Morale and how to harness it.

[Poorlaggedman]

Yes. And even without an individual score they are always looking at the metrics of their success. In a game like this it can be very healthy ones, like the positive experience of working together. People see your deeds literally and judge you by that instead of pressing tab and seeing whose getting the most kills / points. "Real" good leadership that works. And of course whether their team wins or loses.

What I mean by team morale: The more casualties a team is taking/Further they're being pushed back the lower their overall Morale which would then effect Players individual Morale.

In Gameplay terms I think this would help with the flow of Battles (Getting pushed back and having negative effects would make people either Rally or accept they'd lost) sort of speeding things up a bit and not having rounds ending with 2-3 people Camping in some unknown location.

I feel like that wouldn't have much effect on the way people play. It'd just be like a perk on when you're winning and losing. And wouldn't make a ton of sense to be just spawning in and be shook up.

[Grimner]

well i'm curious to see what it will look like

[R21]

I feel like that wouldn't have much effect on the way people play. It'd just be like a perk on when you're winning and losing. And wouldn't make a ton of sense to be just spawning in and be shook up.

Not what I meant, I basically meant the system you're proposing but tied to an overall Armies morale if that makes sense.



This is something they should definitely include, they introduced this stuff round about the time I stopped playing RNL (Hit then getting back up) it's a far better system than a Player getting hit and just continuing to stand there with a bloody screen or Bandaging after being hit. They could still include Bandaging, but make it so they need to be applied after this knock down effect. It'd also be a really good way to have Artillery be effective but not OP (Shell lands and kills a few and knocks a few others down, they then get back up and get into the fight again).

There's your supression/Morale right there, if Players fear they can have control taken away from them by this knock down effect, they'll probably try and take cover. This would also encourage bayonet charges (run in and take players out while they're down).

Of course, playability is key with all this stuff so they'd need to test it quite a lot to make sure it actually added to the Game and wasn't just annoying.

From what i've briefly played of WOR they've kind of got the beginnings of this (when I was shot my character fell to the ground with a pulsing black screen) they've basically got half this feature in already.

[Max Krause]

Honestly, I would prefer to see more than just graphical and sound effects (they may be the first "punishment").

I am thinking about something like this:
Morale health 100% - fresh soldier, no penalty
Morale health 75% - becoming disrupted - slower reloads, higher weapon swey
Morale health 50% - Shaken = moderate visual and sound effects (as seen in post above); possibility of foul reload; slower melee; decreased stamina consumption by sprint (to allow better retreat)
Morale health 25% - becoming broken = significant visual and sound effects (black-and-white; blurry; loud heartbeat); very slow reloads with high probability of foul; no melee but block allowed
Morale health 0% - Rout = auto-surrender when more enemy than friendly within close proximity; else auto-retreat in direction to spawn; stop at certain point and wait for recovery to 26%

At 0% of morale heath, the punishment is similar to 0% physical death - you have to wait for respawn or morale recovery. The latter does not consume the "ticket".

So, when you act as lone wolf, you very likely experience adversary morale effects. When you act as a soldier in close order unit (with good leadership, ordering retreat in proper time) or proper skirmisher (avoiding close contact with close order units), you do not experience much of the effects. And that is the desired result - historical behaviour being more efficient to lonewolf ramboing in realistic manner.

Mostly Agreed, but i think auto surrender is bad, I would say that they would just drop their weopon. No auto retreating because otherwise it wouldn't be able to have roleplay. ( Prisoners and so on)

[R21]

Auto surrender/Retreat mechanics sound a bit too RTS-y, if control is taken away from the player it needs to be within context:

Like, the knock out effect kind of gives the player it's happening too a chance to fight back because the enemy that has shot him will

A.) Think he's dead

B.) He'll be harder to hit due to being prone

c.) Makes sense contextually from a user feedback point of view (your player has been hit and this is the result of the impact)

Auto surrender or your character just dropping their Weapon uncontrollaby would just be annoying imo.

[Poorlaggedman]

Auto-surrender is the most radical concept of the individual morale idea. I have grown to think it's a good thing more and more.

What happened in close quarters combat when one totally overwhelmed or out of ammunition? What happened in close quarters combat? Typically one side stopped short or one side withdrew. If they were totally driven away and you didn't follow you weren't going to make a one man stand at point blank range. Is it fair to the players playing correctly to have to deal with lone wolves? In close quarters? When they are totally overwhelmed. This isn't the Pacific Theater in WWII. Being captured is not unthinkable. Parole is a thing. Entire companies were overran and captured. If you are against a wall of bayonets and you don't even have your own wall of bayonets, it's just you then why should you be able to fling yourself in there and maybe get a kill or two when any reasonable person would surrender in this war? It wasn't even like a dishonorable thing. It happened.

It's a matter of being outmaneuvered and put into a situation you shouldn't have allowed yourself to get into in the first place. Without severe penalties like autosurrender, meelee will be a sure and constant experience without letup. You give each player the license to say "You know what, screw this whole shooting at a target I can't see let me individually go and force meele while they reload."

It should mainly be something that happens in close proximity to the enemy and when seriously outnumbered. A skirmish line vs a battle line. If they get that close and you didn't leave, you fucked up. The charged enemy bayonet could serve as an additional penalty. It's not 'losing control' of your character it's effectively the same as dying for the player's perspective. Does anyone seriously think a good, well-behaving player wouldn't just realize he screwed up when he get's autosurrendered?

[R21]

But how would it work from a Gameplay perspective? The player automatically surrenders, loses control then respawns? If the Player retains control they'll just get bayonetted or shot anyway.

[Poorlaggedman]

No. It's the same as dying except instead of a rag doll it leaves a surrender doll with it's hands up. Instead of dropping and hearing your breathing stop and fading to black your character just drops its weapon (or turns the musket upside down) and puts it's hands up. With one last chance for the player to voice chat some snarky shit maybe before it kicks you back to spawn. I quite like that feature of dying in WoR currently.

So The surrender doll can either disappear after a while or presume walking to the enemy spawn and disappear if you really want to be fancy. For simplicity's sake it could be invincible.

One thing it will do is make a reason to retreat, and also to stop short rather than charge straight into enemy lines regardless of the balance. If you know when you get swarmed you just get autosurrendered then you will stop making stupid banzai charges

[David Dire]

Surrenduring wasn't really a thing in the Civil war except for soldiers who were completely disconnected from their fellows and alone, or units in a complete route. Those situations would be too rare to be worth implementing. "Critical" morale reducing player effectiveness via accuracy, loading, bayonet skill and vision debuffs would be a pretty realistic and fair way to implement it: it would encourage officers to actuall fall back to regroup.

[Poorlaggedman]

Not much of a thing? There's hardly a detailed story about any battle from anybody that doesn't mention losing buddies captured or bagging enemy prisoners.

400,000 prisoners in the first two years? And with a parole system. The largest mass surrender of Northern troops was at Harper's Ferry and that was only something like 8-12,000 in a garrison. The rest were in smaller numbers.





It probably wouldn't be much of a thing in WoR either except for noobs who don't understand the system. Otherwise it'd become apparent to most that frolicking up to enemy lines alone or in pairs means death or capture. Autosurrender would just be the ultimate morale penalty, not necessarily brought on after many others if you aren't taking a lot of hits and end up close to the enemy.

You're imagining that there won't be lone wolves. I assure you, there will be tons. And lots of fruitless charges that shouldn't happen too by bored 'officers' who want to be of some use in close combat or feel special trying to enact a scene from a painting rather than win a match.