National Morale

National Morale (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series

Message

STUCKER868 -> National Morale (12/31/2014 3:01:03 PM)
Hi all, I noticed the German National Morale number drops progressively as the war goes on. I am curious as to why this would be so? War weariness would be a factor of course and could be founded on the fact that this occurred in Germany during WW2. However, what if Germany were winning the war? If Germany were winning big in the East, (and despite the Allied strategic bombing campaign coupled with war weariness) would not Germany's National Morale at least stay steady rather then drop?

Mehring -> RE: National Morale (12/31/2014 5:37:52 PM)
Morale in WitE is a fudge between what it is usually understood to be and also a measure of a unit's training and doctrine. There is no clear distinction between the two but national morale drops ostensibly to reflect hastily trained troops and other consequences of losing as the war went on. So yes, losing the war or the effects of high casualties is hard wired into the game.

STUCKER868 -> RE: National Morale (1/1/2015 12:27:54 AM)
Too bad it's hard coded. Because if I am winning, it's somewhat unfair to me that my morale should drop because it's coded to reflect what was going on historically. quote: ORIGINAL: Mehring Morale in WitE is a fudge between what it is usually understood to be and also a measure of a unit's training and doctrine. There is no clear distinction between the two but national morale drops ostensibly to reflect hastily trained troops and other consequences of losing as the war went on. So yes, losing the war or the effects of high casualties is hard wired into the game.

Mehring -> RE: National Morale (1/1/2015 12:52:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: STUCKER868 Too bad it's hard coded. Because if I am winning, it's somewhat unfair to me that my morale should drop because it's coded to reflect what was going on historically. quote: ORIGINAL: Mehring Morale in WitE is a fudge between what it is usually understood to be and also a measure of a unit's training and doctrine. There is no clear distinction between the two but national morale drops ostensibly to reflect hastily trained troops and other consequences of losing as the war went on. So yes, losing the war or the effects of high casualties is hard wired into the game. If a player wins but at great cost, there's a rationale for lowering national morale. It might work better if national morale was raised or lowered according to volume of replacements taken in a given year. I'd also like to see replacements graded for quality, with a ceiling on morale/experience increases for lower quality troops.

vandorenp -> RE: National Morale (1/1/2015 6:28:34 PM)
Design decisions like this are a curiosity to me. [not the only game with something like this] Here we have a designer sitting down and considering overall morale and its effects. You know some German players are going to have wins. You know some are going to do very well as they achieve their win. You know in such cases the attrition will be lower than historical. You know unit experience will be on average higher than historical. You know about the tremendous effect victory has on morale. Yet you hard-wire a game effecting decline in morale to occur regardless. I can understand programming requirements versus resources contention can put off implementing a "realistic" algorithm but you might think something would have eventually been implemented in a game of this sophistication. Nevertheless, I happily play on.

BJP III -> RE: National Morale (1/1/2015 6:58:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vandorenp Design decisions like this are a curiosity to me. [not the only game with something like this] Here we have a designer sitting down and considering overall morale and its effects. You know some German players are going to have wins. You know some are going to do very well as they achieve their win. You know in such cases the attrition will be lower than historical. You know unit experience will be on average higher than historical. You know about the tremendous effect victory has on morale. Yet you hard-wire a game effecting decline in morale to occur regardless. I can understand programming requirements versus resources contention can put off implementing a "realistic" algorithm but you might think something would have eventually been implemented in a game of this sophistication. Nevertheless, I happily play on. Two things. First, GG should never have used the words "morale" or "national morale," because what he means by the terms is different from their ordinary definitions. IMO, he should have used a term like "combat proficiency" instead, because it seems much closer to what he intended. This would have avoided a whole lot of confusion. Second, I think the hard coding is necessary in order to maintain any sort of balance in the game. The game already suffers from severe feedback loops from the linkage of unit morale to combat victories. If you made National Morale variable based on the same factors, it would just magnify those feedback loops.

morvael -> RE: National Morale (1/1/2015 9:30:40 PM)
Yes, the term is quite confusing. I see it as a combination of quality of manpower and availability of experienced junior officers, NCOs and veteran soldiers. In case of Germany these go down, since they maintain too high recruitment rate for their manpower base, thus the quality decreases from year to year. At the same time they suffer unsustainable casualties (even for their increased recruitment rate) reducing the number of experienced men in the ranks. This reduces the maximum level of fighting efficiency their units can achieve (which is all that "morale" being a ceiling for "experience" and these two factors influence on combat is in WitE). Sure, it seems too harsh this is hardcoded, but actually there is no escaping the brutal math of manpower "income" and "expenditure" unless relative player skill difference is too great and the Axis can achieve totally impossible victories. There should be a parameter that would let to influence whether a player want quality or more manpower, but choosing quality would mean a very rapid decline in numbers. And that path would be as fatal as the opposite one. So treat the current settings as compromise, a golden mean. The Red Army learns on the go, as the weakening Wehrmacht is not able to inflict enough casualties for the core of experienced men to disappear (and the recruitment base is larger). Note that the armies (German and Soviet) "meet" at a value of 60 only as late as 1944. I think it's very reasonable.

cmunson -> RE: National Morale (1/1/2015 9:58:20 PM)
There is always the editor.

