More Mortal Generals? / Wounded soldiers mechanic suggestion

[Fallen Phalangite]

I've noticed since Patch 5 that generals seem to be a lot more mortal than they used to be. In several custom battles I've had them fall within the first few seconds of combat, especially my phalangite generals.

Case in point, during the invasion of Salamis in my Seleucid Campaign, I sent my general (Royal Peltasts) ahead to capture the flag (since the defenders were on the other side of the town, facing away from me ). This prompted the defending slingers to rush over and start firing at me. I decided, in that moment, to leave them where they were to test if slingers were still lethal against armoured troops.

The first hail of stones fell. And then I got this:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

First, and I have to get it out of the way, has anyone else noticed this? This certainly has never happened for me before. I'm guessing it was implemented during patch 5, or it might just be me, though I don't see any reason why that would be the case (no mods).

Now for the main point of my post: is a positive thing to have your generals be more mortal? It would therefore make sense to take better care of your generals; not let them get targeted by missile troops or throw them into the thick of fighting. But on the other hand, if the general is more likely to die in the first few seconds of combat, then that makes them nearly useless in battle, since every time they engage in combat, whether it's against hardened veterans or puny mobs, there's a greater risk of them being killed in battle.

Furthermore, why isn't there a wounded soldiers mechanic in play? It makes sense that not EVERY soldier would be killed in battle. Some might be knocked out from a slinger stone striking their helmets for example, or taking an arrow to the knee. It's not fatal, yet there should be no reason for them to be removed from the unit altogether. Same for generals; just because they fall doesn't mean they're dead. Alexander, as an example, was wounded in battle numerous times. Should generals really be killed just for receiving a papercut?

Personally, I think wounded troop mechanics should be brought back, and applied to generals as well. Or maybe it does and I've never had a general just be wounded in battle. Thoughts?

[krisslanza]

I think individual soldiers can be 'wounded' (though the game counts them as prisoners, I think), but generals are always slain. I don't think any Total War has ever had a general be wounded as a result of "falling" in combat, they always die.

I haven't had my generals die that quickly myself, but I know it's possible as the general unit is at the front. I've had a Roman triarii fall down to around 40 men though and the general was still alive... could just be sheer utter bad luck on your part.

[Fallen Phalangite]

I think individual soldiers can be 'wounded' (though the game counts them as prisoners, I think)

I was thinking along the lines of the original Rome, where troops would fall but some would just be wounded and would return to the unit at the end of the battle. I'm guessing it was removed because of automatic troop replenishment, but it does take away from the immersion of the game.

but generals are always slain. I don't think any Total War has ever had a general be wounded as a result of "falling" in combat, they always die.

In the tutorial your general can be wounded, and you still get the morale hit, but he returns at the end of the battle as always. If your generals can be wounded and returned to the 'family tree' because of agents, the same could apply for generals wounded in battle. It shouldn't be that hard to implement.

I haven't had my generals die that quickly myself, but I know it's possible as the general unit is at the front. I've had a Roman triarii fall down to around 40 men though and the general was still alive... could just be sheer utter bad luck on your part.

That's the way it's always been with me too; the general is usually one of the last men standing. Only been since Patch 5 was installed that I've had generals pulling a Sir Daniel Fortesque on me left and right. Weird.

[Dude with the Food]

It isn't sheer utter bad luck. I've had the same although not as badly as OP is describing. But for most factions, especially barbarians/Sparta the general should stand longer than most. Generals being wounded isn't exclusive to the tutorial either. In NTW, Napoleon was always wounded not killed and IIRC, so were Wellington, Blucher etc.

[krisslanza]

It isn't sheer utter bad luck. I've had the same although not as badly as OP is describing. But for most factions, especially barbarians/Sparta the general should stand longer than most. Generals being wounded isn't exclusive to the tutorial either. In NTW, Napoleon was always wounded not killed and IIRC, so were Wellington, Blucher etc.

I think Generals being wounded only happens in games with a story or some such.

I'm pretty sure the OP just had some awful bad luck. The general tends to be one of the last units to die in almost any situation.

And also thinking on it, I think you do get wounded soldiers but the game doesn't track them - I recall in Shogun 2 you could get a retainer that was said to 'Increase recovery' rate or some such, something related to wounded soldiers. Rome 2 just may not actually track it as a number you can see.

