Morale after a generals death

[SwissBarbar]

Hi everyone

When a general dies in battle, his men get a lower morale, so far so good. But in reality the death of a leader also could have a "whaaaaaat, kill them all!!"-revenge-effect on the dead general's troops. Would it be possible to implement a say 10% chance of a morale boost instead of an increase when a general dies?

Greetings SB

[/Bean\]

Hmm, I think there should either be a way like it is now for levied or mercenary troops, and then a 'kill them all' thing for professional troops.

Or

Maybe we can implement a percentage chance of something, like 50/100 chance a unit will rout if general is killed (and likewise 50/100 fight to death.)

Does any of that make sense?

[SwissBarbar]

Yeah, makes sense. The first one is interesting

[Andy1984]

Intresting idea. However: is this aspect of the game moddable?

[/Bean\]

Don't look at me, Modding takes one look at me and cries with laughter.

[Ludens]

Hmm, I think there should either be a way like it is now for levied or mercenary troops, and then a 'kill them all' thing for professional troops.

Or

Maybe we can implement a percentage chance of something, like 50/100 chance a unit will rout if general is killed (and likewise 50/100 fight to death.)

Does any of that make sense?

I can see where you are going, but in reality it's way more complex than that. Levy, mercenary or professional is not the important thing, but whether the army has a close bond with their commander. I also doubt the berserk response would be triggered if the the army was already uncertain and under heavy pressure.

However, this is probably impossible, as morale penalties were hardcoded in the previous games and I am not aware this is different in M2:TW.

[Cute Wolf]

As I note in my previous posts long ago about Kingdom mechanics on morale... Just look at the difference in Crusade Campaign, with British islands campaign... Crussaders and Saracens are heavily inclined to fight to the death (fight to the death and mostly uncontrollable, but still fight, even after their gen's death).... but the Britons are just plain routing..... (rarely fight to the death, just rout... )

[Skullheadhq]

Indeed, but it is unhistorical to wait till the last man drops dead.

[/Bean\]

Stupid CA not making a surrender option. It seems to be ruining lots of things. Surrender options for units or armies would sort all of this out. It wouldn't be that hard. It could be like the withdrawal button, only surrender. Or they could do it voluntarily, like routing is to the withdraw.

[Belisarius II]

Only problem is with what the AI is already, half of their army would surrender to you. I also Think that if your men kill the enemy general, that your men should get a morale boost, I mean I'd be happy to see the enemy commander get impaled on a spear.

[Phalanx300]

It would be great if it could be given to certain factions (where it would be a great dishonour to leave you're generals body and rout or for him to actually fall in battle).

[Cartaphilus]

It would be great if it could be given to certain factions (where it would be a great dishonour to leave you're generals body and rout or for him to actually fall in battle).

Remember the "devotio iberica" (and the "comitatus" of the germans, and the celtic "soldurii").

But obviously most of armies fled when their general died (or fled).

[Phalanx300]

Yes, though in some cases certain units would fight harder, all a bit hard to predict. :dizzy2:

[Olaf Blackeyes]

A well known and RL historical example of this type of thing are the Saxons. Upon the death of King Harold II at Hastings, the Fyrdsmen ((levies and fodder)) fled like screaming rabbits. But the Housecarls ((UBER HEAVY pros)) encircled the king's corpse and fought until they all died. If we could get the EB thing to do this it would be awesome. Maye a system where if the general dies his bodyguard enrages and will never retreat from the battle or something.
Just a thought.

[Horatius Flaccus]

I'm pretty sure this is all hardcoded...

[Cartaphilus]

The same thing happened in the battle of Maldon. When the earl Byrhtnoth died of many wounds, the levies fled, but his heordwerod, the warriors of his house, fought till the end, as they have sworn.

