Morale Penalties

[Arkell]

Hi, still in process of learning multiplay properly and I would like to know exactly the morale penalties inflicted to the troops if something happens to the general. I never paid much attention to this issue when playing the campaign mode, but multiplaying force me to dwelve into this. Difference between the penalties if for example: 1)general got killed, 2)running away 3) got captured. Been asking peoples in the lobby and got few answers but maybe a post like this can get more ppl discussing it and cover all situations. I hear bout -2 penalties, -6 temporarily and some more. And also about the troops that rallied get + morale. Be great if you guys can explain to me. Also I still have divided opinion bout taking peasants as general. Discuss

[Scurvy]

Basically if you kill ht egeneral while the hard fightings going on the enemy run :)
if you kill him before they hang around for a bit then run

I wouldnt bother using peasants as general, the gen is your 16th unit and i think he should be in a unit that can actaully do something usesfull (i like having mine in a unit of royal knights) also peasants get scared pretty easily.

[CBR]

A general killed/captured means a permanent -2 morale and another -6 for the first 20-25 seconds after he is killed.

The rallying of troops doesnt really raise morale but when you do try and rally, all routing units gets a boost in morale and the game engine checks if this boost is enough to make a unit rally.

There is no penalty if a general routs.


CBR

[Tomisama]

Hi CBR

There is no penalty if a general routs.

Hmm, then why not take the cheapest peasant general, and rout the unit your self to avoid the possible big dip in morale at the wrong time?

Can anyone tell us why that would not be a good idea?

Exactly what bonus does the generals presence bring, and what the range of influence is over the battlefield?

Thanks in advance

[CBR]

Well I have seen some use such a gamey tactic but they lose one manuver element so I dont think it really is a good idea. The money saved by getting a peasant cant really make up for that one less unit even if you can get a couple of extra combat points by having a few stronger units.

You would simply end up having all your units engaged while the other player have one unit that can flank. That of course doesnt mean that you will win 100% of the fights as there is still skill, luck and teamwork that can change the outcome.

A general does not give any bonuses to other units but I do think that the general unit has +2 morale but not sure.


CBR

[EatYerGreens]

I wouldnt bother using peasants as general, the gen is your 16th unit and i think he should be in a unit that can actaully do something usesfull (i like having mine in a unit of royal knights) also peasants get scared pretty easily.

The reason peasants scare so easily is that their basic morale score is -2 (@valour 0). So even valour 4 only brings it up to +6 and I gather the recommended level for MP battles is +8 morale for every unit, except for your missile units, where you don't want them to meleé at all, if possible.

When you said "16th unit" I assume you meant this in the figurative sense?
As we all know, the first unit selected becomes the general. All knights units have morale 8 at 0 valour, saving lots of money to upgrade infantry etc.


@ Arkell,

If you get the VI Army builder program, you can see unit stats, including morale and get a feel for how much valour boost each unit type needs, to bring it up to 8 and then compare cost effectiveness of similar types (eg the reason why you sometimes see Feudal Sergeants being used but not the Chivalric variety).

Units within 50m of the general's unit get a +1 morale boost, from his proximity. Although I don't always adhere to this myself, it helps to not have him so far back, in a 'safe' area, that this influence is lost around where the main meleé is happening. It may be sufficient to bring him up behind the action, without getting directly involved in the fighting unless things are getting dire or the opportunity arises to hit an enemy unit in the rear.

Similarly, don't allow him to run off, in pursuit of routers, where he might get isolated and caught.

If a player tends to be over-cautious in keeping their general safe, you can exploit this by using cav to threaten to attack his unit. You need not engage it fully, if you can drive their general away from the main fight that might be enough. Once your cav is behind their meleé line, you could turn at the last second and hit his infantry in the rear. He'll be practically obliged to send his general back to 'rescue' the situation, whereupon you can engage his unit directly. With luck, he'll get caught up in the rout which happened because he was briefly too far from his men.

Lastly, non-elite units are capable of being 'panicked by routing friends', so having low morale units in your lineup can cause problems. As few as 10-20% casualties will make units like peasants break and run. Far from 'making up the numbers', they're basically no better than a 10-20 man unit.

[Puzz3D]

Hmm, then why not take the cheapest peasant general, and rout the unit your self to avoid the possible big dip in morale at the wrong time?

Can anyone tell us why that would not be a good idea?

Exactly what bonus does the generals presence bring, and what the range of influence is over the battlefield?

