Mercenary loyalty

**Beiss** · August 09, 2006, 02:56 PM

Isn't it weird how in RTW, mercenaries are always 100% loyal, and they can't be bribed to another faction's side unless the whole "army" is bribed? I mean, mercenaries are mercenaries, they should be more susceptible to switching sides to whoever pays better... I think M2TW should have this in mind. This would make it more difficult to conquer the world using mercenaries only, and that's a good thing.

Also, I liked the event in the Heroes (of might & magic) series where you would run into small armies in the wild who would sometimes, instead of fight you, join you and your glorious cause. Take rebels for example. If you try to conquer a settlement, maybe if the people in the settlement are deeply unhappy with their current ruler, or there are already rebels on the map who you can convince to join you if you try to conquer the settlement. If the enemy attacks your settlement, they can use any rebels in your settlement for the same thing. It feels like, in medieval times, people weren't exactly patriotic. There were people, and then there were rulers. The king was not always a leader of his people, but often just a guy who decided he wanted to be powerful and so took some poor farmers to rule over.

Also, I think the campaign map should distinguish "rebels" from "bandits" or "raiders", etc. "Rebels" likely want to take a settlement from an opressor, while bandits or raiders, etc. just want a fight and some money.

Well, those are just my opinions. Thoughts?

**Barbarian-Bob** · August 09, 2006, 03:12 PM

Hmm... I think that would be pretty cool if you could team up with local "gerilja forces" or renegades who are unhappy with the current regime/King whatever. You don't necessarily join your army as such, but rather show up on the battle map as allies. Perhaps they have to be persuaded with gold, or maybe they join you out of free will, in hopes that you will be a better ruler.

I've been playing too much cold-war games.

And oh, loyalty is making a comback in MTW2, so we'll probably see disloyal mercenaries.

**Beiss** · August 09, 2006, 03:17 PM

Sweet.

**Destraex** · August 11, 2006, 05:36 AM

yeah, but as long as I have a inspiring general in terms of traits hopefully they will not turn for a while.
Problem with RTW is that you always seemed to pay your mercs on time. a king needs opportunity to waste the mercs pay or have the baggage train witht he pay raided during battle

**zeno** · August 14, 2006, 02:00 AM

That would be damn cool. Open up yet more playing possibilities and keep things from getting boring.

**Sitarus Originalus PM-30+** · August 14, 2006, 09:50 AM

it is a good, realistic idea =)

**Frost, colonel** · August 14, 2006, 11:13 AM

I don't know much precise history regarding mercs during the time period, as to whether they had any honour at all, or the purse ruled all!

There were often captains in charge of merc bands who became quite famous. Perphaps some mercs could be in groups/several units and have leaders that develop traits? Perphaps you could offer them marrige into your faction? Infact Rome is so nearly there already with the pop-up rebels who have leaders. Ones that seem reputable could cost more, and could you trust merc bands in your cities, etc?

Historically Longbowmen became well sort after mercs, after the battle winning reputation they garnished off the French, it would certanly be nice to see bands of these available for hire in Europe particulary.

There were bands of mercs in the Italian city state wars which were not to keen to heavily engage, but who instead conspired to keep things ticking over, and so keeping the pay coming.

**Ragss** · August 15, 2006, 03:04 AM

Depends on the unit. I'm sure, for instance, Varangian Guards or Swiss mercs would be extremely loyal to whomever they were employed.

Didn't Hannibal have a mostly mercenary army? I don't think there was a big problem with backstabbing mercenaries.

**John I Tzimisces** · August 20, 2006, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by Ragss

Depends on the unit. I'm sure, for instance, Varangian Guards or Swiss mercs would be extremely loyal to whomever they were employed.

Didn't Hannibal have a mostly mercenary army? I don't think there was a big problem with backstabbing mercenaries.

Yes, Hannibal had a mostly mercenary army, but Carthage Did have a mercenary revolt at one point in its history, resulting in the loss of corsica or sardinia...one of those islands.

**Archaon** · August 15, 2006, 03:17 AM

actually logically thinking about it (and i'll keep the vagueness to a min) it is possible to do it in BI. it is possible to recruit units into the family members so they can gain traits then is it then possible to hire mercs into the family too? make so that a merc come with the 'merc' trait that makes his layalty very low and this will make this unit goin the shadowing faction in a few turns... anti traits and the like could be obtained quickly to stop this fom happening too.
also to stop their being too many family members around as governers make the 'merc' trait give negative management points (this can also be reversable in time)

i might go home and play with this idea a bit and see what i come up with...

SLK

**The Lord Of Dance** · August 20, 2006, 06:13 PM

Well technically the Modern US Army is a mercenary army, and its loyalty is not a question.

But as far as the medieval age goes, Mercenaries should definetly not be 100% loyal, their origin, culture and the province they hail from should affect their loyalty to your faction. I dont think this would be hard for CA to do. Mercenaries should also not fight to the death, they should have alot of experience and good weapons, but be prone to withdraw(not rout) more easily than your national troops. Oh, and get rid of the green color on all mercs from RTW it was appaling to see.

I think rebels should always consider joining your force, especially if it outnumbers them. But this should depend on your individual commanders command, dread, and religion.