their being no such thing as Chivalry when you are always killing the underdogs.

    On the other hand, when I had one of my generals spend his life-time fighting back the Mongol hordes, where he was always vastly outnumbered, he became one of my most dreaded generals. You will eventually gain a lot more Chivalry if you stick to no executions, occupying settlements, and fair taxes.
    I just went and checked what trait it was exactly and it is : Cruel and Cunning [It's not a mistake when this man unleashes death most painful upon his foe's he's taking a liking to it].

    Also he's quite the opposite of a bully as he is only commanding 4 units, and almost all of the rebel battles were 1:2 against me. But in those battles he probably made a high number of kills.

    And as i haven't yet had a field battle [only settlement attacks] I haven't captured any men.

    I never had this problem playing HRE, i'm thinking the english are just suppost to be cruel and merciless people, or perhaps i have adopted a different playing style where i'm just a big meanie
    Signature by Lucarius.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Is the game confused ?

    If a general alread has "winning first", it's hard to get the chivalric trait. You'll have to enter a battle and then retreat without killing anyone, you'll have a big chance of having both the BattleDread and BattleChivalry traits reduced, meaning you'll start from scratch again.
    An easy way to get the chivalric trait is to fight against an Islamic faction (if you are a Christian one).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •