Regarding Morale

Users who are viewing this thread

As far as I understand it, the morale of your party, if below average, can cause some of your soldiers to leave you. What I would like to see (I'm not sure if this is the case, or if it would even be feasible) is morale having more of an effect on combat.

For example, for every lower 'level' of morale, it could negate or lower your Tactical/Battle Advantage.

More realistic morale for both your troops and the enemy would also be nice. Currently, only the protagonist can choose to leave the battle, but there are deserters in wars, and I think it would make the game more realistic if you had, say, a band of 10 peasants and were trying to attack a band of 15 Dark Knights, if some of your peasants fled instead of rushing blindly at the enemy. If an enemy were too high in ability or level for your current party, there could be a % chance that one or more of your soldiers could try to flee instead of attacking.

Likewise for the enemies, they keep running to their death even if there's only 1 of them left. The way I imagine, for example, pirates or raiders or bandits, is as dishonest men who would not give a second thought to abandoning their fallen comrades if there was only one or two of them left to fight an enemy of overwhelming odds.

Maybe even introducing a 'surrender' option could add a different feel to the game. Enemy troops down to their last warrior or two could choose to surrender and be taken prisoner instead of facing the possibility of being killed (making some of them easier to capture as prisoners, which I think would be fitting for bandits or pirates, but for some reason I can't see a Dark Knight or Swadian Knight surrendering).

Also a surrender option for yourself, in which you lose a portion of your gold or loot to the enemy, instead of being 'killed' if you're faced with overwhelming odds.

This could be useful as sometimes your escape route is cut off.
 
Another suggestion that I'll post here instead of in a new thread:

I think a good idea (though a lot of people I think will disagree) would be to lower the amount of slots in your Inventory and/or add an extra party slot that can ONLY be filled with a pack animal (such as a pack horse, a mule, or a... llama?)

This would come in handy for carrying around extra loot or for when you're doing merchant quests delivering a lot of goods that you have little room in your inventory for. It could potentially lower your encumberance as well, and could be used instead of or as well as the inventory "chest" at the spawning point of a combat map.

You could maybe access both your inventory and your pack animal's inventory with the I key whilst on the world map or in towns, so you can drag and drop items between the two. It makes sense to me, as your average warrior would carry around his armour, weapon, sleeping roll and maybe some food, and wouldn't personally carry around loot as he'd have a pack animal to hand.
 
Good idea, i like most of them, except the idea of troops getting "scared". Sure, it would be cool to break the enemy line and watch a few stragglers run and flee before your mighty army. But likewise, it would just suck to be giving orders to your own troops, only to have them ignore you and run. Other games have tried this, and i think it just adds to the frustration factor. To represent the discipline of a trained knight vs a peasant, you could simply have better AI for the knights and such. Say...peasants don't try to stay together and attack as a group, and don't support each other very well. But knights should be able to form a nice wedge formation and attack in perfect unison.
 
What about mutiny? This would spread through the lower ranks of your army, since the peasants and such are the ones with most to worry about.
 
DaLagga said:
Good idea, i like most of them, except the idea of troops getting "scared".

What games are you talking about? IMO, the morale system is the only thing that makes Dawn of War even remotely respectable and Rome:Total War is fantastic with the right mods. I'm sure it's been badly done in some games.

War is all about morale. When parties on the campaign map realize they are going to lose, they turn around and leave. Why shouldn't individual fighters do the same? I think it would be great.

I think it is very curious that some people find believability in a game's behavior to be absolutely its most attractive aspect (for example, my friends and I were all ecstatic when we saw that when an artillery shell lands near you in Call of Duty, you fall down, are slightly defeaned and your vision is blurred), while some people have absolutely no interest in it whatsoever and are looking for a idealized "game" experience.

For me, this would make roleplaying a LOT more fun. Imagine if you could become evil and buy some terrifying sword that would damage enemy morale whenever you drew it, and at one point your remaining foes turned and fled, screaming. I think that would be much cooler than watching my guys chase down and gangbang that last rock-throwing pirate.

Of course the feature would have to be used in moderation.
 
I have always thought the option of surrendering should be implemented. A hefty gold loss would be required for surrendering and perhaps it wouldn't always be possible. I would like to see a surrender system based on level. It would help low-level parties avoid being wiped out if unfortunate enough to encounter a group of dark knights early. The chance of attempting to surrender should have a higher chance of success - the dark knights simply don't think you're worth their time, or have much to loot anyway. While a higher level party won't be able to surrender so easily - they offer more of a challenge/threat to the enemy or look like they have more to loot.

The enemy could make attempts at surrendering if your party is powerful as well. If on the world map, they are running away from you, the chances you are going to effortlessly defeat them are good, so why wouldn't they try to surrender? During the pre-battle conversation, they could give you the option, instead of trying to take your money. You could even take them all as prisoners/slaves, or recruit them, or be a generous type and let them go. The more evil/violent-inclined could simply elect to laugh and butcher them all anyway.

