Return of Character Traits in Rome II

[RagingBulblax]

Hello, this is my first post here, and I hope that it's not too redundant, but I couldn't find much else related using the search feature, so I hope that it's relevant.

I have played only three games of the Total War series, Rome, Napoleon, and Shogun 2. I have to say that out of those three, Rome is my favorite, and I have played it for many more hours than the others. There are a variety of reasons, particularly the setting and scale, which are both epic in my opinion.

One glaring difference between Rome and Shogun 2, is the character traits that the generals and agents can get in Rome. I think that it's a lot more immersive and interesting to have the traits appear semi-randomly, based on what's happened to the character, rather than picking them out of skill tree. Same goes with the retainers vs. retinue thing. Its cool to see what happens to people, and have them "have a life" outside of the player's direct control, and try to piece together or fill in the gaps of the story of how a general got that Egyptian Turncoat, and the general's relationship with them, and how they interact with other troops in the camp, etc. I took particular amusement, as much as laughing heartily out loud, when I saw that my badass Seleucid general, Abydos the Conqueror, was "Aggressively Perverse", and imagining him going around the tents in his camp, satisfying his whims, hehehe. Its cool to imagine how he became as such, and how that plays into the relationship he has with his troops and governed citizens, and how it actually gives him that influence penalty. In Shogun 2, picking from a standard list of skills, and choosing the retainers, feels a lot less immersive and a lot less interesting. I hope that the system in Rome II more closely resembles that of Rome, for the sake of entertainment, as this is a big part of enjoyment of the game for me, and, I'd imagine, for others. How do you all feel about this?

[Birk]

I prefer traits myself. When you've skill tree you choose the same most of the time and you always following the same linear progress every single time it gets monotonous very quickly. With traits i feel most of generals are unique, and with traits your favorite general can get negative or good traits, which can make a huge impact in game and you may have to change your plans. It add more realism, it's a lot more interesting and it adds depth to the gameplay. I also miss the bloodline system from Medieval 2. I'm not really into role-playing, but when you've have traits and bloodline. You really try to make you're family survive and you're always trying to make the best generals. It's always a big loss when you lose your best general, therefore you always have to look for a well fitted bride for your family and you really try to keep your general alive, so you can ensure the next generation have good traits. I feel like that I'm much more attached to my generals when I've trait system. In Shogun 2 i don't really care if my general die because i can make a copy in a few rounds later, with traits system you can't do that because generals are unique and you've to breed an elite or be really lucky.

[ElfCommander]

I have no choice except to agree. The traits are so much better than the picked skills. Just like with the bloodline (although I prefer to keep the line clean and 'adoption into the family' should be 'promotion to general') it adds flavour to the characters.

[Marbar]

agreed, in R1 and MTW2 there were some great character traits and I hope they make a return. What I liked about them the most was how random traits were, you never knew if your general was going to be a great commander or a weakling, and it affected where you sent your generals.

[Marmz]

I agree! They'll probably keep some form of skill tree, which is not entirely bad in itself, but I really hope traits have much more emphasis in Rome II.

Skill tree should more or less relate to what kind of training your general/agent has (so an Academy of some kind giving your generals +2 skill points or whatever would make sense).
Skills such as "cavalry commander", "naval" commander" or "logistics" make sense, and help orient certain generals to certain play styles at the player's command.

However, "skills" such as "honourable" and "inspirational" don't belong in a skill tree in my opinion; such traits rightly belong in ...well, "Traits"!
I really liked how traits were a mix of genetics, actions done and a little bit of "luck".
I sorely miss those, and the very few present in Shogun 2 were totally underwhelming.

[Clone1710]

Traits or skill tree?

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

In the latest Games we have both, a skill tree and traits. The problem is that the more unique traits are very rare and the most traits you got are something like "drunkhard" ect. You allways got them if you let your generals stay in a city with the Geisha building... So i never build them because if i needed a Garrison with General, than he would get this traits with -7% Movement. It is really unplausible that every General become a drinker when he sees a liquor store...

I want traits back like beein a lunactic, cowered or Favouror of the Gods, Symbol of Romanship ect.

Besides that, Rome should more Focus on the Persons ingame again. We need a real Familytree again like in Rome and Med2. We need Generals beeing actual Characters with Characteristics based on their Traits and not just random Names with a Skilltree.

Ancient History was allways the history of great man. I know that the modern history is more interested in processes and developmend, but thats the opposite of ancient history.

