Sure if you go east in guns there is a check but if you go north there isn’t one in the game especially when compared to the rune-gun. with i think 4 checks or so. and again for gun development in lords possibly but unsubstantiated.i think i would be cool if it became used in lords as it could really mess with the established builds.(everyone goes for the rune gun for +15 soldiering myself included).
Also thank you for your answers to my questions it is much appreciated
I’m not saying this is common, but as one of the regulars, I prefer giving Campos the runegun to the soldiering bonus.
YMMV and all, of course, I’m just saying that I think the “established builds” might be less than 100% “everyone picks the runegun for themselves”.
i was more saying i haven’t seen people go for the dragon locks in general due to it’s low return for 500 gold and no rune gun.
Well, the dragonlocks are a tracked stat so it’s possible that decision could come into play in Lords.
My MC bought the dragonlocks for his men because he genuinely wanted them to have the best weapons available as he thought it would increase their (and his) chance of survival.
Outside of headcanon, the decision does give you +15 to morale, +15 to loyalty, +10 to discipline, and +8 to rep, which are pretty nice stat boosts for those who look to avoid The Wrath of Carrecort. Those increases have the potential to lift your troop stats and rep to a higher threshold going into Guns (which could help you succeed in some of the early decisions, such as sending your men after the partisans), so I wouldn’t classify buying the dragonlocks as a total waste.
Of course, I usually go for the rune gun in my other playthroughs.
I wouldn’t say a low return - the bonuses @MrWolf101 mentioned are pretty darn nice if you have the money.
They might not be used directly very often (in the sense of checks on if you have them or not), but high unit stats are very nice.
I would have to disagree with that, there are many people who deliberately do things they know are wrong in order to attain personal gain, while Caius on the other hand does what he does in order to honor the saints and his adaptive father.
Does doing something terrible for a “higher cause” make it less terrible?
Caz seems to be a peculiar mix of “his fanaticism provides some kind of way to function more effectively despite his issues” and - well, fanaticism doesn’t exactly make him less terrifying.
He is most certainly not a paragon of what’s conventionally considered goodness, that’s for sure.
Of course it doesn’t make it less terrible, but it does make me respect him more than someone who would do the same thing out of personal gain because that means Caz at least has some principals, and I’m in no way saying Caz is a paragon of goodness, I’m merely saying that he is still human.
Completely monstrous and human are not mutually exclusive, unfortunately.
I’m not saying Caz is a complete monster, I more just want to see how people make sense of how he’s both terrible and yet not entirely so.
He’s terrible, but not a complete monster because he has some redeeming qualities. And in a way I kind of pity him, being constantly treated as an abomination must not be good for a child’s psyche, it’s probably why he is so cold hearted and ruthless, and he probably clung to religion as a coping mechanism, which is why he is such a religious fanatic, and after all that, all he wants to do is to honor the saints and one of the few people who did not treat him as an abomination, I feel that is at the very least slightly redeeming.
The thing that strikes me most strongly about Cazarosta is that for some reason, he seems…
He seems like the kind of person who if you needed to hold a ruined castle against all odds, would both volunteer to be that someone and succeed at being that someone.
That kind of thing suits him uncannily well, and I’m not entirely sure what it is.
But being a good man for a desperate spot is some kind of virtue, I think. At least it puts him on a different list than the people I genuinely completely despise.
Ah good old exterminatus
Guys, when you speak of the Imperial Banner Armies, all that I can imagine is an army of two corps with over 80,000 men who are all grenadiers, and horse guards wearing meter caps, bearskin caps and shiny helmets. Even the army itself can’t beat you, the numbers will! Not to forget that the Imperial Banner Army like the Garde Impériale had the guard battery with some of the best cannons to shoot at you.
And dragonlocks? I would prefer the percussion caps more.
What region is Sgt. Hernandes from?
No one knows, but might be from Cunaris, since everyone will choose the prancing lancers in the first place to join in
Given his surname, possibly Aetoria like Villanueva.
the low return i was mentioning came from a guns perspective (as unit stats within sabers have a small impact on guns (max is 40 min is 25)same as rep as it get’s cut in half)furthermore my previous statement was about potential uses of the dragon lock in lords potentially as a use in a striker for a the gun in development by GG&T. for specialised units like the experimentals or dragoons. before i got into saying they were under used and currently not worth a fourth of the investment needed to be the sole investor of Garing’s new rifle design.
I don’t think they’re a low return, though. Sure, you start with at most 40, but I’d prefer to start with a bonus than at the minimum.