How about the traits system? Still a joke?

[nodey]

I found the traits system to be completely moronic in RTW.
Within a couple of turns you could get a handfull of negative traits which had little or nothing to do with consequences of your actions.
This basically spoiled the enjoyment of creating a character that was strong in some aspects when all your effort would be spoiled with a couple of random -3 traits. If success isnt rewarded, it wont be desired.

Now as if that wasnt enough, traits would more often than not counterdict eachother.

One particularly brilliant example of failed logic when it comes to traits are the 50k mark in rtw. When you hit the mark, all of your generals would suddenly fail to grasp basic economical rules and start to squander money to the left and right, ignoring any previous characteristics that they may have aquired through the campaign. Apparently, economical success means economical failure. If this management design is meant to limit the player, why even include traits?

So my question to those that are playing the game; Any change?

[Taelok]

I'm pretty certain that it is still based on the same system, though from what I've heard from over in the modding section there are now many more conditions, triggers for traits appearing.

[Venom]

Well, it's a good thing we have people like Player1 around who fix all those annoying bugs and conflicting character traits when CA doesn't. I sure hope there's a Bug-Fixer project for Medieval 2.

[SIlver General65]

Man I hope its better than rtw I thought it as a joke to... But hey what happens happens

:german:

[edmont]

I'm pretty certain that it is still based on the same system, though from what I've heard from over in the modding section there are now many more conditions, triggers for traits appearing.

Not like in RTW,Thank Lord

[ProudNerd]

I found the traits system to be completely moronic in RTW.
Within a couple of turns you could get a handfull of negative traits which had little or nothing to do with consequences of your actions.
This basically spoiled the enjoyment of creating a character that was strong in some aspects when all your effort would be spoiled with a couple of random -3 traits. If success isnt rewarded, it wont be desired.

Now as if that wasnt enough, traits would more often than not counterdict eachother.

One particularly brilliant example of failed logic when it comes to traits are the 50k mark in rtw. When you hit the mark, all of your generals would suddenly fail to grasp basic economical rules and start to squander money to the left and right, ignoring any previous characteristics that they may have aquired through the campaign. Apparently, economical success means economical failure. If this management design is meant to limit the player, why even include traits?

So my question to those that are playing the game; Any change?

read FBE guide to RTW. It explains about that and it makes sense why it is the way it is.

[hsimoorb]

I never though RTW's traits system was a joke. It was much better than the MTW system, and definatly had a positive impact on the gameplay. I do admit though, that after playing EB, RTW's traits looked like something that you would see on an Atari RPG game, but still, they were far from being a joke. Anyways, if they're as good as EB's traits, I'm down with that.

[Blood Claw Warrior]

I didn't really concentrate on them much but I did think they were pretty silly as well. They didn't have any rhyme or reason as to why you really had any of them. I hope M2 has a better system for it but it's not a huge deal to me if they don't.

[savage_rabbit]

Well I was pretty miffed about the rapid gain of stars by generals when they cause a force to retreat rather than engage when they are immensely outnumbered. On the converse, your own generals would get annoying cowardly traits when they were forced to retreat from even one losing battle.

[ZaPPPa]

All 'broken' traits can easily be modded out. It's one of the first things I did for the RTR mod. Slowed stars by about 50% and made most traits more rare to get, especially the negative ones.

[General Dissaray]

I never tried to manage my chericter traits. I like to think of them as there own people so they do what they will and gain what traits they will. Then I just play to their strengths and if they have none I find a way for them to "conveniantly dissapear" It has always worked fine for me.

[(insert clever name here)]

I hated the Traits and Ancillaries system in RTW. It was either too easy to get command stars (and too hard for admirals) or your general would just randomly go insane or suddenly have some trait that made him easy to bribe. Sncillaries are actually a great idea it's just they are too hard to transfer, they should act as a separate unit you can move werever you want.

I liked the system in MTW better because every unit could be appointed as a duke or lord of a province and you didn't have to have a family member sitting in or near there who could be capable of managing the place. You could have a archer captain become a governor, which was nice. RTW forced you to have family members as governors or risk fighting off rebellion because no one else was a decent governor. MTW let you take crappy units and turn them into badasses. I remember in BKB i made some Aragonian Catalonian Guards into an 8 star general with 6 Piety, and 7 Acumen, and 8 loyalty. You can't do that in RTW.

[Axe-Battler]

i love the ones in both mtw and rtw where a general would have a trait such as "loyal", and then he would somehow get a trait "disloyal", and have both at the same time. Or in mtw where the general would be "zealous", and then he would have a trait such as "aethiest" at the same time lol. I mean, couldn't they figure out a way to get around that(CA)?

[Arbaces]

No. The system of traits and ancillaries was very good and exciting in RTW, hopefully MTW left this untouched or immproved it further with ideas like Genetics Aging Family Health.

Arbaces.

[smoke]

Hmmm yes i liked it too.

[Artemas Ward the XXIII, Esquire]

I much preferred MTWs trait system over that of RTWs'. I think it added more flexibility, and was more immersive than that of RTW. That system was complicated and had potential, but somehow failed in the "believable person" aspect. Oh, and there weren't any non-family governors, which would be silly for a medieval game.

[Inhuman One]

I think there should be clear ways for all skills to improve them.

Command can (too) easily be improved, but managment and influence have been rather random in rtw.
Usually the very good commanders gain influence because of their many victories, but managment is hard to improve.

[Lusted]

From what i've seen it's better. Corruption traits are now linked more to cities, as cities produce the bulk of your Kingdoms wealth compared to Castles. I've also had some nice ancilliaries, and command stars are not too easy or too hard to get.

[Taelok]

From what i've seen it's better. Corruption traits are now linked more to cities, as cities produce the bulk of your Kingdoms wealth compared to Castles. I've also had some nice ancilliaries, and command stars are not too easy or too hard to get.

Lusted can you confirm if the merc captain trait is still in and works in the same way as RTW?

[monoxism]

Lusted can you confirm if the merc captain trait is still in and works in the same way as RTW?

It's in, not as a trait, but as an ancillary. And yeah, as far as I can see it works like in RTW...