Decimation

[bmolsson]

Eh.... Seems a bit harsh... If you want to get rid of them, wouldn't it be more "pleasant" just to let them be sick and die when they are far away from home. Some kind of attrition based on the distance to their "home town".....

[Zild]

Harsh, but apparently realistic :)

The thing is, I figure something like attrition would exist for all factions. So the Romans would have decimation AND attrition! :D And as I said, it only seems to come into play when they lose, so it's not going to happen all the time. Although I might be wrong - it might be when they run away (it's possible for a unit to run away but the battle still be won, of course)

[Ulug Beg]

I believe it was optional and inflicted upon units that the army commander, rightly or wrongly, considered to have committed a particularly heinous crime, such as cowardice in battle. It could be quite satisfying to push the ‘decimation’ button after loosing a battle. I wonder what the effect on moral should be!

[troymclure]

it was a practise, but it WASN'T commonly practised if you know what i mean. It was entirely up to the generals discretion and could be for any offense as far as i'm aware not just an army who ran from the field. It was i believe fairly controversial even back then, not that anyone would gainsay a general who wished to do it but it wasn't considered the ideal way to deal with a deserting army.
I think Crassus was famous for doing it to the legions he received to fight spartacus. The legions in question had actually broken a couple of times when facing spartacus's armies and crassus decimated them as one of his first orders of buisness when he took charge.
I think it wouldn't be bad as an option, perhaps available to do anytime rather than alwasy after a defeat. It could give like plus 2 morale for the next battle or something. Though i think it wasn't a common enough practise for me to be overly concerned if it's not included.

[Akka]

I often thought about decimation during a game ^^

I think that it could be added into the game. It could be applied to any unit, and would have as effect :

- If the unit had fled while not enduring more than 25 % losses in the previous battle, it would raise its morale by +2 for the next battle, and the morale of the whole army by +1 for 2 years.
- If the unit had fled while enduring between 25 % and 50 % losses in the previous battle, it would raise its morale by +1 for the next battle.
- If the unit had fled while enduring more than 50 % losses in the previous battle, it would have a -1 morale penalty for the next battle.
- If the unit had not fled, it would cause a -2 morale and discipline penalty in the whole army for 5 years (cumulative).

So decimation would be a tool usable to punish a cowardly unit, but it would backfire if used inconsiderately.

[Vlad Tzepes]

Errr...decimate yourself, buddies- it's not the poor soldiers that lost the battle - you were in charge

[Oaty]

Errr...decimate yourself, buddies- it's not the poor soldiers that lost the battle - you were in charge

I'd like to see you say that to a Roman general back in there glory days.

Actually Krassus did take the blame for losing carrhae, but then again how did that word get out if none of the Romans returned home

[EatYerGreens]

I only found out this thing about decimation meaning a Roman military punishment relatively recently, from a TV doumentary of all places. I'd long had it in my head that it meant destruction of an army down to one tenth of its original size but, checking my dictionary, just now, that is listed as definition number 2 and has the comment "disapproved of by some speakers", indicating that it's considered a misuse of the word.

Definition number 1 is as stated previously in this thread but it says that it was "killing every tenth man (of eg mutinous soldiers)". In that case, loss of a battle need not be involved at all.

It does seem unfair to dish out this kind of treatment where it was actually poor strategy on the part of a general which was to blame for loss of a battle but no-one would get to be general in the first place without some level of demonstrated ability so I imagine such occurences were extremely rare. Some military blunders have been accentuated in the history books, as a salutary lesson to future would-be commanders. Meanwhile, the maxim that "history is written by the winners" might suggest that countless similar, but smaller-scale or less educational, embarassments have been thouroughly covered up by their respective empire's historians, along with any incidences of decimation which followed them, other than historical notes that such a practice existed.

As a punishment for individual units which routed off the field with only light casualties, whilst their companions fought on and got slaughtered all the more for lack of their support, it makes perfect sense. Where the entire army routed together and prematurely, causing the battle to be lost, it makes even more sense - for bringing the empire's entire soldiery into disrepute. The ability to psychologically affect an opponent just by the mere reputation of your army's qualities has the battle half won before it even starts. Anything which threatens that needs to be stamped out fast.

It's sobering to think that the practice of executing individuals for cowardice and desertion was still in use as recently as the first World War and there was an incidence of mass mutiny in the French army which led to randomly selected individuals being picked out, court-martialled and shot. The movie of that story features Kirk Douglas but I forget the title. I think it was a Stanley Kubrick film. Rarely shown on TV these days as it was shot in black and white.

[soibean]

I think Crassus was famous for doing it to the legions he received to fight spartacus. The legions in question had actually broken a couple of times when facing spartacus's armies and crassus decimated them as one of his first orders of buisness when he took charge.

Speaking of Spartacus, he had a movie on the history channel yesterday so thats the only reason I understand about Crassus... good film by the way, just too many commercials about alexander the great

[markpoll]

didn't the French do something like this (not 1 in 10 of course) during WW1 when a section of the front mutinied? The point being its not that bizarre or ancient. I'd prefer to leave this out of RTW though.