[Adreno]

yeh it has both already, but sure could use a bunch more traits

[Radzeer]

Full support. Random and semi-random traits make roleplay and AAR writing much more fun.

[Altimis]

Full support. Random and semi-random traits make roleplay and AAR writing much more fun.

This

I want to jaw-droped when I see "Born Conquerer"

[Stath's]

A big Yes!!!

[myaku]

YES. There should be both - traits and skill trees, each detailed, each building off each other.

Wouldn't it be cool if you got a random trait that unlocked a skill tree or something? Nothing too-game changing, say if your general was stuck in frontier town for too long, he could gain an "administrator" type trait which cause him to gain a slow trickle of experience even when not fighting (ie, stuck in a town) and a new "administrative" skill tree opened up that gave progressive bonuses to taxation/build times/build costs whatever the further you went up that tree.

Obviously what I said is riddled with holes, I just came up with the idea in about 2 minutes from reading this thread, but I definitely want a combination of MEANINGFUL traits (none of the +1/-2 "Fecund Wife" stuff from S2 lol) and DIVERSE skill trees.

Also, I'd love it if traits had a more direct impact on the battlefield - a general whose alcoholism has advanced ("always drunk") could lose control and charge the enemy frontline, a valorous general could have his rally radius enhanced, a "strategist" could have his deployment zone/line-of-sight expanded, etc.

[Heathen Storm]

YES. There should be both - traits and skill trees, each detailed, each building off each other.

Wouldn't it be cool if you got a random trait that unlocked a skill tree or something? Nothing too-game changing, say if your general was stuck in frontier town for too long, he could gain an "administrator" type trait which cause him to gain a slow trickle of experience even when not fighting (ie, stuck in a town) and a new "administrative" skill tree opened up that gave progressive bonuses to taxation/build times/build costs whatever the further you went up that tree.

Obviously what I said is riddled with holes, I just came up with the idea in about 2 minutes from reading this thread, but I definitely want a combination of MEANINGFUL traits (none of the +1/-2 "Fecund Wife" stuff from S2 lol) and DIVERSE skill trees.

Also, I'd love it if traits had a more direct impact on the battlefield - a general whose alcoholism has advanced ("always drunk") could lose control and charge the enemy frontline, a valorous general could have his rally radius enhanced, a "strategist" could have his deployment zone/line-of-sight expanded, etc.

THIS!!

[Ivar the Boneless]

Also, I'd love it if traits had a more direct impact on the battlefield - a general whose alcoholism has advanced ("always drunk") could lose control and charge the enemy frontline, a valorous general could have his rally radius enhanced, a "strategist" could have his deployment zone/line-of-sight expanded, etc.

I like that idea.

[ChewieMuse]

I loved the Traits and Retinue that came with my character say after a huge battle of a messed up marrige lol I missed those as well and I really do hope they return to Rome 2, alot of the things in Rome and medieval that they took out I loved, and I dont know why

[Serkelet]

One thing that bothers me about the skill tree system a lot is that the only way to improve your generals is by having battles, even if you want to give him non-combat skills, like "poet". In previous Total War games, generals that acted as city administrators would improve anyways overtime because they had three separated values. In Rome 1, your administrators would improve their Administration value without fighting a single battle, while having no Commanding score whatsoever. I would like in Rome 2 for generals to earn experience by other means, for example by staying in a city with an Academy inside, or something like that.

[ElfCommander]

I don't want to have a skill tree and random traits. Random traits - YES! Skill tree, mwah. Chosen skills and random skills don't mix well together. So, if CA decides the player should have some influence on the traits and retinues of a character, I rather see an option to chose a focus point. Like defensive stratagies for a general, or Ways to kill people for an assassin.
As a nice addition, the abilities of units could be unlocked through those focus points. Of course, once proven successful, the ability becomes a standard option after some years.

[Marbar]

I would only want a skill tree for generals for combat skills, But nothing silly like half way through the tree you get the ability to have your cavalry form a wedge. I want things like radius of influence expanded or general's bodyguard does more damage. And then the rest of the traits are the random ones he picks up.

[Emperor of The Great Unknown]

I hated the skill tree personally. I would rather see branching decisions instead for generals. Like for instance, should I read books on sieges or field battles?, or should I hire a great swordsmen to teach me combat? Then you get greater chances to increase your skill in these areas. Kinda like CK2 with wards and all that.

[Eofor]

I think a mix of the S2 skill tree (hopefully expanded) and the trait and retinue system of M2 would be absolutely grand.