I've imagined morale having more of an effect on battles as well, but with the idea of a line of text appearing during the pre-battle conversation telling you how many of your troops are willing to fight this particular battle and how many will abandon you if you order the attack. The percentage that are willing to fight could depend on what troops you have, type of enemy you are fighting, how many of the enemy, and what their morale rating is.

Having them abandon the battle during the fight would be interesting, but possibly frustrating for most players. Many seem to be indicating they desire more control over their party members, not less (or at least better AI). Perhaps having the combat effectiveness of a minion lowered if they have a low morale would work better.

In the early stages of a game, I like to use a swarm of peasants as a human wave or human shield while I snipe the enemy with a ranged weapon or ride past and club the enemy unconscious. They are useful only to keep the enemy away from me and I expect them to die. I like to achieve victory through sacrifice and play an evil noble type of character who uses peasants to win at any cost and considers life cheap.

This strategy wouldn't be very effective if hired minions could simply run away and abandon the battle. Perhaps they could be slaves and driven into battle against their will, or a player can be allowed to bully his army into submission so they fear the commander's wrath more than death in battle with the enemy. The ability to kill your own troops, should any attempt to flee would be a welcome addition and could cause morale to raise as the rest of the army realise fleeing is going to get them killed anyway, so they may as well fight. It would add a more evil element to the game and I would find it highly amusing to perform mid-battle executions to set an example. Cowardice will not be tolerated in my ranks.
 
Again I'm very puzzled by someone being frustrated by morale. I always thought it was idiotic when I'd slaughter a room full of bad guys and the last one standing would run at me even though he obviously had no chance. Of course, morale is much more necessary for war games (having one footman run at your town and die over and over again is just the stupidest thing ever), but I think any game that involves fights between two sides of any number should have a morale system. It used to be a very important part of Dungeons and Dragons. Whenever I see a lone enemy charge suicidally at me I am always de-immersed from the roleplaying experience (that happens to some degree in whatever genre) and disappointed in the game.

I think morale would be a good way to prevent the "Progress Quest" monster-extermination routine that is ruining the RPG genre.
 
Well, I have no problem with Berserkers, Samurai, Fanatics, Elite Fighters and people under the direct command of a very charismatic leader ignoring all danger to themself - but if I charge with my whole heavy cavalry, lances couched, at a thin line of bandits or undisciplined crossbowmen I want to see them freeze or flee in terror *g*

But if a morale system is implemented, the leader should be able to inspire their followers - gvging them a speech before engaging, reminding them of their duty towards their lord and family, promising glory, honor and loot... and of course, when the morale is failling, the troops slowly panicing and on the edge of fleeing, one should be able to valiantly charge against the far superior enemy witha battle/rallying cry - and possibly renew the fighting spirits (unless one gets cut down, or instead flees... and obviously: Leader flees -> anything but the most seasoned and disciplined troops would fall into panic)

"Glory and Peace for Swadia... CHARGE!!!" :lol:
 
Gilglaurad said:
But if a morale system is implemented, the leader should be able to inspire their followers - gvging them a speech before engaging, reminding them of their duty towards their lord and family, promising glory, honor and loot... and of course, when the morale is failling, the troops slowly panicing and on the edge of fleeing, one should be able to valiantly charge against the far superior enemy witha battle/rallying cry - and possibly renew the fighting spirits (unless one gets cut down, or instead flees... and obviously: Leader flees -> anything but the most seasoned and disciplined troops would fall into panic)

"Glory and Peace for Swadia... CHARGE!!!" :lol:

I totaly agree but the enemy should have moral too, If there are 30 of you and 10 of them they could be realy scared and run away. If there is only one of you they should be over confident and charge you rather than filling you full of bolts (cough)Swadinian Cross Bowmen (cough)
 
Obviously.
If there is a morale-system for my own guys (and girls in the case for Sword Sisters - who would propably have a really high discipline and morale... being elite and so on), then the enemy should have it too - and standing in front of a cavalry charge should sent most undisciplined forces running :twisted:
The NPC Parties should have a captain, too, who would be stronger than teh average guy, and should be able to inspire his foldiers, too - but if you kill him, the enemy morale take a heavy hit.

And overconfidence should be a factor, too (it was in RL wars, too - Victory Disease ), but I doubt that Crossbowmen would use melee weapon then - more likely, they'll make a shooting excercise - only one man at a time... at least untill they recognize their error :lol:
 
I don't want my own men to refuse my commands, but maybe at the start, if they see they are outnumbered, they will hesitate and stay back or something. Also, I would love to chase down the last remaining enemies. If they made it to one of those retreat spots, then you get a message saying "enemy has retreated". After you're done organizing prisoners and loot, you go back to the overhead map where the group can try to outrun you still. I think that would be a pretty fun challenge, and recognition for your batlle skills.
 
Back
Top Bottom