Think positionally. If you rout the general, you only have 15 units. How will you stop the enemy's 16th unit from flankiing you? The other factor is that the general has 6 hitpoints. He can turn the tide of a battle if he is used at the critical time. Also, the general's unit gets +2 morale, and you loose that advantage by routing his unit. And, his unit can cover the flank or back of a unit giving that unit a +2 morale boost. All of that is a lot to loose just to avoid the possibility that he might be killed. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[Scurvy]

When you said "16th unit" I assume you meant this in the figurative sense?
As we all know, the first unit selected becomes the general. All knights units have morale 8 at 0 valour, saving lots of money to upgrade infantry etc.

I dont actually know what you mean by figurative sense? however i find that if i dont use my general to flank/support line then i really struggle- need my 16th (or 1st) unit more than the risk of him getting his head chopped off.

[Puzz3D]

Units within 50m of the general's unit get a +1 morale boost, from his proximity.

Within 50 meters of general: +1 morale per command star
Beyond 50 meters from general: +1 morale per 2 command stars

However, in multiplayer the general always has 0 command stars.

[Arkell]

@EatYerGreens

I do have the VIArmyBuilder and been playing with it quite a lot altho it has one flaw (or not?) where after you bought the 5th unit of the same kind it didnt increase the price of that unit like they suppose to do in the normal multiplayer game (the tool maybe encourage players not to take more than 4 of same unit). I know pretty much the stats of the popular units, but I posted my first post because I've been in a few big chaos battles like 4v4 and my general being killed/rout/captured was the reason my main line broke, hence would like to know how big this penalty is.

p/s: So what Tomi said is true? If my general runs away frightened but didn't get killed or caught, theres no morale penalties to my troops yes? But only losing the +2 morale for not being near my troops.

Edit: After I did a quick check now I see there is no morale bonus for troops being near general as they have no stars in multiplay. But I also didnt see the +2 morale for the general units. But if u guys talking bout this gen unit doing the flanking then i understand.

[CBR]

p/s: So what Tomi said is true? If my general runs away frightened but didn't get killed or caught, theres no morale penalties to my troops yes? But only losing the +2 morale for not being near my troops.

No you dont lose the +2 morale as thats just for the general's own unit.


CBR

[InDaKnight]

I was under the impression that your army suffers an imediate -8 morale penalty when your gen is killed/rout which is reduced to a permanent -2. But if your general routs (-8) and then gets captured it's another -8.

Also have any of you noticed that when a unit's morale is really high it fights with more vigor than a unit that morale is lower?

[Tomisama]

I was under the impression that your army suffers an imediate -8 morale penalty when your gen is killed/rout which is reduced to a permanent -2. But if your general routs (-8) and then gets captured it's another -8.

There must be something in place like that.

Otherwise you are telling me that I should keep a unit that by it’s presence only brings a +2 morale to “it’s self” under certain circumstances. When the loss of that unit brings a potential loss of 120 morale temporarily and 30 morale permanently (- 8 and -2 moral respectively for each of the remaining units) “to my army” in total .

That’s +2 versus -30, not a good trade off. The benefits too small to balance the risk, even considering the missing 16th unit argument.

There must be something more to this…

[Grey_Fox]

Tomi, the risk of losing your general compared to the risk of not having that extra combat unit is acceptable. All you have to do is get your opponent's troops tied up, and you can use your general to run around the flank at the critical moment.

If you take a peasant general and withdraw him at the start, odds are that against a competent player you will end up commiting all of your forces while his spare unit can hit you in a vulnerable position.

It is true that a good player can make up for this deficit through sheer skill, but it is in my opinion unacceptable to deliberately withdraw a possiby battle-winning unit because you are afraid the general might die.

Even if your general dies, you can still win the battle, the morale penalty is only catastrophic if you are already losing.

[L'Impresario]

Also have any of you noticed that when a unit's morale is really high it fights with more vigor than a unit that morale is lower?

I think there is a reversal of relation between "cause" and "effect". In order to maintain good morale you must have created the circumstances that allow your unit to be winning, thus indirectly inflicting more morale penalties to the enemy, and steadily adding bonuses to yours.


