Units surrendering then 'unsurrendering'

[MadGrenadier]

Last night as I was finishing up my first successful run as the Germans in VoT, I noticed something odd.

During my counter-attack into the village, I heard the sound effect 'We Surrender' (which is pretty damned cool, I might add) and noticed an American FO unit raising it's (his?) hands. Then another smoke barrage came down and broke LOS from all my units to that FO unit.

Next thing I knew, it wasn't marked 'Captured' any more.

Does this mean that 'Captured' units really need some kind of guard presence, whether it simply be LOS to a sufficient number of Enemy units or an actual presence? If so, cool. I guess it's pretty realistic for unit to realize that they might still get away and decide to change their minds about surrendering.

My counterattack ended up working and pushed the American forces out of the village and got an American surrender on turn 34 anyways... ... and that Panther nailed 4 Shermans all by it's lonesome. I was impressed.

------------------

--MG!

[CrapGame]

MG,

Yes it does. POW's have a habit of running for the hills if you don't post a guard on them. Sometimes they seem to do it even if there is a guard in the area if there are forces from their side in the area as well. A cool feature to see them try and make a break for it when given the opportunity.

------------------

CrapGame out

[Doug Beman]

There needs to be enough enemy presence around them to convince them that staying surrendered is safer than trying to escape. The rules are sorta fuzzy, like the rules surrounding objective location control. I'm pretty sure that any combat-effective unit will suffice for guard duty (heavy weapons squads, HQ units, even crews from abandoned vehicles should be able to keep surrendered units in control, as long as they're right on top of them, and there isn't a strong enemy presence in the area)

DjB

[iggi]

You can also eliminate surrendered units with area fire. Less hassle.

[MadGrenadier]

1 word - SWEET.

This game just doen't cease to impress me. Espcially since I can actually make all those tactics I learned ages ago work for real now.

Yeah, I ended up using the crews of my KO'd pillboxes and 150 as guards for the unit I overran in the counterattack. Didn't want a bunch of them running about my rear.

Thanks for the info. Kudos to the game designers again!...

------------------

--MG!

[aka_tom_w]

I have seen that as well

I think it is VERY realistic that they first surrender and then try to escape...

Then you can gun them down if you are paying attention as they try to run away

When they escape they (In my experience IME?) always escape un-armed so they are easy to kill them if you can get a shot at them

It think this is A VERY cool and well thought out feature

yes you have to guard them....

and yes your troops will disarm them, and if you let your troops abandon them, and let them think they are escaping, and then you can have another unit shoot them in the back as they flea..

evil laugh .... he he he

yes... I'm a sicko

now its time to go take my medication

(Oh yeah ....BTW its JUST a game...)

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

OK cool

I had not thought of that

iggi you are almost as demented as I am

he he more evil laughing

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by iggi:

You can also eliminate surrendered units with area fire. Less hassle.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 06-01-2000).]

[iggi]

Well if I have the turns left over, I have a couple of squads in one of my PBEM games that will not get an opportunity to surrender.

But tom, I think your way is more creative . At least you make them earn thier execution.

[Mikester]

As I recall, live prisoners are worth more to you in the games victory calculations than dead ones (dead ones are treated just like regular KIA's I believe). I would therefore keep them alive and in your control if at all possible vs. killing them since they might help you win the game.

Mikester out.

[aka_tom_w]

is that true?

That sort of take the fun out of it...

If captured prisoners are worth more than dead bodies KIA I guess we should be more careful with our prisoners. I had no idea they were "worth" more as captured prisoners.

But I figure if I'm at the point where I'm capturing prisoners and they are surrendering I have already won the scenario so what difference does it make if I waste them if they try to "escape" ?

thanks

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikester:

As I recall, live prisoners are worth more to you in the games victory calculations than dead ones (dead ones are treated just like regular KIA's I believe). I would therefore keep them alive and in your control if at all possible vs. killing them since they might help you win the game.

Mikester out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Mikester]

Tom,

Try doing a search on prisoners and the like. I think it was some time back, but I believe Steve stated that prisoners were worth more alive than dead.

In many cases, like you mention, it probably wouldn't matter. However, sometimes there are some outlying defending units that surrender real early in the game. Later on the battle might grind into a slug fest and one side or the other won't end up surrendering before the game ends. In these cases, the prisoners might be worth their weight in gold alive vs. dead.

