What happened to characters having character?

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

This is something I've missed since M2TW.

For Empire and Napoleon, the Traits and retainers were severly lacking, to the point where I didn't care about characters at all.

But, Shogun 2 sort of helped that, with the RPG system. Losing a high level general is actually a problem, now.

However, it has it's own issues. Now, all my generals just feel so.... Robotic. They're all exactly the same.

So, what I think would be best, is keeping the RPG system as it is, but not counting them as traits. Instead, there should be far, far, far more traits and retainers to gain simply from playing, rather than choosing. I don't want to be able to decide my characters' personalities.


So, basically, a mix between how it was in Rome and M2TW, and the new RPG system.

This is probably the thing I miss the most from the old games, and I really hope CA does something good with it. I have faith, though, espcially since they talk of making the game more about characters, even giving Legions their own traits.

[Tim_Ward]

I reckon the problem with the RPG system in Shogun 2 - which is an improvement over previous games, don't get me wrong - was that the only generals that were really distinct characters were high level ones who'd had plenty of time to branch out into different skill sets. It takes a lot of time to get a high level general and lower level ones just have a very limited set of traits to choose from. Lower level generals, which are what you have most of the time, pretty much are the same. The other problem was that skills were mostly but not always just stat bonuses. +5 to replenishment is all well and good, useful even, but it's not something you'd really notice.

So there really needs to be a lot more skill trees for characters to progress down. But we don't want a bewildering variety of skill sets on the level up screen. Therefore, the traits and retainers a character starts with or gains through their actions on the game map should unlock skill trees.

For example, a general fights a number of siege battles, he gains a 'Siege Expert' trait - he then levels up and puts points into siege warfare skills he should gain access to skills which are useful in a siege and possibly access to some of the cooler siege machines - though that should really be dependent on possession of some kind of engineer retainer.

The more obscure/controversial units like flaming pigs could also be made available based on skills: an anti-elephant tactics tree being available to generals who have faced elephants in battle, and flaming pigs being one of the skills available on it - others being perhaps the ability to do that thing the romans did where they opened up allys in the ranks a let the elephants pass through.

Where possible, some of skills should give something more than just stat bonuses that you won't even notice but rather something that adds a new gameplay mechanic for the player to employ.

The whole system should also be intertwined with the factions political system and faction events. Like, a character needs a certain skillset to initiate the 'Marian' reforms, and the skills and traits a character has should influence their political career: generals with reputations reputations for leading from the front should do better in the senate: Roman's loved that .

[Orlorin]

I would like to see a combination of M2tw and S2. Essentially more random and interesting traits than shogun, but with an intuitive skill tree influenced by thier personality and family history. This way we still have the beloved bastard that is a lewd womaniser who is only tolerated for his shrewd tactics.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I like that idea.

Although, I do think it's a bit complex, and it would sort of lock out some skills for certain generals. I suppose that's realistic, though.

[Altimis]

However, it has it's own issues. Now, all my generals just feel so.... Robotic. They're all exactly the same.

I already put that into "Don't want to see in ROME 2" wishlist

Aha! finally someone agreed the same thing I saw from Shogun 2...

I end up had 4 generals have the same skill tree which is ...... looks weird because in reality life you will never meet the exactly same person, same IQ, same personality, same character etc.

Even RPG games, each character have different skill and unique appearance.

I like the old way better, when I'm much excited when someone born with legendary stats or some kind of that.

That's look more life

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

Yes, exactly!

I want special, great generals to be just that. Special. I mean, not everyone is cut out to be a great general, so I shoudn't just be able to churn them out like machines.

[Erwin Rommel]

They're all exactly the same.

. looks weird because in reality life you will never meet the exactly same person, same IQ, same personality, same character etc.

I have Date Teremune as an intimidating general in the skill tree, while I have Shiroishi Shigenubo as all melee bonus and charge bonus in his cavalry bodyguard, which can survive extended melee encounters, unlike Teremune. Teremune of course sports the crescent moon maedate in his kabuto (which should be for Masamune), while Shiroishi is shown wearing a suji-bachi kabuto.

