Generals & corruption

[Nelduin]

Hello everyone

I'm currently playing a campaign with Roma, and I've noticed something that I don't understand.

Very often, when I put a governor in a settlement there is a lot of corruption and there isn't any trait explaining that.

For example, I put a general as governor in Asculum:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

As you can see, I have good income when there is no general in the settlement:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And when I put a governor:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Nevertheless he don't have any trait explaining that, and that's the same with 3/4 of my family member





Does someone has an explanation ?

[Maurits]

Roman Leadership System, check the Feature Highlight

[Nelduin]

Roman Leadership System, check the Feature Highlight

I read it several time but it seems I didn't understand it very well .

If I'm right, by default the generals aren't able to lead a settlement or an army, except if they have appointments.

There is a lot of corruption because this general doesn't have any of it, right ?

[Latin Knight]

I read it several time but it seems I didn't understand it very well .

If I'm right, by default the generals aren't able to lead a settlement or an army, except if they have appointments.

There is a lot of corruption because this general doesn't have any of it, right ?

Yes, that's about it. He is incapable of governing a settlement because he lacks a public office (in case, he is ineligible). Remember, in the Roman context, that makes a lot of sense. A mere privatus could not rule a region by himself, without the status of Praetor, a promagistracy or anything similar. The same could be said about leading the armies.

[Nelduin]

Ok, thanks for the answers. I just understood how that sytem works. Thanks for the time and +Rep you both.

[Maurits]

Thanks! Once you get into the system I'm sure that it will add lots of fun to the game

[Nelduin]

Thanks! Once you get into the system I'm sure that it will add lots of fun to the game

Totally right, it's very immersive .

[Mr Mike]

I have a similar question....

I'm brand new to the mod, and this a system and am quite confused, but I'm slowly learning. My question at the moment is this...

Ive had 1 FM come of age, looked promising, sent him to Rome to acquire an eligibility (not sure if that was even correct. Anyway, next turn he lost his eligibility for all ranks. 3 questions:

1. Was sending him to Rome the wrong move?
2. Did he lose his eligibility for all ranks because I ended the turn with him outside of a settlement?
3. Is he basically useless now?

Same thing happened with a "man of the hour".

In other words, what do I do with the "new nobility"?

I apologize if this is a silly question.

[Nelduin]

I have a similar question....

I'm brand new to the mod, and this a system and am quite confused, but I'm slowly learning. My question at the moment is this...

Ive had 1 FM come of age, looked promising, sent him to Rome to acquire an eligibility (not sure if that was even correct. Anyway, next turn he lost his eligibility for all ranks. 3 questions:

1. Was sending him to Rome the wrong move?
2. Did he lose his eligibility for all ranks because I ended the turn with him outside of a settlement?
3. Is he basically useless now?

Same thing happened with a "man of the hour".

In other words, what do I do with the "new nobility"?

I apologize if this is a silly question.

To conserve his "eligibility", a general must end the turn in a friendly settlement. So if it took several turns to make him arrive in Rome, and if you didn't do it step by step (settlement by settlement) he may lose his eligibility trait.

If I'm right, sending a general in Rome is just to make him obtain an appointments, if he is already eligible.

So, I think:

1. No, it was right
2. Yes
3. Yes, too

I lose several battles while I had the advantage just because I use a young general without any appointment to lead the army. They are not only useless, they are dangerous .

I advice to do with a "Man of the Hour" the same as with a "Coming of Age" general. Send him to Rome and wait he become eligible and obtain appointments.

If you want to know how many year a general must wait before being eligible, see this thread.

Hope it help .

[gdpsnake]

I get that a 'leader' cannot govern a settlement without a title but he should be able to 'move' into a settlement without damaging the economy - he's just another 'troop' unless he has an office so shouldn't "leader" units not have ANY effect on a settlement UNLESS he holds an office?

[Muizer]

I get that a 'leader' cannot govern a settlement without a title but he should be able to 'move' into a settlement without damaging the economy - he's just another 'troop' unless he has an office so shouldn't "leader" units not have ANY effect on a settlement UNLESS he holds an office?

Ideally, yes, but that would require us to create a trait system that tracks for each FM the native score on all attributes involved, and exactly cancelling it out. It can be done, I think, but it's a pretty nightmarish exercise to account for all possible permutations. I'm not sure it's worth the effort.