Chivalry vs. Dread

[MadWolf]

What do you guys find more useful? Personally, I believe dread is much more useful in battles, not sure about affect on populations. Supposedly chivalry makes your troops "braver", which I think means they wont rout as quickly? What are your stances on chivalry and dread?

[Towelie]

Not sure, but dread should affect enemie troops rout more quickly?
Again, not sure is that cause of dread, but saw few times, when i concuer some settlement, there is some ammount of happines affected by fear for first few turns? Saw that first time i concuered Aztec's city, so i thought that cannons and guns made that effect, but now in my French campaign i tucked Caen with dreaded general, same thing happened?

[MadWolf]

Yeah, when I play with a high dread general (7+) enemy troops run away much more quickly, which I think is better than the chivalry bonus, as routing troops are slain with ease. So I think chivalry wont reduce casualties in your troops...which sucks.

[sgt.kzi33]

I go for dread because chivalry starts to cause unrest in populations and if you have a chivalry faction leader then you will experience alot of rebellions. Bottom line go for dread for maximum impact and best experience. But if you want a harder campign then go for chivalry.

[Gattamelata]

I prefer chivalry in the early campaign because of the host of good traits that can come if you have chivalrous generals.

During the gunpowder era, I prefer dread, because a high dread general commanding an army composed entirely of gunpowder troops can often rout the enemy before they even make contact. Cavalry is the lone exception, and when they're outnumbered, even they can be routed before their charge hits home.

[Feliks]

Dread is a whole lot easier to get, and it comes as a natural result of how I play the game.

[Plutarch]

Dread is a whole lot easier to get, and it comes as a natural result of how I play the game.

lol does that mean youre a butcherer?

[Towelie]

lol does that mean youre a butcherer?

oh, yeah.. butcher.. remember in old M:TW, almost all my generals had butcher routine

Now, they're merciless

Well, what else should you do with captured bastards!?

[TAG]

oh, yeah.. butcher.. remember in old M:TW, almost all my generals had butcher routine

Now, they're merciless

Well, what else should you do with captured bastards!?

For that i give you the "disrespects prisoners" trait

[Feliks]

lol does that mean youre a butcherer?

Well, when I capture an enemy army after a long battle, I don't really want to have to fight them again, catch my drift?

And I've learned that larger cities can be a lot easier to keep when their population is signifigantly reduced.

[AdmiringtheEnemyeh?]

I wish chivilry was acually useful, the population increase chivilrous governors get causes squalor in your settlements which is no way a bonus.

[Ulazlo the Warmonger]

Yes I could care a lot less about what happens when I have a dread general, than it takes to get one. I mean a 10,000 florin ransom isn't worth it If I have to put up with their king, and Rome always had it coming anyway so the people should be ok, if I send my knights down the streets hacking down anyone in the way.

[Ulazlo the Warmonger]

Yes I could care a lot less about what happens when I have a dread general, than it takes to get one. I mean a 10,000 florin ransom isn't worth it If I have to put up with their king, and Rome always had it coming anyway so the people should be ok, if I send my knights down the streets hacking down anyone in the way.

Sorry Double Post

[Kraut]

I try to balance chivalric and dreadful actions, depending on my opponent and the circumstances.

Two examples: playing HRE I had a border conflict with France. Actually I did not want this war (I was occupied in the East), I wanted to end it quickly, and France was a catholic faction at all, so my whole warfare was that of a true Gentleman. Release prisoners, never destroy captured cities, and I offered peace quite early. My Generals gathered high chivalry values in this conflict.

Total opposite: playing as Egypt, trying to stop the Mongol Invasion. Prisoners either weren´t taken at all, or executed on the spot. Every city taken from the Mongols was burned to the bottom. Assassins flooded in their direction. And so on. Total merciless warfare, resulting in horrible dread values for my Generals. But those Asian hordes would learn to bow to the will of the great Caliphe!!!

[Sacc]

Honestly though, do traits of your generals really effect the overall game that much? MTWII is my first of the series, so maybe I’m wrong, but I never really pay attention to traits.

A lot of my generals get dread because I execute 90% of my captured enemies, but I like chivalry, it makes me feel better, and IIRC high chivalrous generals are needed to unlock certain guilds and such.

[Germanicus75]

Honestly though, do traits of your generals really effect the overall game that much? MTWII is my first of the series, so maybe I’m wrong, but I never really pay attention to traits.

I'm the same - I've never really paid any deep attention to traits.

For commanders, I simply look at the command stars.

For governors, I look at the piety rating. I also see if they have the good with numbers trait and make sure they don't have the mean leader trait. And that's about it.

Am I missing alot?

[largedarryl]

I agree with what Gattamelata where it is good to have high chivalry in the early game. With the population growth bonus you get from high chivalry generals can make your cities and castles grow to a good size quicker. Then you can pump out better units earlier in the campaign.

In the later part of the game it is an advantage to have all dreaded generals. Since your cities will have high enough populations and will suffer from higher unrest/squalar you can use the dread from your generals to keep this under control.

[irons]

i tend to prefer chivalry but i always tend to get a general who has loads of dread...a bit of a rouge...just so that i have a chance of getting some of his children to be generals with high dread as well. Gives me options

[Giorgos]

dread all the way. beginning, middle or close to the end is no different for me. go for chivalry if you want a harder game, for sure, but for effective empire management you have to go for dread.

[benedettoIV]

I can't see the reason for having to make a choice. Almost all the factions in the game start off with at least one family member who isn't your first king (who almost always dies by turn 10 anyway) so I make one of his sons chivalrous and the other dreadful. Their children will also be chivalrous and dreadful, respectively. This way, I have a choice, and it makes the game more interesting. But I always send dreadful Generals on campaigns if I'm going for extermination of the faction I'm against.

and @ Sacc and Germanicus91 - I believe you are missing something. The traits of a character show what he will/will not be good at. A general who can't do taxes well will cost you valuable income, and is better out on the field. Generals with traits like 'Un-Manly' but have high piety are obviously going to be better in a settlement. Generals who get bonus command stars under certain circumstances e.g. defending, when ambushing etc. are better used for those purposes.