Mike

[Echo]

Not to mention the intel that can be garnered from from POWs, especialy a higher ranking individual.

[Mikester]

Found what I think I was remembering. It's a bit dated, but probably pretty close to how the game handles things.

_____________________________________________

Big Time Software

Moderator

posted 09-06-1999 06:19 PM

The "double point" thing Fionn mentioned was my initial understanding of the situation, but it isn't correct. Basically, the friendly player has no incentive to wipe out its own captured men. I'm not sure I fully understand how points are calculated in the Big Picture, but the points come out very much in the capturing player's favor. First of all, to wipe out anything involves a comittment of SOME form of firepower (artillery, tank fire, small arms, etc) so that if someone is using that to kill his own captured men, he ISN'T using it to whack enemy troops. And while he is busy fussing with killing his own, he ISN'T busy dealing with things that can actually cause pain. In other words, if Martin had used artillery to whack his own men, that would be ammunition not used in some other crucial area. And since this stuff is not unlimited, a poor decision on the player's part. Likewise, it is a BAD idea for the capturing player to use them as human shields because a dead POW doesn't count.

In short, best thing to do is march your prisioners off the map ASAP. And because positions are variable, that doesn't mean that the AI should take over and just blindly march them to the rear. MUCH better to let the player do this. And since movement orders are very simple to give, this does not require more than minor effort. Plus, I think itis cool to have to deal with prisoners. Makes you feel like you reall accomplished just run away. Big deal. In CM I am staring at a group of guys that I captured and that I control. Nice feeling of power

Steve

________________________________

Mikester out.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Boy, that is an old post

Yes, captured enemy soldiers are worth more alive than dead. So those of you who have been breaking the Geneva Convention are simply short changing your victory score.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

what Geneva convention???

I never knew I had to sign some damn convenetion agreement to be "nice" to POW's

to play CM!

All Kidding aside the way troops surrender and then try to escape is EXTREMELY well modeled!

This is an added bonus.

I'm a little sorry the game is not Black and white, with respect to WIN or Lose then killing "escapeing" POW's would not matter, to my mind anything that is not a loss or a tie is a VICTORY not matter how marginal or decisive and if a few POWS got wasted trying to escape?

oh well

I think it is great the way they are disarmed and it is good that you have to order them to go somewhere (like off the map) and that your own troops have to guard them this is just simply AMAZING for a wargame.

thanks again BTS

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Boy, that is an old post

Yes, captured enemy soldiers are worth more alive than dead. So those of you who have been breaking the Geneva Convention are simply short changing your victory score.

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Guest Scott Clinton]

I am not one to go on about 'nice touches' (goes against my sig ) but I noticed a nice touch a few days ago that is on topic:

I was playing a particularly bloody VoT game with the AI as Germans (150% forces). After a bloody point blank fire fight in the woods between two full platoons of Germans and two platoons of my very "Tired" GIs that lasted for near five minutes...the last squad of Germans finally decided to surrender rather than run into my 105mm barrage that had cut off their retreat.

But the carnage was such that as soon this German squad surrendered they were "Panicked"...and remained panicked for the next 3-4 minutes (turns) as I consolidated my hold on the woods and started to flank the bunkers and pillboxes. Those poor buggers where scared ****less and would not move!!!

Funny thing is the AI finally surrendered, even though I had not destroyed a single pillbox or bunker (it had two 75mm pillboxes btw). But I was all the way around the flank of the pillboxes and bunkers with two flame-throwers, engineers and a Sherman...it was only a matter of time.

So when it was all over the Germans had well over 150 casualties and I took 60+ prisoners...but only got a TACTICAL victory (my loses where quite heavy also)! This scenario is a blast against a German AI with 150% normal forces!

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 06-01-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Scott, I'll pretend ANOTHER "Scott Clinton" made the above post so as to not tarnish your sig

One thing I like about the way the AI surrenders is that it does so in a more or less REALISTIC manner. That means infantry casualties matter to it. In other games the AI or a stubborn human might say "ah, I can still cause casualties, so I'll stick it out until I am wiped out". Not so in CM. The AI looks at the situation, makes some calculations, and then decides if it can REASONABLY expect to better its standing. If not, and defeat looks certain, then it is likely to surrender EVEN IF it still has major assets still functioning. So far I have never seen the AI surrender when it shouldn't have and yet still seen it realistically fight on to the bloody end occasionally as well.

Steve