Morale in BF: Evo

Megatron

Mongoose
Will there be a morale system in battlefield evolution? Like something that simulates suppresion and stuff?
 
Neither side had anywhere to go thanks to a river, some cold weather and nasty Russians (they were nasty to the Germans and Russians who ran... Kommisars). (OK, maybe you can retreat to house next door.) It was just a dangerous place to be.
 
brook said:
Neither side had anywhere to go thanks to a river, some cold weather and nasty Russians (they were nasty to the Germans and Russians who ran... Kommisars). (OK, maybe you can retreat to house next door.) It was just a dangerous place to be.

I don't accept that explanation (which is also used in SST). Maybe it makes sense for bugs, but there is a point at which almost any human being will run from danger, even if they have no hope of escape. It's an oxymoron to explain that they won't run because there's no place to run to. That's attributing rational thought to an irrational impulse. When they run they aren't thinking rationally. They're thinking about escape and survival whether it's rationally attainable or not.
 
I am continually fascinated by the stories of the surrendered Germans being marched out of the city in freezing weather, while the Russians were stripping some of them of their cold weather gear, shoes, and hats. While other Russians were randomly shooting the German soldiers as they were marched past. How far could someone make it in Russia without a warm hat.

Some of these guys were in prisoned for 10 years....In Siberia....That wasn't Club Gitmo.

In Stalingrad, After November, few Russians retreated "off the board" and fewer Germans were so lucky. It will be interested to see how the game will simulate morale. In a city where everybody, was vested in not losing the building that they where were standing in. Also, retreat may have meant crossing a road, a seriously dangerous activity in a city full of hostiles.

I was always curious how many Germans actually escaped Stalingrad by foot. Somewhere I read only 4, but that seemed remarkably low.
 
Well, shooting randomly at POW's and stripping them of their cold weather gear never amezed me, it's kinda a part of war.

What amuses me is that the Germans are always portrayed as the bad guys (okay Hitler was a bad guy), but alot of German tech captured after WWII laid the way for what we use now. Also, the Germans are no less a human the the ones they fight. The Allies get all these movies portraying them as heroes while such "heroism" probably was equally commonplace with the German troops.

The winner wrote the history, that's just it. Sven Hassels books and that documentary "Through hell for Hitler" actually give the Germans a face, rather than them all being nazi idiots deserving death.

Went a little off-topic there.

(I am not a nazi by the way, I'm just saying the Germans were humans as well)
 
There's an entire series of books talking about notable german soldiers, tank commanders, and pilots. I read one story of a soldier who led his men in defense of the Berlin pocket. He was wounded and was evacuated (with a good portion of his command) back towards the American and British forces.
 
You're refeering to an German officer I take it?

What's the name of those series? I'd really like to get hold of 'em.
 
Bede said:
brook said:
Neither side had anywhere to go thanks to a river, some cold weather and nasty Russians (they were nasty to the Germans and Russians who ran... Kommisars). (OK, maybe you can retreat to house next door.) It was just a dangerous place to be.

I don't accept that explanation (which is also used in SST). Maybe it makes sense for bugs, but there is a point at which almost any human being will run from danger, even if they have no hope of escape. It's an oxymoron to explain that they won't run because there's no place to run to. That's attributing rational thought to an irrational impulse. When they run they aren't thinking rationally. They're thinking about escape and survival whether it's rationally attainable or not.

You maybe right. But don't discount the powerful attraction of hiding, cowering, and then doing nothing. In most circumstances, I fully agree that people will run. In Stalingrad, soldiers fought over a single building for days. The tractor factor was a horror show. Maybe soldiers were able to sneek out of firefights, but my guess (only a guess) is that they did so deliberately and slowly, otherwise their own side would have put a bullet into them. Sometimes running away is really a tricky business as soldiers found out during the fighting in the "noman's land" of WWI.
 
Kristovich said:
Well, shooting randomly at POW's and stripping them of their cold weather gear never amezed me, it's kinda a part of war...
(I am not a nazi by the way, I'm just saying the Germans were humans as well)

Its kinda part of war...except when it happens to you. then, it just plain stinks.

Being caractized as the bad guy comes from attacking everybody, then losing the war. Opening up concentration camps doesn't help either. Then again the Russians don't come out smelling like roses either, but I'm an American, so I'm biased.
 
What amuses me is that the Germans are always portrayed as the bad guys
well,the atrocities wreaked on the civilians in conquered countries MAY have something to with that. sure, there was a lot of good germans. but those who were "bad" did more than make up for this(i'm not saying that the soviet gov. was any better mind you-both sides were equally sick in their methods)

as for the orginal topic- while morale could be included, it would be nice if it was more of a "endgame" then what it is in, for eg. WHB, when units break and rally many times during the game. imo when the unit breaks, there shouldn't be any force short of a NKVD squad to make it rally on the board(i'm talking about the Stalingrad game of course, not BF Evo :oops: )
 
Yeah, you Yanks got all the glory (no offense).

And indeed, the Germans hardly did deserve getting known as the good-guys, but I doubt the standard German trooper was a nazi or had anything against other races. I do know German troops took part in the excecution of people, but it was mostly SS that held that. And in later years the SS and the Wermacht were at odds with each other.

Then again, the Russians don't smell like the good-guys either.

The Brits and Canadians got almost no notice later. Truth is, while US Airborne only took one of their objectives at the night to the 6th of June, the British Airborne took all objectives.

I did not intend to offend anyone with this post.
 
Stackpole Military History Series
Infantry Aces
Luftwaffe Aces: German Combat Pilots of World War II
Messerschmitts over Sicily: Diary of a Luftwaffe Fighter Commander
Panzer Aces: German Tank Commanders in World War II
Panzer Aces II: Battle Stories of German Tank Commanders in World War II
Tigers in the Mud: The Combat Career of German Panzer Commander Otto Carius
Armor Battles of the Waffen SS, 1943-45
Grenadiers: The Story Of Waffen SS General Kurt 'Panzer' Meyer
The 12th SS: The History of the Hitler Youth Panzer Division Volume I
The Brandenburger Commandos: Germany's Elite Warrior Spies in World War II
Michael Wittman and the Waffen SS Tiger Commanders of the Leibstandarte in WWII (Vol 1 & Vol 2)


Are all the examples of the series I can find. I have the Infantry Aces one, and it's very good.
 
For game purposes it doesn't matter if they run, hide, crawl into a hole, etc. The point is that they're out of action, and it isn't because they were shot.

Now you could just as easily explain the combat results in SST as including all possibilities (i.e. the guy hit was either killed, severely wounded, or had his morale broken so that he'll take no further part in the fight). Instead, Mongoose chose to explain it as "there's no need for morale because these guys are too desperate". IMHO, that's not a very credible explanation in the real world.

brook said:
Bede said:
brook said:
Neither side had anywhere to go thanks to a river, some cold weather and nasty Russians (they were nasty to the Germans and Russians who ran... Kommisars). (OK, maybe you can retreat to house next door.) It was just a dangerous place to be.

I don't accept that explanation (which is also used in SST). Maybe it makes sense for bugs, but there is a point at which almost any human being will run from danger, even if they have no hope of escape. It's an oxymoron to explain that they won't run because there's no place to run to. That's attributing rational thought to an irrational impulse. When they run they aren't thinking rationally. They're thinking about escape and survival whether it's rationally attainable or not.

You maybe right. But don't discount the powerful attraction of hiding, cowering, and then doing nothing. In most circumstances, I fully agree that people will run. In Stalingrad, soldiers fought over a single building for days. The tractor factor was a horror show. Maybe soldiers were able to sneek out of firefights, but my guess (only a guess) is that they did so deliberately and slowly, otherwise their own side would have put a bullet into them. Sometimes running away is really a tricky business as soldiers found out during the fighting in the "noman's land" of WWI.
 
Bede said:
Instead, Mongoose chose to explain it as "there's no need for morale because these guys are too desperate". IMHO, that's not a very credible explanation in the real world.

If Mongoose rewrote the rules explanation to include elimination for reason of morale breaks, how would you effective would you judge the morale system. Would it be acceptable or too abstract?
 
Kristovich said:
Yeah, you Yanks got all the glory (no offense)....
The Brits and Canadians got almost no notice later. Truth is, while US Airborne only took one of their objectives at the night to the 6th of June, the British Airborne took all objectives.

I did not intend to offend anyone with this post.

No offense taken... there is a reason that Hollywood is in the U.S.
The Brits and Canadians are great. No arguments.
The Brits get noticed...I'm not too sure about the Canadians.
 
Back
Top