Generally, one can fight with 15 units when he omits some extra missile unit. He may have a disadvantage in that field but it isn't impossible to avoid enough losses from missiles as to justify the lack of that unit, plus it's probable that one or two units will be of higher quality/price.
But making the abundant unit the general, enter battle and then withdraw, you deprive yourself of a tactical tool. Generals can lure, provoke, faint, trick etc. They are almost always a high priority target for the enemy and they carry psychological effects with them that are to be viewed outside the strict field of game-mechanics. Seeing a heavy cav General trying to get over your flank or to charge through the weakest point of your infantry line will force you to react as you stand there watching "doom" approach. This could be done with any unit when you got more units than the enemy (or more combat units), but I think that using a general will exasperate the receiving end more, because you know that killing that guy may turn the scales in your favour.

[Arkell]

Ahh ok CBR, the +2 morale for the gen's unit itlsef. So, are we agreed that, if my general runs away, didnt get killed or caught, theres no morale penalty to my troops, yes?

[CBR]

Yes that is correct. I cant remember if I did some tests on that a long time ago or someone else did it but there is no effect from a general being withdrawn before combat. And same thing with a routing general in combat. The morale hit only comes when he is killed or captured.


CBR

[Grey_Fox]

Well here would be the 'worried by routing friends' penalty if the general was close enough...

[CBR]

Yes that morale hit from seeing routing friendly units (a general) is still there of course.


CBR

[EatYerGreens]

Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
When you said "16th unit" I assume you meant this in the figurative sense?
As we all know, the first unit selected becomes the general. All knights units have morale 8 at 0 valour, saving lots of money to upgrade infantry etc.

I dont actually know what you mean by figurative sense? however i find that if i dont use my general to flank/support line then i really struggle- need my 16th (or 1st) unit more than the risk of him getting his head chopped off.

Figurative sense, as in :- "a figure of speech", or "not meant literally".

The discussion was about a proposal to withdraw the general off the field, so you were making the point about having one spare (a "16th unit", rather than the 16th unit) to flank and outnumber with, against someone using 15 units.

I only made the post so as to clarify the selection order for the benefit of any patrons who were reading the thread but hadn't yet tried MP. They would soon have discovered their mistake but I hoped to save them some embarrassment, in their first attempt.

[t1master]

kerns have an uncanny ability to rally after routing, and once fighting in earnest they tend to fight to a man, and are fast. not bad for four hundred bucks, good general unit.

i don't think you should withdraw your general, take peasants sure, but at least engage them :) naptha and hashishin generals are more fun than peasants, ask ichi.

[ichi]

kerns have an uncanny ability to rally after routing, and once fighting in earnest they tend to fight to a man, and are fast. not bad for four hundred bucks, good general unit.

i don't think you should withdraw your general, take peasants sure, but at least engage them :) naptha and hashishin generals are more fun than peasants, ask ichi.

Even better is ichi's inferno, 16 units Naptha only, Byz v Turks, set on Huge Units with Unlimited Ammo.

Back on topic; its fun to watch the enemy send 3 units of cav over to kill Sensei's peasant general, sitting miles behind the fighting. For 50 florins he freqently ties up some of his opponents critical resources. You see that pez gen sitting there unprotected and the urge to 'go get it' overpowers you.

ichi

[Eternal Champion]

I guess then one advantage to having a "lesser general unit" is if he routs it won't send your disciplined or elite units into a panic. Having said that I still don't think using a peasant unit is the best choice, even though Sensei beat me the other night. I'd rather bring an extra archer, kern, anything that can inflict some damage or fight a little.

[Puzz3D]

I guess then one advantage to having a "lesser general unit" is if he routs it won't send your disciplined or elite units into a panic.

I've seen this technique used by some good players. They choose a fast unit for the general, and try to get you to chase him. If you do corner the general, they rout him off the map.

[Scurvy]

best general is a cheap unit of hosrarchers which can be chased around the map as well as any light cav but can also inflict some damage

[L'Impresario]

Best general is the one who sits back while his troops chase all enemies beyond the hills.

[Scurvy]

best general is the one who never has to fight a war :) ---> pen mightier than the sword and all that

[Ghost of Rom]

So there is no big morale hit when it says "your general has let caution get the better of him and is fleeing the field"? I always assumed it was.

[Puzz3D]

MORALE FACTORS in MTW/VI

Morale is determined on a unit basis.

States

Impetuous: 10 and above
Steady: 2 to 14
Uncertain: -5 to 5
Wavering: -14 to -5
Routing: Less than -6

The rout point is -16 in MTW v1.1, and probably moved to -18 in VI for MP. Routed units will keep routing until their morale rises to -6 or above. Hitting the rally key pumps +8 morale into the selected units.

