Crusader Kings 2 has a similar character creation DLC. It does seem to lead to min-max’ing (lots of advice online about being inbred being worth it to free up points for something useful, like being really tall…).
If not that, then something as simple as Oregon Trail’s 3 ‘class’ system (banker has high starting cash, but poor life skills, IIRC).
On my second play through I totally went down Sarissofoi’s “Noble Adventurer” route by buying a Knight in the first town, then a Squire, and then only hiring expensive militia, deserters and hunters.
I would have much preferred to have selected at least the Knight and Squire characters at start up, rather than having 3 rubbish starting brothers whose faces didn’t fit in the company I wanted to create.
Although I have had some great fun in CK2 when randomly picking a character, then RP’ing him/her regardless of what would otherwise be my prefernce, and then RP’ing whichever successor, but it is also nice to have some control over what you’ll be getting, to an extent. In CK2 i might somehow justify to myself sending my first son away to be tutorred by someones with good stats in the hope he won’t turn out TOO much like ‘me’!
It would also be nice to accept a massive starting malus to be able to lvl up at least one of your brothers to become more of a leader or figurehead (or Sargent if you want to consider your command role as being more remote [like the lieutenant in Aliens!]) or simply be able to mark him as such (say with a militia style armband?) without having him buffed in any way.
Although I do appreciate what GOD wrote about the banner/name/regiment perhaps being the more important identity. I think I’m more in favour of the company having a physical leader which you then RP. If ‘you’ get killed you just RP as the second in command. To me, not having a character to represent me in game feels a bit odd, and forced.