[Fallout386]

I find generals are the first to die if you ever raise them as a part of foot infantry such as spearman or triarii. If they're on horse however this isn't the case. Not sure if it's just my bad luck but it is almost like the game is designed so your general is always the first in battle if he's on foot and subsequently the first to die.

[krisslanza]

I find generals are the first to die if you ever raise them as a part of foot infantry such as spearman or triarii. If they're on horse however this isn't the case. Not sure if it's just my bad luck but it is almost like the game is designed so your general is always the first in battle if he's on foot and subsequently the first to die.

This doesn't always seem true. I've usually kept my Roman generals foot generals (because the horse unit is just terribly weak) and I've had him kept down to around 40 men and still not get the "Our general has fallen!" message.

It mostly seems to be based on luck. The general is usually one of the last to die, but if his unit is just utterly overwhelmed, he can fall in seconds - or a lucky missile attack can kill him off the bat.

[big_feef]

That was indeed quick and quite a bit of bad luck there. Only seen it happen once to a general in similar fashion as I'm very careful with them; but that was patch 4. Had a Macedonian general with Companion Cavalry flank and charge a unit of Thorax Swordsmen engaged with my Thorax Pikemen and watched him be the only one die as the unit they hit routed and broke. Quite a WTF?!!? moment.

And in Rome and Medieval 2; there was the wounded soldier mechanic... And certain traits and ancillaries would help to increase the recovery rate after the battle and were considered very valuable because of it; especially in Rome where there wasn't really a good retraining mechanic. Not really needed in Warscape games though; because of the superior (IMO) recovery mechanic.

[Fallen Phalangite]

Not really needed in Warscape games though; because of the superior (IMO) recovery mechanic.

I would consider it convenient, rather than superior. Sure, it makes things easier to be able to march your army into a friendly province and have it regenerate, but it doesn't make much sense if your Spartans are somehow regaining strength while campaigning in the Far East. Perhaps troop regeneration should only really occur in provinces where they would naturally be found (i.e. Spartans in Greece, Romans in Rome), making your army more reliant on Mercenaries or Auxiliaries when campaigning far from home?

[Riekopo]

Generals should be the last or one of the last soldiers to die.

[McCarronXLD]

Generals should be the last or one of the last soldiers to die.

This. I'm all for the representation of random death in the chaos of battle and having these important people succumb to untimely deaths.. but this is ridiculous. Considering the time we invest in these generals to have them die so easily and quickly really takes away any attachment we have to units (something the TW series has sorely missed). The whole point of having these stronger General units is so that they don't just get used as buffing units as in past TWs. Not only that, but the units the Generals are tied to get disbanded when they die... so that 158/160 unit as mentioned above in the OP is going to get disbanded? Come on. Could you imagine the frustration if that is a max veterency/upgraded unit? There has got to be a better way to do this.

[Humble Warrior]

Generals should be the last or one of the last soldiers to die.

Not necessarily. They are human, just like anyone else. there have been a few instances in war where even a King has died before his men.

I don`t mind my Generals being `weak`. I always keep them out of danger until I have no choice.

[Langer Kerl]

Havent had this problem yet, and I tend to put my royal Spartans in the front row. Hmn.

It looks like a bug to me, maybe something like "unit stats are not applied to the general individual" so hes probably all zero and dies instantly.

A chance for wounded general instead of slayn would be a nice addition; regarding wounded soldiers - are you sure thats not already in the game? Somebody needs to count all his men in the last second of a battle (while still on battle map) and compare that to the number of men he gets on the campaign map after victory. I always kind of assumed that feature was still there because losses after a victory always seem less servere than what I would have expected after fighting the battle personally - because you could recover your wounded. Though maybe thats because you get your prisoners back, I dont know

[AusHaching]

My Generals die like flies. I like to have them mounted, for example currently as Athens. The general is always among the first 5 - 10 men to die. Always. It has reached the point where the general unit has become worthless. After all, if the general dies, everyone loses morale. The contribution of one unit to the battle is almost never worth it. But honestly, I have stopped giving a about generals a long time ago. The last 10 generals I could pick all came from the opposing party, and if they don´t die in melee, some onager or ballista will kill them. That´s my second current point of anger - I hate the way siege engines are implemented. They were not antique field artillery with accuracy and rate of fire - not to mention lethality - of 19th-century guns. That annoys me to no end.