Impetuous units will pursue enemies for longer, and may disregard orders to hold position. Some troop types may charge without orders.

Uncertain or wavering units which are not fighting are less likely to charge, and those who are fighting are more likely to fall back.

Negative factors:

Loose or disordered formation: -2
Outnumbered 2 to 1: up to -4 (range = about 75 meters)
Outnumbered 10 to 1: up to -12 (range = about 75 meters)
Outclassed in quality and speed: modifies the outnumbered penalty.
One flank threatened: -2 (range = about 60 meters)
Two flanks threatened: -6 (range = about 60 meters
Charged in flank: -4
Infantry charged by cavalry in flank or while disordered: -6
Charged in flank by unit hidden in forest: -8
General's death (for first few seconds): -8 to all his units except highly disciplined units
General's death (after first few seconds): -2 to all his units except highly disciplined units
Routing Friends: up to -12 for seeing 2 equal or higher level friendly units routing. Elite and disciplined units consider lesser types as 1/2 a unit for this calculation.
10% of unit is dead: -2
50% of unit is dead: -8
80% of unit is dead: -12
Taking casualties from enemy missle fire: -2 for a duration less than the reload of the firing unit (additional -4 for gunpowder weapons)
Unit is very tired: -2
Unit is exhausted: -6
Unit is totally exhausted: -8
Losing: Up to -8 (up to -14 if losing to cavalry)
Skirmishing without ammo: -6
Skirmisher pursued for a long distance by equal speed unit: -6

Positive factors:

Two flanks protected: +4
No retreat possible (usually castle sieges): +8
No enemies around: +4
Two enemies routing: up to +8
Uphill Position: +2
Winning: up to +6
Unordered charge: +4 (such as when impetuous knights charge automatically)
Outnumber Enemy 3 to 1: +4
General's unit: +2
Within 50 meters of general: +1 morale per command star
Beyond 50 meters from general: +1 morale per 2 command stars

Archer and xbow open fire range = 100 meters (2.5 tiles)
Normal infantry marching speed is 1.68 m/s (speed 6)

Notes by longjohn about morale penalties due to casualty rate, army destruction, constant retreat and how the outnumbered penalty is calculated:

longjohn2
06-25-2003, 20:10
Location: UK

Surprised it's not in the strat guide, but yes there is a morale penalty for taking casualties that depends on the percentage suffered in the previous combat round. These are quite prone to random variations, so an unlucky round can tip a low morale unit into rout. Missile casualties count here too, so a lucky volley can be much more effective than the relatively small penalty for being under fire would suggest.

The indication of who's winning and losing takes into account push backs as well as kills, so it is possible to be winning whilst suffering more casualties.


longjohn2
06-26-2003, 21:02
Location: UK

As you've all guessed the 20% etc losses penalties are static, and as such depend on the initial size of the unit. There are another set of penalties (I'll try to look them up for you when I'm at work) dealing with casualties sufferred in the preceding second. These percentages are worked out on the current strength of the unit.

Outnumbering is based on both numbers and men and combat power. A unit has to be outnumbered by the requisite amount in both areas to get the penalty. This was a change from Shogun which was based on a straight banner count. The change was mainly aimed at helping to get rid of small units at the end of battles.

The "army destroyed" penalty kicks in when most of an army's combat power has been eliminated. Again, it's intent is to speed up the end of games by getting rid of small units that have rallied well away from the action and would be a chore to hunt down.

The "disheartened by constant retreat" penalty is related to the Benny Hill detection code that routs your unit if you try to win a battle by running around avoiding combat until the timer runs out. As the retreat counter builds up, you get a morale penalty that serves as a warning and may, if you're lucky, tip your unit into a normal recoverable rout rather than the unrecoverable Benny Hill penalty rout.


longjohn2
06-27-2003, 23:02
Location: UK

The actual combat power calculation is quite complex, but involves all the factors you'd expect including numbers of men, combat factors, valour and upgrades. It's the figure the a.i. uses when picking match ups. As you've surmised, the combat power and numbers of all units in a 75m radius are added to give friendly and enemy totals which are compared to decide the morale effect. The unit's own strength is added in twice (I think) to help out lone units. For a morale effect to happen, the outnumbering must happen in both morale and combat power. So for instance, if a CK unit faces off against a peasant unit, the CK doesn't get a penalty for being outnumbered in men because it has superior combat power. Similarly the peasant unit doesn't suffer for being "outnumbered" in combat power as it isn't outnumbered in pure numbers of men.