Bad Generals?

[Tacitursa]

Ive tried and tried and tried to make a good general in SS but it just dosent happen.

How do you guys make decent generals.

I play as england alot and with my faction heir i destroy scotland , ireland and all the rebels on Isles then i crusade

After all of that my general still only has 1-2 command stars at most. Also 9 out of 10 traits will have negative/reducing effects.

I know SS changed the way generals work to stop people making 10 command generals in 5 turns but its a bit overkill i think. My generals seem to get worse the more you use them and they regularly lose command stars for no reason atall.

Starting a campaign my king starts with like 8 command stars and 4-5 dread and by turn 5 he can have as little as 3 command stars and no dread atall.

[Goofy]

Note that command stars have just a small actual stature; they just are candies for eyes
Of course they have an effect, but as I said, command is not the main thing you should increase. It's chivalry.

1. What does command?
-“rally troops”-ability is more effective

2. What does chivalry?
-settlement’s population increases faster when a chivalrous general is the governor
-increases public order in a city
-your troops morale is higher

(...)

1. How to get traits that increase command?
Here are some ways to do it:
-when you end turn and your general is staying in a city there is a small chance to this kind of trait to appear, but it may require some buildings
-win battles

2. How to get traits that increase chivalry?
Here are some ways to do it:
-occupy cities you capture
-release your prisoners
-keep tax rate on low level (be aware that it may cause your general to get a trait that decreases tax income)
-win battles in chivalrous way (for example 500 against 1000 men, look Royal Military Academy for more information)
-join crusade

You just must battle A LOT to increase command; chivalry is increased in quite same the way.

[Kawee]

You need to win a bunch of Heroic Victories. Most of my generals have good command because I station them on the front line, where they fight off hordes of stacks, getting 8-9 stars eventually.

[Tacitursa]

I already know all that information it just seems the requirement is too harsh.

I have to literally destory scotland,ireland then crusade to middle east and wipe out 8-10 muslim stacks before my general becomes half decent and by that time hes about 5-6 turns from dieing of old age

And no matter what i do with my general be it very chivalrous crusading campaing of occupying and releasing prisoners , Winning heoric battle left right and center 70% of my traits will just be bad

How can you get severely wounded trait after winning a heoric victory? Getting severly wounded dosent really sound like a heroic victory to me.

It seems after a battle or end of a turn a Dice is rolled and random trait is added but there's a 9/1 ratio of Bad/good traits.

Its really anoying to get severly wounded trait when your general wasnt even attacked...

[Warmaster Tibs]

How can you get severely wounded trait after winning a heoric victory? Getting severly wounded dosent really sound like a heroic victory to me.

That can be heroic. Your general was severly wounded when leading a charge against the enemy swinging the tide in your favor causing your army to win against staggering odds.

Sounds heroic to me. A heroic battle is more heroic when sacrifices are made and putting yourself on the line as the general is in it self heroic.

[campbela]

The generals you are trying to build command for, are they military or administrative minded? Are you building the right education buildings? Is your king in a city or castle when he is losing command stars and is he taking part in any battles at that time?

It is weird that you are getting severely wounded trait after an heroic victory, does that general have any of the fragile type traits?

[Gnostiko]

The only time I've seen severely wounded is when a battle is auto-calculated, and not fought on the battlemap. I would suggest you fight more of your battles on the battlemap. I myself have yet to see a general with over 5+ command stars, but that's because I regularly rotate my generals around.

[Sir Walter]

The only time I've seen severely wounded is when a battle is auto-calculated, and not fought on the battlemap. I would suggest you fight more of your battles on the battlemap. I myself have yet to see a general with over 5+ command stars, but that's because I regularly rotate my generals around.

My best was 8, most are bad but when you autoresolve and totally ignore "Severely Wounded" and keep him fighting they eventually get "Scarred" which makes them harder to kill

[Tacitursa]

I dont know why people keep mentioning auto resolve seriously anyone that uses that might aswell not even play the game.

[Tate]

I dont know why people keep mentioning auto resolve seriously anyone that uses that might aswell not even play the game.

No kidding. I never autoresolve any battle, even the pointless and trivial ones.

[Gnostiko]

I do. I autoresolve tedious battles. Obviously I prefer fighting my battles, but when you're dealing with a stackathon, or you're basically repeating the same battles every 2 minutes I just autoresolve.

[Seether]

I may be wrong, but the issue with command stars and associated traits sounds like an issue that has to do with BGR. If it is SS without any submods (like RR/RC), then I have no clue as to why you are having this problem.

[KittySN]

I never really had a problem with my generals being hard to develop, but it bothers me that many of the generals opposing me have at least 6 command stars. Last time I played England, I was attacked by a Scotland and Ireland at around turn 10, and both had nearly a full slate of command with absolutely no justification in their traits or ancillaries. I'd at least like to know why the general attacking me is so damn good, but they apparently spawn that way for challenge.

[Gnostiko]

I never really had a problem with my generals being hard to develop, but it bothers me that many of the generals opposing me have at least 6 command stars. Last time I played England, I was attacked by a Scotland and Ireland at around turn 10, and both had nearly a full slate of command with absolutely no justification in their traits or ancillaries. I'd at least like to know why the general attacking me is so damn good, but they apparently spawn that way for challenge.

Indeed, it is purely for the sake of challenge, but I too am irked by these sudden military prodigies!

[Sir Walter]

Can we get rid of the "Unproven Commander" trait? No matter how many battles a general wins against the odds, I can't get the trait to go away...

[Caesar Clivus]

I'm pretty sure you can get the severely wounded trait even if you fight the battle, especially if your general gets involved in a lot of melee. Have to check the traits file to confirm this though

[Sir Walter]

I think most of the traits like Severely Wounded are possible to get when fighting yourself but more common on an autoresolved battle.

[magraev]

I think it's quite harsh that a general i punished because he outnumbers the opponent (if that's true?).

I sometimes find myself leaving half my army behind before an attack, to avoid being punished for fighting when the odds are with me.

I think I'll go looking in the descr_traits and change that asap.

[Byg]

I think it's quite harsh that a general i punished because he outnumbers the opponent (if that's true?).

I sometimes find myself leaving half my army behind before an attack, to avoid being punished for fighting when the odds are with me.

I think I'll go looking in the descr_traits and change that asap.

I don't think there are any traits like that unless you are using BGR III or IV. These are based on confidence and overconfidence, one of the most important apsects affecting any battle throughout history.

Suppose you are a 30 year old boxer in your prime and are repeatedly matched against 10 year old children. Then one day you are pitted against an opponent of your own age. How do you suppose you would feel and what effect do you think this would have upon your performance?

[Tacitursa]

Suppose you are a 30 year old boxer in your prime and are repeatedly matched against 10 year old children. Then one day you are pitted against an opponent of your own age. How do you suppose you would feel and what effect do you think this would have upon your performance?

I think i understand your point but Generals never get matched against 10 year old children repeatedly and neither do 30 year old boxers.

Boxers fight other Boxers and Generals fight other Generals.