Morale?

Alright I had a thought. This game is a great game and reflects a lot of aspects of warfare but not morale? Why not? I don't know if this has been suggested or not but if so then sorry for a waste of time. Now I was thinking there could be a total morale to reflect your countries population and troops will to fight.. It would start off as a base of 100. It would go up and down with your victories and defeats. If the morale got to 70 then it would give all your units a -1 ARB (I think it is 8 ARB for all units). Anyway point being if the total morale is 50 then all your units would have 5 ARB. I think this wouldn't make it too hard for someone who is down on their luck to keep fighting but does have some effect to it. Like for each unit lost it would go down 1 and for each enemy units killed it would go up 1. If you loose a city it goes down 5 but if you take one it is up 5. Capital cities are (+-)10. Your home country capital would be (+-)30. It could not fall below 0 and could not go over 150. If it goes up say went to 130 and up it would give your units a +1 ARB for every 10 morale. Same concept as going down. Also there is the plus or minus 20 buffer before it really starts to effect anything as your population will grow weary of a looseing conflict the longer it goes on and if it is going well you will gain momentum. Thank you for what do you guys think? Too hard to impliment? Just a bad? Or is it a descent Idea?

Instead of boosting ARB, i think it should be transfer to sp bonus like perhaps modifiers. x1.2, x1.3, etc.

It sounds awesome, but it sounds hard to implement too.

Well I have great faith in our overlords XD. SP modifiers isn't exactly the point it is supposed to reflect your armies will to fight.

I would even go a step further and say that particular strategies can effect morale more then others. Say Gurerilla warefare and Master of Stealth take down your enemies morale more then normal units. It is hard to fight any enemy you can't see kind of logic. Like Iron fist would loose less morale when looseing units and so fourth. Some strategies would stay the same on the morale issue naturally. Also I was thinking about it and I think it would be good to change the previous number, say an enemy captures a city you loose 5 then you retake it and get the 5 back so what was the point? Looseing the city in the first place should take down 7 (plus what ever units are killed in it in this example it is 0) so your oponent abandons it and you retake it and get the plus 5 so that would be a total loss of 2 for not defending your city. So what do you guys think?

This idea sounds really good, I just have no idea how this would be implemented.

I don't either exactly but it was just an Idea, if Ivan or Amok take it serious and like it enough I am sure they can figure it out. They have done an excellent job so far.

Написано Wildchild92, 29.09.2012 at 00:43

I don't either exactly but it was just an Idea, if Ivan or Amok take it serious and like it enough I am sure they can figure it out. They have done an excellent job so far.

I agree.

Another bump of one of my ideas that never seem to get much attention.

I think that this will make first turns/first few turns even more important. It would be hard to add this into the game.

Would make sense helping the one losing have a better chance at winning, rather than making the person winning even stronger.

Написано Meester, 15.07.2013 at 06:37

Would make sense helping the one losing have a better chance at winning, rather than making the person winning even stronger.

Not sure if you're being a smart ass or not but it would be possible to upset the balance of war with a few key battles if you're looseing and turn the tide. Atleast that is how I imagine it working. Also I don't feel it would be too hard to impilment, I mean they can amange SP and all those other stats in game. Why not slap a morale bar or something on your screen that reflects units and cities lost and such.

Написано Wildchild92, 16.07.2013 at 00:19

Написано Meester, 15.07.2013 at 06:37

Would make sense helping the one losing have a better chance at winning, rather than making the person winning even stronger.

Not sure if you're being a smart ass or not but it would be possible to upset the balance of war with a few key battles if you're looseing and turn the tide. Atleast that is how I imagine it working. Also I don't feel it would be too hard to impilment, I mean they can amange SP and all those other stats in game. Why not slap a morale bar or something on your screen that reflects units and cities lost and such.

My point exactly. A person who is winning builds more units thus meaning he overpowers the losing force in most battles. Make their morale even lower, while theirs keep going up and up and up.

Just think of this. Everybody would know i make 4 times money as my enemy as 4 times more reinforcements. While he/she would instantly start losing multiple battles as my forces would easily overpowers theirs. Not to mention I was playing MoS. In 1 turn i could launch 40 attacks on 40 different places. If i win 30 of those battles i could move his/her morale from 100 to 20 in 1 turn.