Mehring -> RE: National Morale (1/2/2015 9:00:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: morvael Yes, the term is quite confusing. I see it as a combination of quality of manpower and availability of experienced junior officers, NCOs and veteran soldiers. In case of Germany these go down, since they maintain too high recruitment rate for their manpower base, thus the quality decreases from year to year. At the same time they suffer unsustainable casualties (even for their increased recruitment rate) reducing the number of experienced men in the ranks. This reduces the maximum level of fighting efficiency their units can achieve (which is all that "morale" being a ceiling for "experience" and these two factors influence on combat is in WitE). Sure, it seems too harsh this is hardcoded, but actually there is no escaping the brutal math of manpower "income" and "expenditure" unless relative player skill difference is too great and the Axis can achieve totally impossible victories. There should be a parameter that would let to influence whether a player want quality or more manpower, but choosing quality would mean a very rapid decline in numbers. And that path would be as fatal as the opposite one. So treat the current settings as compromise, a golden mean. The Red Army learns on the go, as the weakening Wehrmacht is not able to inflict enough casualties for the core of experienced men to disappear (and the recruitment base is larger). Note that the armies (German and Soviet) "meet" at a value of 60 only as late as 1944. I think it's very reasonable. If the game is not supposed to endlessly recreate history but only be capable of doing so if players make the same choices as historically, why single out morale/experience for hard coding? If you can put it so succinctly as "high recruitment rate in relation to manpower base" -nicely put- surely code to simulate that relationship would not be so hard to develop? Whether or not the game would then allow players to tinker with replacement rates, players would then be "rewarded," if only slightly, for looking after their forces and punished for not doing so. As you say, there is no escaping the brutal maths of manpower income and expenditure. Absolutely I agree, but relatively there should be room for manoeuvre. That's what gives a game nuance.

morvael -> RE: National Morale (1/2/2015 10:13:12 AM)
I agree, a game simulating entire war economy and demographics with the ability to influence it would be great. Even though WitE has a base for that (a lot of numbers everywhere) certain parts are just for viewing pleasure and no changes can be made to them (for example the production system). Sometimes it's easier to hardcode something to follow a historical path (in case of German military power a decline) than recreate all the factors that resulted in the same. How do you turn a loss of 200 junior officers in a division during a week of heavy combat to absolute numbers? There is even no distinction between junior officers, veteran infantry NCOs, branch specialization (you can have 10000 trained artillery crews, what if you need to make them tankers asap?), soldier health and hygiene problems, horse diseases (there are actually no horses at all, except some increase in supply consumption). The list goes on an on. This is simply not part of simulation in WitE.

Mehring -> RE: National Morale (1/3/2015 10:07:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: morvael I agree, a game simulating entire war economy and demographics with the ability to influence it would be great. Even though WitE has a base for that (a lot of numbers everywhere) certain parts are just for viewing pleasure and no changes can be made to them (for example the production system). Sometimes it's easier to hardcode something to follow a historical path (in case of German military power a decline) than recreate all the factors that resulted in the same. How do you turn a loss of 200 junior officers in a division during a week of heavy combat to absolute numbers? There is even no distinction between junior officers, veteran infantry NCOs, branch specialization (you can have 10000 trained artillery crews, what if you need to make them tankers asap?), soldier health and hygiene problems, horse diseases (there are actually no horses at all, except some increase in supply consumption). The list goes on an on. This is simply not part of simulation in WitE. And yet here is a general evolutionary tendency that irons out unnecessary complication while developing complexity that enhances or enriches a given thing. Though I certainly have issues with the pace at which it advances I can clearly see this in the evolution of SPI WitE/W/WiE to 2by2 versions of the game. Several of my pet issues in WitE1 have already been addressed in whole or part- logistics and weather come to mind. One day we might indeed have a game which, under the hood, processes the mood, health, temperament and favourite colour of every soldier on the pixel field and which computes the impact of these factors on the battle field. In passing, I'd love to see a team play version of the game where economy is so detailed as to occupy at least one player per side. But for now, the hard coded national morale is a clumsy generalisation that I suspect could be replaced in the near future by a more immersive and realistic model. That might certainly also go with an attempt to grade replacement quality and training.

swkuh -> RE: National Morale (1/3/2015 12:21:20 PM)
WitE 1 has always had engaging detail, but, alas, it is often just "eye candy." And for some there is never enough detail, or, incorrect details. I'd love to see a game that simplifies players' mechanics, as I suspect many players may suffer as I do from clickety-wrist. But in any case I do enjoy the game, play on.

GamesaurusRex -> RE: National Morale (1/3/2015 9:06:47 PM)
[sm=00000613.gif] Grognards : "Grumble... grumble... grrr !" Morvael : "Well... game design can get as deep as a designer wants to wade into it..." (Ah, Morvael... the Angel of Patience !)[&o]

Mehring -> RE: National Morale (1/4/2015 9:14:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GamesaurusRex [sm=00000613.gif] Grognards : "Grumble... grumble... grrr !" Morvael : "Well... game design can get as deep as a designer wants to wade into it..." (Ah, Morvael... the Angel of Patience !)[&o] Patience of a saint, perhaps, blessed, definitely. How many people got an iron rice bowl these days?

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.765625