And so spoke Byrhtwold, one of his warriors:

"Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre,
mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað.
Her lið ure ealdor eall forheawen,
god on greote. A mæg gnornian
se ðe nu fram þis wigplegan wendan þenceð.
Ic eom frod feores; fram ic ne wille,
ac ic me be healfe minum hlaforde,
be swa leofan men, licgan þence."

Here in modern english:

"Thought must be the harder, heart the keener
Spirit shall be more - as our might lessens.
There lies our chief all cut down,
Good man on the ground; for ever may he grieve
Who now from this war-play thinketh to go.
I am old in years - hence I will not,
But by the side of mine own lord,
By my chief so loved, I think to lie."

[Skullheadhq]

"Thought must be the harder, heart the keener
Spirit shall be more - as our might lessens.
There lies our chief all cut down,
Good man on the ground; for ever may he grieve
Who now from this war-play thinketh to go.
I am old in years - hence I will not,
But by the side of mine own lord,
By my chief so loved, I think to lie."

Amen:clown:

[antisocialmunky]

I'm pretty sure this is all hardcoded...

Yup.

You could just the elite guard sky high morale(which they have in EB anyways).

[Phalanx300]

I've been reading this book on Google books: Germanic Warrior 236-568 AD. Time period isn't EB but Germanic values and stuff are the same.

And here is a piece of text from it:

The warrior was bound to his lord through a code of loyality. Tacitus says that 'the chiefs fight for victory, the followers for their chief'. The chief, as the strongest and most able warrior, led by example. The followers had to 'defend and protect' their chief, never deserting him and fighting to the death if necesarry since 'to any fighting man death is better then a life of dishonour' (Beowulf). An example of this was noted by Ammianus Marcellinus after the defeat of the Alamanni at the battle of Strasbourg in AD 357. The defeated king Chnodomar and his comitatus attempted to evade persuit but were cut off and surrounded by Romans. Chnodomar, accepting the inevitable, 'came out of the wood alone and gave himself up. His attendants to the number 200, together with tree very close friends, also surrendered, considering it a disgrace to survive their king or not to die for him if the occasion required it'. Attitudes regarding the duty of a retainer changed little over the centuries.

And from examples above as well we can conclude why Germanic bodyguards were wanted by Roman emperors. :2thumbsup:

[Alsatia]

But not loyal enough however to the empire to keep it intact..

[Phalanx300]

I doubt foreign tribes would feel any loyality to the empire rather then their warlords. :inquisitive:

Also the Varangian guard is another good example, and the Germanic bodyguard was more loyal then the Preatorian guards!

[Cartaphilus]

But not loyal enough however to the empire to keep it intact..

The decline and fall of the roman empire was not a matter of guards' loyalty. :beam:

[Alsatia]

The decline and fall of the roman empire was not a matter of guards' loyalty. :beam:

True, true. Economy, money, barbarians invading, corrupt officials, inept emperors.....

The list goes on...

[Vasiliyi]

"Thought must be the harder, heart the keener
Spirit shall be more - as our might lessens.
There lies our chief all cut down,
Good man on the ground; for ever may he grieve
Who now from this war-play thinketh to go.
I am old in years - hence I will not,
But by the side of mine own lord,
By my chief so loved, I think to lie."

Thats beautiful. I love war poetry.

[dragoon47]

I forgot exactly what the city was called but what about when Alexander sieged that city in Malli, India? The one where him and two of his bodyguards lept into a crowd of about 1,000 Mallians.

His men thought he was dead and charged in and slaughtered everyone inside the citadel, I think this is the one where he was wounded by an arrow IIRC.

Can't the trait that keeps track of the battles the general has been in also affect this type of event? I'm just putting something that's prolly not possible out there though :beam:.

[Horatius Flaccus]

Wasn't he wounded with an arrow in Gaza? :book:

[antisocialmunky]

He was wounded numerous times but the incident dragoon mentioned was the one that convinced him to go home. Yeah, he pretty much Leroy Jenkins himself into the fortress and his men freaked out and broke several ladders trying to get to him.