I end up had 4 generals have the same skill tree which is

Then dont use the same old skill tree route? Get an admiral, get an ambusher, get a night fighter, get a tea sipping bastard that makes you gain bonus in chi research rates.

Yes traits are lacking then again, this is one of the shortest time period for a TW game unlike Rome and M2 which can have dozens of generations of inbreds, psychotics and other deviancy decorating your 2 hundred year old family tree. In S2, you'd be lucky if you have the grandson of Teremune become daimyo. Unless you like sending your daimyo to yari wielding enemies.

[Spajjder]

Yes traits are lacking then again, this is one of the shortest time period for a TW game unlike Rome and M2 which can have dozens of generations of inbreds, psychotics and other deviancy decorating your 2 hundred year old family tree. In S2, you'd be lucky if you have the grandson of Teremune become daimyo. Unless you like sending your daimyo to yari wielding enemies.

Actually this is quite interesting... how will we have time to level them up if theyre just in the game for maybe a 5th or less of the game instead of almost the whole game like in shogun 2

[Stath's]

Traits and Retainers are needed. The more the merrier. Their numberr has to be high. You have to control "characters", not build characters. It's more realistic and more hard and interesting this way. I agree with what is said here and hope CA will understand this.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I just realised that I misspelled "characters."

Twice.

In two different ways.

I should just not make threads anymore...

[Love Mountain]

THIS! So much THIS!

I'm so happy I'm not the only one who noticed that ever since Empire characters have lost all character. I loved the extensive trait system they had in RTW,MTWII. It added so much to the role-play... Especially in Roma Surrectum where you had entire systems of traits built into the engine. It was absolutely exhilarating to play. I felt like I was writing a novel. I felt like I could write a novel on my campaign if I wanted to. So sad that the current trait system is so extremely lacking. It makes me a sad sad panda.

[Kahvipannu]

THIS! So much THIS!

I'm so happy I'm not the only one who noticed that ever since Empire characters have lost all character. I loved the extensive trait system they had in RTW,MTWII. It added so much to the role-play... Especially in Roma Surrectum where you had entire systems of traits built into the engine. It was absolutely exhilarating to play. I felt like I was writing a novel. I felt like I could write a novel on my campaign if I wanted to. So sad that the current trait system is so extremely lacking. It makes me a sad sad panda.

^ This.

[universalmind]

THIS! So much THIS!

I'm so happy I'm not the only one who noticed that ever since Empire characters have lost all character. I loved the extensive trait system they had in RTW,MTWII. It added so much to the role-play... Especially in Roma Surrectum where you had entire systems of traits built into the engine. It was absolutely exhilarating to play. I felt like I was writing a novel. I felt like I could write a novel on my campaign if I wanted to. So sad that the current trait system is so extremely lacking. It makes me a sad sad panda.

I totally agree. Playing Shogun 2, I kept hearing about how the characters would be so much deeper, but I always thought I was missing something.

[Wowwars]

Hell yeah Roma Serrectum 2 had some pretty epic campaigns My Invincable Hannibal United the people of the anicent World.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I really like making AAR's (Even if I never actually write them down) because I find it's a really good exercise to learn how to write better.


It's, more or less, improvised writing. I don't know how to story's going to turn out, or what the characters are going to be like, or who the hero is. So I have to stay on my toes, and be ready for anything.

And, to a degree, I still have that with the newer games. But I have to make up way more of the experience, and I guess that just sort of ruins it for me. I can have a wise, peaceful daimyo. If I make him wise and peaceful. But he'll never just get that way on his own.

[alexanderswift]

I'd love to see an RPG system with... More options. In Shogun 2 a good amount of the traits were worthless and so it got very same-y. Having considerable more options with more variety and usefulness between them might be better off, I prefer having control to the random traits personally. Maybe because I like to meta game a bit but getting really unlucky with a ruler was always lame as hell.

[Kahvipannu]

but getting really unlucky with a ruler was always lame as hell.

