Starting characters

[Quinn Inuit]

Since there is a reasoned difference of opinion on this, I'd like to hear what our users think.

Should starting characters begin with a 2 points each in command and management, or should they start at nothing?

Here's my argument in favor of the change:
Right now, people start at 0 in both traits. However, the game labels the first few ranks of each trait as being for pretty incompetent people, and it seems weird that a perfectly intelligent person would, even after earning "Good Commander," still only be at 2 stars.

They also frequently get negative traits in the first couple of years. Starting characters at 2 would allow for these traits to have an immediate impact, instead of only kicking in when the character would otherwise have gained a bonus. This would create more variety in your named characters almost immediately.

Finally, it would create an immediate incentive to use a named character to lead armies or manage cities (unless they'd accumulated a _lot_ of negative traits immediately).


Here's Carados's argument against the change:

I'm still of the opinion we shouldn't bump the stat trio up

It's not as if that one person has absolute control of everything, there will no doubt be other people who advise on/carry out orders so there is a limit to how bad the actual performance is - not all of these workers will carry out stupid tasks.

There are also other factors:

Morale, tax, cost modifiers, public order, health, farming, law. The list goes on. Command, Management and Influence are just generalised traits but are in no way total in their portrayal of the actual skill and ability the character has. A character might actually be terrible at commanding armies effectively, but he is such a likeable, loved and fair leader that the people would fight to the death for him. 0 command perhaps, but +3 morale.

A character could be pretty bad at handling money in general but he is very good at making sure the right personal work in the right job. He might also be very good at propaganda and thus this character might have 2 management points, but makes up for it by reducing construction costs by 10% and recruitment cost by 20%, reflecting the effective targetting of the work force and the reduced cost of trying to hire people for war.

{Carados, if you'd like to submit something else there, post it or PM me and I'll swap 'em out. I thought this post was well-stated, though, so I figured I'd use it.}

[Carados]

I'd also like to add that it would be a little more work for us if it's a yes

Plus... do we want millions of 10-star generals?
Not to mention, the amount of red tape that the governors will leave behind will mean I'll be forced to impose a waste tax on everyone, hahah

[Quinn Inuit]

Not too much extra work--I was just going to tack it onto the Unit Size trait that everyone already gets.

I think the potential for millions of 10 stars running around may be the biggest downside. I'm a little worried about that, too.

I like the waste tax idea. Rome certainly got more wasteful as it got larger. How would we implement it fairly?

[Caesar Augustus]

Quinn you could probably implement it in the same way as the Large Empire Tax in FOE. Though I don't know how that works.

I'm intrigued by the unit size trait?

Something would need to be done about the 10 star generals. What about +1 command, +2 mangement and +2 influence, or no initial command level?

[pannonian]

Quinn you could probably implement it in the same way as the Large Empire Tax in FOE. Though I don't know how that works.

Q for Quinn: is it possible to have 2 lines of buildings, mutually exclusive after a certain point, one representing tax gathering and another representing trade? The tax buildings gives a bonus to tax income, at the cost of a trade hit (neg bonus), while the trade buildings increase trade at a cost of a tax hit. This may lead to discrepancies in the income scroll as there's supposedly a bug in how negative bonuses are shown, and human players are better able to exploit the specialisation of settlements, but it would also factor in greater inefficiencies with larger settlements and give the player something else to do.

[Quinn Inuit]

Maybe. Would people like that as an option?

The unit_size trait is what runs the Camp Captured script. Every single named character has to have it, but it's hidden, so it doesn't show up in the list. So, if you want to add something to every character easily and not necessarily show people, you just tack it onto that trait. Right now, it only acts as a control for the camp capture.

[JaNuZ99]

Maybe. Would people like that as an option?

The unit_size trait is what runs the Camp Captured script. Every single named character has to have it, but it's hidden, so it doesn't show up in the list. So, if you want to add something to every character easily and not necessarily show people, you just tack it onto that trait. Right now, it only acts as a control for the camp capture.

I know a big fail on my part, but i'm under the impression that foe lags old computers a lot (mine is a 9 year old intel celeron) so i haven't played FOE at all, so what exactly is the large empire tax? well i can guess what it is ,but how does it work?

as for the command +1, management or influence as +2, that sounds just fine, after all some commanders are probably going to be complete idiots but maybe better in other areas such as money management or just knowing how to play the political scene.

