12/6/2023 0 Comments Tw medieval 2![]() Unless my empire is large and has multiple fronts, I hardly ever need more than 5 standing armies that are ready to strike at any enemy. A general/governor can boost that to 200+public order 3200+ income and up to 2.5% growth. A settlement can be 100% public order, 2500 income and a population growth of. This aspect obviously wasn't adequately addressed in earlier titles like M2TW where you do not have control over exactly what traits they get. This is different from later TW titles like Attila where you can specialize family members to be good governors or good generals, though Shogun 2 had the most interesting trait customization options imo. But I reckoned they do better as generals because buildings already give substantial bonuses. Originally posted by Idlihx10:I actually face the dilemma of making governors good generals because I'm aware they can boost settlement income and other stuff, or making them high ranking generals without these benefits. Wonder if the Turks are worth playing looking at all the responses so far, seems to me they are not the powerhouse yet of the Turks in Empire TW. But I can understand why you think chivalry is useful. But you do not have any control over enemy morale apart from a high dread general. You can compensate for your own army's lower morale with superior tactics and some elite units to cover gaps that open up as a result of troops fleeing. And once I give them a battle for a change, they almost always "feel appreciated" and increase loyalty.ĭread helps to reduce fighting time with fewer losses in contrast to chivalry that I believe allows men to fight longer. The traits and retinue links I gave above show how traits and retinue are gained.Īnd the way I play, I both enjoy and can win, too.My generals lose loyalty frequently whenever I let them sit in a settlement for too long. Originally posted by CHE:I haven't experienced governors "tend to lose loyalty", and the negative traits my governors have gained are all understandable and generally avoidable (especially once certain buildings are built), while governors can benefit the player by increasing happiness in a city, as well as increasing growth and income (lots of money long term), increasing sanitation, cheaper unit recruitment, etc. These are different ways to play, and I prefer to play he way that I think improves my faction's reputation (Chivalrous actions), as well as being a way of integrity - doing unto others as I would have others do unto me - since we are all one.Īnd the way I play, I both enjoy and can win, too. Yes, Dread reduces enemy morale, but Chivalry increases the general's own units' morale. ![]() The traits and retinue links I gave above show how traits and retinue are gained. I haven't experienced governors "tend to lose loyalty", and the negative traits my governors have gained are all understandable and generally avoidable (especially once certain buildings are built), while governors can benefit the player by increasing happiness in a city, as well as increasing growth and income (lots of money long term), increasing sanitation, cheaper unit recruitment, etc. I also don't favor the idea of leaving generals as governors for long unless they are newly adopted because they tend to lose loyalty and I think gain negative traits that way. Not to mention the huge morale shock on any enemy army including the Mongols. Every time you loot/exterminate a city, you get lots of money and the population cowed into submission because all resistance is exterminated. I've always preferred dread because it seems to be more beneficial even though it does not help with your starting settlements. Originally posted by Idlihx10:Thanks for the info CHE.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |