Some answers on morale issues

Post bug reports and request support here.

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

Post Reply
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33034
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

Some answers on morale issues

Post by Joel Billings »

We've looked into the morale issues to some degree and will look into it more in the next week. Here's what I can say at this time:

1) Gary intended that there be a chance for multiple morale point gains from a victory in combat
2) Gary did not intend for there to be multiple victories credited to a combat unit just because a support unit was attached (this is a bug we will fix). We are not sure if multiple victories can lead to multiple morale gains - first look says no, but it might be in the code somewhere.
3) There is an undocumented +1 morale gain to units in combat when their Morale Help Level is set over 100%. There is also an undocumented 1 less morale loss when a combat is lost when over 100% help. I was not aware of these items, and Gary agrees that this should have been set to kick in at morale help 110 and over (the challenging level) instead of at 101 and we're planning on making that change.

We appreciate that these issues were discovered. I realize there's a lot of passion in this community, and that's a good thing, but keep the discussion civil and do not make personal attacks. Thanks to those that helped get to the bottom of this.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Peltonx »

Good stuff.

Thanks for up-date.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
morvael
Posts: 11763
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:19 am
Location: Poland

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by morvael »

I have a question: was it intended that units can rise without limits (other than 99) over their national morale through combat?
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: morvael

I have a question: was it intended that units can rise without limits (other than 99) over their national morale through combat?

That would be a yes, if you read the rules.

Your chances are less and less as you go up.

A pain in the ass to figure out the %, but you can [8D]

From my exp its a 1-10, 11-20 scale, but I could be wrong [X(]
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33034
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Joel Billings »

Yes, it was intended, although my understanding is that as you go further over morale you have less chance of gaining (similary when very low compared to NM you don't go down as fast when you lose).
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
Walloc
Posts: 3143
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:04 am
Location: Denmark

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Walloc »

Now that we are on the subject.

1) Gary intended that there be a chance for multiple morale point gains from a victory in combat

Does that mean the formular behind how much/fast u gain moral for example from victories has been changed in 1.07.06?
Undocummented in the readme, correct me if im wrong, but the readme only seems to go too regaining moral when below NM fix.

Kind regards,

Rasmus
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Now that we are on the subject.

1) Gary intended that there be a chance for multiple morale point gains from a victory in combat

Does that mean the formular behind how much/fast u gain moral for example from victories has been changed in 1.07.06?
Undocummented in the readme, correct me if im wrong, but the readme only seems to go too regaining moral when below NM fix.

Kind regards,


Rasmus

I am a crazy moron as many peeps have stated over the yrs, but I say yes
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33034
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Joel Billings »

ORIGINAL: Walloc

Now that we are on the subject.

1) Gary intended that there be a chance for multiple morale point gains from a victory in combat

Does that mean the formular behind how much/fast u gain moral for example from victories has been changed in 1.07.06?
Undocummented in the readme, correct me if im wrong, but the readme only seems to go too regaining moral when below NM fix.

Kind regards,

Rasmus


I don't remember there being a change in that area in 1.07.06 or any of the 1.07 versions for that matter. If I knew for sure I'd say, but I'm not certain. The focus of the work was on the non-combat areas of morale changes.
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
Flaviusx
Posts: 7732
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:55 pm
Location: Southern California

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Flaviusx »

I'm very troubled that multiple morale gains in combat are actually intended. This has to be both inflationary and tending to create feedback loops where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

But if it is intended, then I am in fact less troubled by the recent bug fix to NM. Because this may be the only way a defending player can keep up with a rampant attacker who is racking up wins and morale. The two help offset each other. But really, this entire morale business needs to be reigned in. Too much is tied to it and its effects on combat values are too non linear.
WitE Alpha Tester
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Michael T »

Joel, could you answer this for me. What is the point of NM levels under 50? As the morale rules will push all units to at least 50 in a very short time. The only way they go down again is through combat loss. In my game with Kamil all my Rumanian's were at least 50 till the recent blizzard effects.
User avatar
Ketza
Posts: 2227
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 7:11 am
Location: Columbia, Maryland

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Ketza »

Great info. Thanks for the ongoing support for an awesome game!
Walloc
Posts: 3143
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:04 am
Location: Denmark

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Walloc »

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I'm very troubled that multiple morale gains in combat are actually intended. This has to be both inflationary and tending to create feedback loops where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

But if it is intended, then I am in fact less troubled by the recent bug fix to NM. Because this may be the only way a defending player can keep up with a rampant attacker who is racking up wins and morale. The two help offset each other. But really, this entire morale business needs to be reigned in. Too much is tied to it and its effects on combat values are too non linear.

This is exactly what i have been thinking. You create more so than previously, cicles of negative or posetive feedbacks. Get to 50 in 3-4 turns and 2 helds as per Denniss examples and u at 55-56 moral 4 held and u at 60 as soviet in 41. Get into that feedback and no way forward for the axis and all things given those monster russian should be able to attack and more succesfully all the soon.

Same as the other way if german player is able to keep russian player off balanced gets wins u get 86+ moral armies.
Not only is there the direct affect of higher CV for higher moral/possible xp u also start to pay less MP to enter enemy hexes. So progress is faster and not only that as fuel consumption is tied into MP usage u in effect get it easier too supply wise.