[Quinn Inuit]

Wow, and I thought my four-year-old machine was old.

FOE is more graphics-intensive than the ExRM, true. We're using a lot of their graphics for the next ExRM version, just so you know.

AFAIK, the LET works by reducing income based on the number of provinces you control. I haven't looked at the script lately.

[JaNuZ99]

Wow, and I thought my four-year-old machine was old.

FOE is more graphics-intensive than the ExRM, true. We're using a lot of their graphics for the next ExRM version, just so you know.

Well I am planning on building an up to date AMD rig , prob is I'm 15 , its roughly $800 total for all the parts and finding a part time job in Florida is not easy right now, not even publix is hiring!

[Carados]

Hmmm.

Influence. I wouldn't be at all comfortable giving characters any "starting" influence points at all. Command and management are, in my opinion, just bearable. But not influence - it's just too powerful.

[Caesar Augustus]

Good point Carados. Though in a way it could be kind if accurate, if influence wasn't so important. If there was some kind of system where you could show the difference between the older, established families and the comparative new men then influence would be a decider when it comes to political office etc, but alas I doubt the engine could handle that.

Also, first post on my new laptop! Hooray for wireless internets!

[Juan_de_Marco]

Noo no no no no, please no! No free starting command or management, I like the game as it is, it looks clean as is, and it is up to the player by careful management to make Scipio a command-hero, or into something else. This mod should not force you down a certain path too much, there should still be room for your own interpretation after the logical and time-frame-accurate happenings: It be a variation of history, not an exact replayment of history.

edit: so please no, or make it optional (so I can switch it off thanks! )

[GraaEminense]

I agree that people important enough to be named characters shouldn't really start off at zero, but on the other hand it seems that a +2 command +2 management bonus would mean that even true incompetents could get decent stats with a bit of luck and the right sidekicks.

+1/+1 seems reasonable though.

[Juan_de_Marco]

Allright, +1 seems reasonable enough (there were standing out in the crowd enough to be promoted anyway). I was just tossing my nickle on the discussion there.

[Caesar Augustus]

It's always worth contributing man. Never hurts to add your two cents to any discussion. Even if you turn out to be wrong alot of the time (generally that seems to be my role in the discussions here )

[Carados]

Yup.

I still think it's a bad idea. But I'll be sure to come up with some interesting traits - perhaps with the help of CC. I'm adamant in making 10 star generals a thing of the past

[Caligula Caesar]

Starting at +2 would make a lot of sense, actually. Then the evil b*** traits can actually take effect, because he won't be in negatives. Whereas someone who is fairly average but not bad will not be incompetant. However, it would need adjustment from the current system, ie cutting the chances of gains in traits by about a quarter and adding the the chances of negative traits by a bit as well.

The LET is pretty simple, actually. You add something this to a building found in every region (eg the Town Square) after the capabilities section:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

faction_capability
{
trade_base_income_bonus bonus -1
taxable_income_bonus bonus -1
}

The values can, of course, be adjusted, however, this subtracts one from the bonus income per province you own, so you have to make sure there is always a positive net number (so you have to give a big bonus of around 200 somewhere and then increase costs).

I'm not sure how much the effect is, but together with other FoE/VII mechanisms, it certainly works

(btw, this is also how you get such big empire-wide bonuses from your capital and your empire basically collapses if you lose it in FoE)

[JaNuZ99]

(btw, this is also how you get such big empire-wide bonuses from your capital and your empire basically collapses if you lose it in FoE)

i know big fail, just started playing FOE, due to previously stated problem with my computer and lag but anyways

1. thanks for the tip , I'll keep that in mind
2. "Not My Empire! anything but that!"

3 on a completely random train of thought, I've found that sometimes i just can't deal with certain generals who just flat out SUCK!

I end up implementing the old rat on a boat solution from vanilla, put the bad general on a boat, and send it to fight pirates till it sinks... but i hate seeing all those unnecessary losses..

can we add as commit suicide option? there must be a way, the senate asked it of us in vanilla!

(and even when i did comply they STILL made me an outlaw, bastards! )

[Caesar Augustus]

I often make particularly unsavoury generals lead "heroic" cavalry charges, it's cheaper than building navies

[JaNuZ99]

I often make particularly unsavoury generals lead "heroic" cavalry charges, it's cheaper than building navies

I try that, but the coward seems to run right beefore he can die "heroically"