Morale.

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • As I have a tendency to do this, somebody might have covered the following ideas. Correct me if I'm wrong but so far all I have seen low morale do is make a fighting unit loose it's edge or a province rebel, I have thought of some extra things low morale could do to fighting units in a player's armed forces. I figured that since people do this in real life, why not have it happen in the game. I would like any units that have low morale (Below 30%) to have a certain % chance of defecting to the other side, this could then boost the opponent's army and reduce yours, this would then mean that morale is much more worth the time spent developing it.
      British=best. Duh!


    • Hmm, personally, I wouldn't. Anyway, it could have mixed results. I like to sometimes send my units on a deep penetration mission where the main objective is to cause as much havoc as possible before dying. It would be awful if they defected on a mission where they would serve their country in the best way possible.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • I like to take them "From behind" pun intended, I would trick them by bombarding their borders and massing troops their but actually attacking from behind (This works well on the med' map) So yeah, I guess it would be annoying if I lost a large stack as they were disembarking and then found them "Liberating" my capital later on.
      British=best. Duh!


    • Oh, you mean tell them to bite the mountains while you liberate their country in a deep penetration mission? :P

      I don't like the idea, mainly for these reasons:
      1. The one I said at the start
      2. Sometimes a unit may be caught unawares and you just save it when it has very little morale. Then it defects because you saved their lives
      3. You may get a unit you can't support. It would be really bad if they built a load of militia that all started to rebel to you and you can't do anything about it.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Butter Ball Bill ().

    • You can easily resolve the militia problem by sending them to their deaths at the end of the enemies guns while your better units advance behind- a free meatshield, if a unit has low morale and gets saved but defects then I guess you didn't save it well enough, I might be wrong but if you move a bad morale unit into a city or province with high morale then the unit morale increases

      Your first reason would teach you to not waste human lives on a vast scale, it would also teach you the importance of the fighting edge in CoW, it's all well and good you trashed his province upgrades but he can rebuild those in days, it would take weeks to rebuild a full stack of whatever you sent on the suicide mission.

      I take it the comment at the top was and innuendo.
      British=best. Duh!


    • comrade dave wrote:

      I take it the comment at the top was and innuendo.
      I was thinking more double entendre.

      You can't advance behind militia, it is sooooo slow! You have changed my mind a bit, it does sound enticing. If military logistics get put in, I want this alongside it(as a GM option). Otherwise, no.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • I would have that in every game, heck no! I ain't 'bout that reality. I would have it in GM yes, and seeing as I'm a fp *Smug grin* I can enter GM games for free as long as it is an FP game. I din't know militia was slow, just pace your units further away to prevent it from being spotted or something whilst your militia moves up.
      British=best. Duh!


    • Or, you could try to blitz and either: Lose them all to an extensive defense, or have several of your sophisticated and expensive units defect and be then used against you.

      Alternatively you could waste the pointless militia scoping out his defenses and acting accordingly and not lose all your important units. :P
      British=best. Duh!


    • comrade dave wrote:

      Alternatively you could waste the pointless militia scoping out his defenses and acting accordingly and not lose all your important units.
      That sounds better. They are so slow though. Maybe they could give the enemy a ticklish feeling in their softer spots(double entendre?).

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • Well, I am never far from my nuclear reactor and when I have nukes, I always keep my country supplied with strips. I love getting my bomber crews to blow countries(double entendre).

      I think we should stop with double entendres, the thread will get closed down.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • I don't like the missiles, too slow to move around. Only for anti-ship duties.

      I got a couple warnings from Five too but I don't think we are meant to talk about those here. We may able to but we definitely can't talk about bans.

      Forum ArmyField Marshall :00000441:

      Mess with the Bill, you get the scorn!

    • I saw a guy posted a thread about his happy time here before being banned and it got deleted, I therefore assume you can't talk about bans.

      But that is why I use my nuclear weapons for the game winning war, the bombers with the lower yield and range hit the frontline targets and the rockets, because they take longer to get into range, hit the important cities and capital after the war has started and my opponent has squeaker raged.
      British=best. Duh!