Actually generals being weak units is a new thing that came with the warscape engine, back in rtw and m2 generals bodyguards were usually the best cavalry you could get, and the 2hp made them incredibly tough, and resilient.
Actually generals being weak units is a new thing that came with the warscape engine, back in rtw and m2 generals bodyguards were usually the best cavalry you could get, and the 2hp made them incredibly tough, and resilient.
Check out my YouTube videos!
I remember in Medieval 1, one time I had the Byzantine Emperor as my opponent and I outnumbered his army, he caused half my army to flee and mauled all the rest badly before going down.
Also Roman Generals did have bodyguards or an analogue unit. In the Early and Mid Republic it was made up of allies and was called the Equites Extraordinarii for horse, and Pedites Extraordinarii for foot. Providing the generals guards, holding the position of honour in the camp near the generals tent, would lead the army on the march and would be at the generals immediate disposal on the battlefield.
In the late Republic this role was taken up by the Praetorians, probably because after the Social War the allies all became citizens and so served in the legions rather than in seperate units.
In the Empire the Imperial family had the German Guards, the Praetorians and the Speculatores, where the provincial governors could create the before mentioned Singulares from Auxiliary or Legionary units.
Considering my General tends to be the only cavalry unit in my army at any given time... and if they suddenly became 'offscreen' characters, that took no part in battle, I feel like we'd lose a big part of the game. This is after all the era of fighting when generals weren't all sitting back at cap, drinking wine and laughing, as their soldiers did all the dieing.
Which isn't to say some didn't do that, but I always figured in Total War, we imagine our generals are not cowardly people hiding in their tent.
I agree I never really liked bodyguards, unless it was the faction's leader. Instead you should be able to assign generals to be the commander of units like in real war. If it was a siege defense you would probably have your lead general in the best infantry cohort. or an assault it could be in the vanguard. While on the field you could attach your general to a light cavalry unit to be mobile.
Give a man a fish you feed him for a day, teach a man to fish you feed him for a lifetime.
cant read?
They would be in the battle still- only instead of special BG units they would be attached with perhaps 2-3 officers to another unit. So if you attach to a 46 size cavalry unit, that unit becomes 50 (or 52 with a couple ancillaries) and the new BG with radius extending from it etc. In the next battle you attach that general to a 150 infantry unit which becomes 154 in size and the new BG. Perhaps depending on what type of unit you attach general to the inspire ability becomes more or less effective which would be interesting I think.
Later techs or buildings might unlock units like Praetorians which offer better radius of command or improved inspire ability as well slightly better stats when general is attached.
Barbarians or some factions on the other hand might retain the older TW style of BG unit being strong individual units but trade smaller radius of command and less inspire abilities for that advantage.
STAINLESS STEEL Historical Improvement Project (SSHIP) - v0.8.2 Beta released!
Recent AARs/Guides
Norway 180 turn SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...71#post8479471
Lithuania SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369607
1390 SS submod WIP
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=479539
if CA abandon unit recruitment to adopt army recruitment then have the general using one the units as bodyguard