I suppose you could give everyone sky high morale and give every general a massive morale penalty so they become unbreakable if the general dies...

[Chris1959]

The number of times soldiers went berserk at the death of a leader are extremely rare but often well reported Gustavus Aldolphus at Lutzen springs to mind. However, it is perhaps a 1 in a 100 or even 1 in a 1000 event so rare that it is not worth simulating, realistically in an entire 1200 turn EB campaign it might happen once.

As for elites fighting to the death again it is well recorded but by the time it takes place they are so outnumbered and so disadvantaged that any loses they inflict are totally disproportionate to those they recieve, basicllly they just die heroically. All they do is provide material for bards and poets!

[Phalanx300]

The number of times soldiers went berserk at the death of a leader are extremely rare but often well reported Gustavus Aldolphus at Lutzen springs to mind. However, it is perhaps a 1 in a 100 or even 1 in a 1000 event so rare that it is not worth simulating, realistically in an entire 1200 turn EB campaign it might happen once.

As for elites fighting to the death again it is well recorded but by the time it takes place they are so outnumbered and so disadvantaged that any loses they inflict are totally disproportionate to those they recieve, basicllly they just die heroically. All they do is provide material for bards and poets!

I suggest to have an option that if the general dies that there is a chance that the bodyguard it was in will fight to the death. Germanic bodyguards were known for their loyality as were many others so that would be a good and accurate thing. :sweatdrop:

[ziegenpeter]

Hi everyone

When a general dies in battle, his men get a lower morale, so far so good. But in reality the death of a leader also could have a "whaaaaaat, kill them all!!"-revenge-effect on the dead general's troops. Would it be possible to implement a say 10% chance of a morale boost instead of an increase when a general dies?

Greetings SB

Could you give a historical example for this effect?

[A Very Super Market]

Gustavus Adolphus, but of course, that is beyond EB.

[Phalanx300]

Could you give a historical example for this effect?

Just read all of this tread there are many examples, or rather examples of extreme loyality.

[A Very Super Market]

Extreme loyalty in bodyguard units, or elites does not constitute as great examples, as it's almost a given when dealing with the quality of troops here. Had Alexander fallen while leading an army based mainly on levies (Be the Makedonian, Greek, or Persian, it doesn't matter) they would certainly have disintegrated and fled.

[Chris1959]

Actually when you look through history there are far more occasions when mortally wounded leaders tried to conceal their deaths from their men; Nelson at Trafalgar, Wolfe at Quebec etc.

We should not get carried away and allow the extreme exception become the rule which then distorts the balance of the game. If we had a berserker bonus for the death of a General it wouldn't be long before useless FM's were leading armies and suicide charging pike blocks in the hope of getting an army morale boost and a kamikaze bodyguard.

[Phalanx300]

Extreme loyalty in bodyguard units, or elites does not constitute as great examples, as it's almost a given when dealing with the quality of troops here. Had Alexander fallen while leading an army based mainly on levies (Be the Makedonian, Greek, or Persian, it doesn't matter) they would certainly have disintegrated and fled.

It does, if its a given then why do you appose it? :inquisitive:

And I'm more talking about the morale of the bodyguards and elite units.

[Elzeda]

Armies wouldn't do this for just anybody. I'm thinking, maybe you could create a very-hard-to-get trait that would have this effect. This way, the army would only go really crazy for good kings or exceptionnal generals. I don't know if it's possible to mod, but maybe create a trait that gives 50% chance of the army going berserk on the general's death.

[A Very Super Market]

Because elite units are already notoriously difficult to rout anyways!

[Hanoeman]

I don't think it would be very realistic. There are probably as many cases of elite warriors killing their leader (Caligula for example) as there are of elite warriors dying for him. I'd be more in favour of a general who loots an x amount of cities getting a +1 morale bonus for giving all of that sweet loot to his soldiers.

[jazstl]

I like the idea with the trait, but the general or leader would have to be very popular and experienced.

I vote for it...:juggle2: