Winning (first?)

[caralampio]

In my experience playing M2TW and the mods that have spawned from it I have come to the conclusion that chivalry is more useful than dread, especially for city growth. I know there are a lot of dread fans out there, but I prefer to follow the path of the Light Side of the force .

So I try to make my generals as chivalrous as possible. I usually only accept chivalrous adoptive and in-law sons. I try to just occupy cities, let prisoners go when they are not too numerous, etc. I do gain some chivalry that way but something gets in the way: Practically every one of my generals gains "Winning First" (trait BattleDread level one) after any battle.

I've tried a number of things like not chasing routers, not letting my general get involved in any bloodletting (losing a key tactical piece in the battle), etc. but still, at the end of the battle "Winning First".

I have found three triggers that most likely cause this trait to appear:

;------------------------------------------
Trigger battle3_Dread_fighting
WhenToTest PostBattle
Condition GeneralNumKillsInBattle > 8
and not Trait BattleChivalry > 0
Affects BattleDread 1 Chance 50
Affects Bloodthirsty 1 Chance 10
;------------------------------------------
Trigger battle3Dread_PickingOnWeak
WhenToTest PostBattle
Condition WasAttacker
and WonBattle
and BattleOdds > 1.5
and PercentageEnemyKilled > 50
and not Trait BattleChivalry > 0
Affects BattleDread 1 Chance 100
;------------------------------------------
Trigger battle3Dread_TotalAnnihilation
WhenToTest PostBattle
Condition WonBattle
and BattleSuccess >= crushing
and PercentageEnemyKilled > 70
and GeneralFoughtInCombat
and IsGeneral
and BattleOdds < 0.95
and not Trait BattleChivalry > 0
Affects BattleDread 2 Chance 100

The problem is, in most battles you get into you want to go with some superiority, in most battles you would like to make use of your general in the fight, as he is a key unit that can sometimes be decisive, and also the enemy is sharp and he will rarely rout before sustaining heavy losses. It is very rare to win a battle before the enemy has more than 70% losses. Also, note that one of the triggers above is for battles where you are numerically inferior, but you win big. So dread is practically forced upon you one way or the other.

But the thing is, my generals are gaining WF even in numerically inferior battles, where they didn't fight, etc.

The other frustration is not being able to know if your general is chivalrous or dreadful during and after the battle. Some generals you get to know by heart but others are relatively unknown and it's hard to recall during the battle who they are and what their stats are. Making a list is not very helpful because inside the battle you can't see the generals name! You can't even do this prebattle, once the screen comes up telling you a battle is coming you can't see the guy's stats. So at the end of the battle you have to guess, do I release or execute the prisoners? Do I occupy or sack the city? not knowing if this will ruin your general's chivalry/dread.

Does anyone know which might be the main trigger causing Winning First to appear after virtually every battle?

[Hound of Culann]

I also prefer chivalry over dread, but have noticed that dread is much easier to increase (partly because of the above). And my generals too very often get this trait although i wouldn't want it.
I too would want to know if there is any simple ways of avoiding this? And also is there any other relatively ways to increase chivalry besides the ones already said? It would compensate the WF

[Hermes Trismegistos]

For the first trigger you posted, there is a counterpart:

Trigger battle3_Chivalry_fighting
WhenToTest PostBattle
Condition GeneralNumKillsInBattle > 8
and not Trait BattleDread > 0
Affects BattleChivalry 1 Chance 50

So there is basically a 50/50 chance of either getting basic dread or chivalry if you let your general get involved in battle if he hasn't already one of these traits.
There are many cases where you can get dread or chivalry affected through the same act (routing for eyample), depending on whether you already have basic dread or chivalry.

But somehow I have the same feeling like you that chivalry is harder to get - mostly because you get it for things I would regard as stupid.. like getting routing enemies away.

As for what's better I would prefer dread, because it has much more impact on the battlefield - chivalry is more useful for govenors though, it's really the question which function of your generals you regard as more important.

[caralampio]

Chivalry has some actual practical use, to make cities grow. In battles I can win with any one-star dolt as commander (because it is really me who is in command). I have really never noticed any big difference when the generals have high dread or high chivalry or high command. I know supposedly chivalry improves your side's morale, dread decreases the enemy's morale, and no one has satisfactorily explained what command stars do. But the difference is subtle and hard to measure.

[Hermes Trismegistos]

When you really use your general in battle you can see the difference - when you attack the morale dropping of enemies is instantly noticable - often you can rout enemies very quickly (OK a cavalry attack at the right place and time can always have huge impact but still it is much easier to cause a chain reaction).

Also I see a huge impact of command stars - I always notice that when I have fought many battles with my best general and then one without general that it doesn't work as I'm used to and battles I would otherwise consider a joke are much harder.

I believe the command stars really only affect morale, but since morale seems to affect most of the fighting stats in the game the whole performance of your troops becomes much better.

[Ozzmosis]

Dread definitely works. As Mordor, I had just conquered Dol Amroth as part of an invasion, but Gondor still had lots of armies about. I saw that there was a general, alone, in my lands, so I sent the witchking out, alone, to get him. I killed him, but then I had no movement points left so I ended the turn. That turn, a 3/4 stack of mostly militia infantry attacked WK and he had nowhere to go! I fought the battle, and not one enemy escaped! every time I charged into a unit, about 3/4 of them died and the rest always routed. It worked even better when I used his special ability. But I kept picking off each enemy one by one, and by the end, 68 morgul knights defeated c.1300 gondor militia swordsmen and gained 6 exp!!

[caralampio]

Perhaps I'm too administrative-oriented . I suppose that the epithets turn me off too, I don't like my favorite general to be called "the Merciless Mauler"... I'll stop worrying, do as I want, and let the traits fall as they may.

[Disco_Stu]

maybe its just me roleplaying, but i always have the roman legion mentality in mind... in that if i want to make a field army, i'll take a general of my choosing and make him a balanced full stack.... from that point forward that stack is "his army" and i don't transfer any units away, only retrain or add reinforcements... anyways i find that in their first pitched battle together i typically take heavy losses... but then in every battle theirafter they generally take stastically much less casualities... i like to think of of this as the cowards die out and whats left is a cohesieve hardened army that fights for each other and their general... like the roman legions did... this general typically gains alot of command stars from that point foward till his death............ my point with all this is i think that command stars mean less casualties and more morall for the troops bascilly... sry for the long-windedness

[caralampio]

I never said command stars aren't useful, just that the way they work hasn't really been explained (to my knowledge).