Well I see what you're saying, that could be an obvious balance issues but do you have any suggestion to make it to where it wouldn't be so lopsided?

For morale to favor loosing players and penalize winning players, it could depend on how far your troops are from their home country. Basically, troops defending/attacking in your home country would perform best. Attacking your opponent in his home country (especially if it is far away) would be more difficult.

Another idea would be that countries under your control for longer would give morale boosts to your troops in their borders, while recently conquered countries would give a morale penalty. Also, if you recently lost a country that was under your control for a long time, your troops trying to recapture it would get a morale boost. Trying to attack a country you never had would be more difficult.

I know a few strategy games that implement this type of idea in one way or another.

That doesn't seem like such a bad idea but that seems very hard to impliment. My idea was simply a reflection on your populations will to keep fighting as a whole. Instead of individual units.

That doesn't seem like such a bad idea but that seems very hard to impliment. My idea was simply a reflection on your populations will to keep fighting as a whole. Instead of individual units.

Hmn yeah, or you have to have 1 strategy, crazy inspiring leader, bringing down the attack and defense value 1- or even 2- but with a 80 percent morale limit, and with some kind of frontline unit like youth soldiers who dont make youre country lose morale,

think ww2, 1944 the morale of the german armies were totally beaten and totally outnumbered, but they didnt know the facts and the propoganda machine of Goebbels promised a end victory, so they fought on, they tried to hold every meter (atleast against the russians) even though Hitler ordered like a counterattack of 1 corps against 3 russian field armys

same for Russia in 1941, stalin didnt make good decisions at the start of the war, german morale was great but after the battle of Moscow.. stalin made better decisions like appointing zhukov at the most help needed front

Crazy Inspiring Leader strat = Hitler or stalin in ww2, they inspired there countries to fight on to the bitter end but made horrible decisions
(stalin became smarter during the war and Hitler became dumber)

Also this brings up surrendering, if the units in a town are outnumbered and far from the frontline, like english in bordeux holding a French invason to bordeux, and the morale is like lower than 50% they could surrender to save losses, however tthis needs to be balanced because if this army is 100 bombers. 1 air transport and 1 miltia, then they dont surrender as the city with 8 inf practicly "outnumbers" the 1 militia
stuff like that, ivan and amok! think of it and play with the idea! or make a button in game settings "morale" which you can toggle on and off

Bump

So here's the only real problem:

If morale alters the battle experience (which irl it does) then it means that as you progress or digress it only continues to multiply for or against you. I think the way to balance this is to create a plateau or obstacle somewhere. I'm not sure what, but let's suppose on reinforcement turns the morale is automatically boosted. So let's say you've been doing poorly the first 3 turns, your untis are sloppy etc, but now you're on reinforcements- you might have slightly less due to population decrease but at least they're performing at norm.

Another problem is just that- population. As you continue losing it's only going to make it 10x that your population is decreased and because of it you won't be making enough units for a counter assault.

I'd say to cross that off the overall suggestion. The suggestion as is without any balancing would greatly affect the game.

Let's say you're PD France in a 3v3, the only places you can expand to are Benelux regions and Ireland because Spain is going to take Italy. Of course your morale is going to become low xD. You'll be lucky to win against UK in Belgium or the Netherlands.



It is a very awesome suggestion though, and if there is a way to completely balance it out then I'd support it all the way.

If you're PD france you shouldn't have any problems expanding like you have described if it is early in the game. 1. that early morale wouldn't have an effect. 2. Your PD infantry is very strong.

Anyway that aside I get your point. There would need to be some serious balance issues. I suggested this a long time ago. As you can clearly see I am useing ARB instead of crit lol. Also I think population casualties would have the most affect naturally. If anyone else has a good idea to balance this it wouldn't be an awful idea.

I imagine this makeing it hard to sustain a looseing fight with conventional tactis but stealth attacks could really upset the Morale of a game and turn the tide (tet offensive is a perfect example, guerilla attackes on broad front but didn't hold any of that ground but still broke the morale of the enemy). So I don't know how that would effect certain strats.

That would probably be an effective means to stop PD infantry offense spam.