To me it was total opposite, the random element gives so much more "life" to the game. Rulers were sometimes crazy or lazy, it's part of fun for me. If I could "build" my king, it would just feel so... gimmicky. To me roleplaying isn't about assigning points to characters or something like that, it's believable characters.

I really do hope CA keeps theyr word of the "more human" part with Rome II

[AzureNight]

Shogun 2 didn't fix it at all, all of the generals in every campaign felt exactly the same. Not sure why they completely dumbed down the awesome character trait system in Medieval 2 and Rome; it doesn't even make sense from the standpoint of appealing to the mystical casual masses who hate realism and only play multiplayer.

[-FrOzeN-]

This is one of the main reasons that I play Rome and Medieval 2 and not Shogun 2. In Shogun 2 the generals feels boring, they are only just another general. In Rome you could have that incredible general whose name actually meant something for you, when he died you could feel a bit empty or even sad. In Shogun 2 my reaction when a great general dies is: "damn, now I have to make another one". That is not how it should be!
They should add random traits again, and expand on the skill tree.

Another thing that buggers me (as I wrote in another post) is that you choose what the general will be good at. What should happen instead is that he should get better at what he is doing. For example: a general that does a lot of ambushes should get better at...you guessed it; ambushes! Not battles in open plains

Roleplaying (for me) is not making a general with the best stats, but to follow a "person" throughout his career and life. And to see him ultimately become the best general, or just a great governor.
There is a reason that the Luke is a more interesting character than Stormtrooper number x in Star Wars.(Yes, I just referred to Star Wars)

[Anna_Gein]

I think the terrible mistake of Shogun 2 come from the confusion between between levelling and RPG.
The game tried to increase the Role-playing element by allowing your characters to become better on certain area by levelling. By the mean time the game completely failed to provide a convincing system by limiting the maximum level of character and so providing few choice of customisation. The final blow came from the tree of skill who forced every choice of the player if he want to to obtain some specific skill like siege and let's be honest to maximize the XP.
So we end up with a system where a general couldn't be an honourable lord and a famous warrior, or a expert siege commander and a fearful leader (even if he razed enemy city all the time).
And if you ever find yourself using most of your time your artificially created field commander on siege while your designated siege commander was protecting your state on great field battle damn you ! Because none of them would get better at what they are actually doing.


Some place of learning were famous during Ancient Times : Athens, Alexandria, Pergamon ... Wouldn't it be sad to not use it.
So to begin I propose a system of School. Rome TW already had one by the past. So you had to construct academy in your town and upgrade it.To improve it character could now be send to an academy during their young age. That would avoid the need to create schools at every corner of your empire. We could also had different kind of education to offer some choice to the player. With maybe the highest level of school able to provide an education on different matter for each character but again with a primary subject and secondary subject.
To make things more interesting and more dynamic we could also change how academy would work. So school building would cost you money to maintain but the more you spend money on one of them the better teacher you get. Those teacher would then be recruitable the same way generals were in Napoleon TW And education would be provided by those teacher instead of the building itself. The teacher wouldn't cost you money as you already pay them via the building. Maybe we could add a small bonus for the most attractive academy to show their importance.

We could also add some change to reflect the dynamic of the career. Alexander was already in charge at Chaeronea (338 BC) under his father commandment. Scipio Africanus, Marius, Sulla and most famous Romans generals acted as officer under commandment of older general. Why not use something similar to offer skill to your character after their education in academy or as a different way to end their education. So they would act as part of a character retinue just like a general would get an officer or a governor would get an assistant. The character put in retinue would then gain trait base on his action and his interaction with the character he serve. He doesn't need to gain the same trait of his master but could as well gain opposed trait. And an skilled servant could provide help to his master. Depending on the maximum unit number per stack officer could act as small bodyguard unit with restricted ability or simply appear in the general's unit.
The character could pursue his role of "servant" after his education ended but could then be use for more important task.

Finally the good old system could use some simply improvement. First it has always been painful to find all trait of one character as the screen where you find it has always been too small. In Rome TW the only way to look at it on full screen was right before a battle and maybe (but I am really not sure) in a fort. That shouldn't be difficult to correct. I suppose other small fix could be done for others little but annoying issue.