Its almost as the concept of NM has been abandoned. While it seemed that many hated that part of the game im not one. Through the lack of showing real attrional effects on the combat effectiveness/loss of experience, other then the loss of manpower. An effect that also happens when winning if the losses are higher than what they can be replaced with, NM keept IMO the system sane instead.

Kind regards,

Rasmus
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Michael T »

Rasmus, you mimic my thoughts exactly. It seems at some point in the recent history of the game the morale system has broke down and does not replicate the real war too well at all. I do not know why, probably more than one single parameter. I just hope 2by3 can somehow get us back to the status quo that existed some 6-12 months ago.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Walloc
ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

I'm very troubled that multiple morale gains in combat are actually intended. This has to be both inflationary and tending to create feedback loops where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

But if it is intended, then I am in fact less troubled by the recent bug fix to NM. Because this may be the only way a defending player can keep up with a rampant attacker who is racking up wins and morale. The two help offset each other. But really, this entire morale business needs to be reigned in. Too much is tied to it and its effects on combat values are too non linear.

This is exactly what i have been thinking. You create more so than previously, cicles of negative or posetive feedbacks. Get to 50 in 3-4 turns and 2 helds as per Denniss examples and u at 55-56 moral 4 held and u at 60 as soviet in 41. Get into that feedback and no way forward for the axis and all things given those monster russian should be able to attack and more succesfully all the soon.

Same as the other way if german player is able to keep russian player off balanced gets wins u get 86+ moral armies.
Not only is there the direct affect of higher CV for higher moral/possible xp u also start to pay less MP to enter enemy hexes. So progress is faster and not only that as fuel consumption is tied into MP usage u in effect get it easier too supply wise.

Its almost as the concept of NM has been abandoned. While it seemed that many hated that part of the game im not one. Through the lack of showing real attrional effects on the combat effectiveness/loss of experience, other then the loss of manpower. An effect that also happens when winning if the losses are higher than what they can be replaced with, NM keept IMO the system sane instead.

Kind regards,

Rasmus

With the ammo bug nerfed soaking attacks become nothing more then a boon for GHC and a real downer for SHC.

This will require SHC to plan things out unlike in the past when SHC would just attack along the lines 50+ times a turn and grind down GHC.

Grinding like that is not possible now as the higher morale will lower losses and increase losses tto the attacker.

Finally morale is working.

As GHC one pointer, do not lower Art or AA below 71%
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
Joel Billings
Posts: 33034
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Joel Billings »

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Joel, could you answer this for me. What is the point of NM levels under 50? As the morale rules will push all units to at least 50 in a very short time. The only way they go down again is through combat loss. In my game with Kamil all my Rumanian's were at least 50 till the recent blizzard effects.


I could be wrong about this, but other than being far in the rear where you can gain morale up to 50, there is still a difference for units with an NM under 50. Units with NM under 50 will not get to go as high via the other reasons for morale gain, and their chances for gains and losses in morale from combat are impacted by the lower NM (at least I think they are). Are the Rumanians getting to 50 because they're in the rear a lot, or because their winning lots of battles, or both? Or is there something else going on?
All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Michael T »

Well it is true I rotate them in and out of the front, so can the Reds do this, even more so, especially in areas or at times with little activity. But having a NM or 35 meant something before, now it doesn't hold much weight at all really. I suspect a NM of 45 for Russia in 42 won't mean much either. Whereas 12 months ago it did.
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Joel, could you answer this for me. What is the point of NM levels under 50? As the morale rules will push all units to at least 50 in a very short time. The only way they go down again is through combat loss. In my game with Kamil all my Rumanian's were at least 50 till the recent blizzard effects.


I could be wrong about this, but other than being far in the rear where you can gain morale up to 50, there is still a difference for units with an NM under 50. Units with NM under 50 will not get to go as high via the other reasons for morale gain, and their chances for gains and losses in morale from combat are impacted by the lower NM (at least I think they are). Are the Rumanians getting to 50 because they're in the rear a lot, or because their winning lots of battles, or both? Or is there something else going on?

There is no difference and there never was before, but it was broken so the % was much lower.

It has never worked right, but because the % was so low no one suspected it was broken MT.

JB as I have stated and posted in the dev area NM for the Russians, Romanians, Huns and Italians is 50.

I can be ignored again, but I am right again as I have been about morale for a very long time.


Beta Tester WitW & WitE
User avatar
mmarquo
Posts: 1376
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by mmarquo »

Every condition to augment morale described in the rule book apply to units with morale either below 50, below 75 or below national morale. The only time morale should otherwise augment for a unit with higher morale is successful combat, and only if the attacker, "retreats the defender when attacking."

Thus, multiple successful attacks in a single turn causing the defender to retreat could potentially farm huge gains in morale, if the rule working literally as written, then forcing surrenders without retreat does not count as a successful combat for moral purposes. If so, this should be reexamined.

If Pelton has found another condition, he should follow MT's gentlemanly example and post it as bug.


Marquo
User avatar
Peltonx
Posts: 5814
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 2:24 am
Contact:

RE: Some answers on morale issues

Post by Peltonx »

ORIGINAL: Marquo



If Pelton has found another condition, he should follow MT's gentlemanly example and post it as bug.


Marquo

Noper its withen the conditions.
Beta Tester WitW & WitE
Post Reply

Return to “Tech Support”