Chad Harrison Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 As it is now in CMBO, the only troops that I ever see surrendering is MG's (or other crews) when they are down to 1 man, immobile, and under fire. They less likely to do this until that side has taken heavy losses, and force morale is low. Is CMBB going to model Surrendering the same way as CMBO, or has there been *improvements* made to the system. Reason I ask is because at the beginning of the German/Russian conflict, the Russians surrendered en masse quite often. After the Germans killed a lot of their prisioners, that came to stop as the war drug on. But, in CMBO, lets say that one platoon is surrounded and under heavy fire. Yes, they will break, and try to run away, but I have never seen them surrender unless Global morale is low. When global morale is high, they will do the Chicken death dance, running back and forth, until destroyed, or surrender with 1 man left in the platoon. I think that it would be nice to see that same platoon, helplessly overwhelmed by superior firepower and with no option but to die, surrender en masse. Regardless of global morale. In a 7000 point battle on a 9 km square map, all that matters to that platoon is what is around it, ie. what it can see, hear, ect. So if that lone platoon is surrounded ect., what would it matter if the entire force has not lost a lot of men and global morale is high? Reality, they would most likely surrender, instead of running away. Just a thought that I had after playing a game where a platoon was overwhelmed, and did the Chicken death dance until all killed/wounded ect. BTS or anyone else know how CMBB will work with surrendering? Chad Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grey Hunter Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 As it is now in CMBO, the only troops that I ever see surrendering is MG's (or other crews) when they are down to 1 man, immobile, and under fire. Hmm, I seem to have had different excperances, I've just captured a Volksturm team with no casulties in my PBEM game. maybe its just luck, I've had the game for two years, and its still finding ways to surprise me. [ August 18, 2002, 04:29 AM: Message edited by: Grey Hunter ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 Can you formalize what would go into such a surrender so that it can be coded? What factors would lead to such a decision to surrender, and how would they be evaluated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egan Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 I think it would be useful if once you had surrounded an enemy unit you could have an HQ unit offer them a chance to surrender.EG: your panzer grenadier company has surrounded russian infantry if, say, platoon size. istead of charging in and finishing them off, you command your HQ unit to make a formal offer for the russians to surrender, whether or not they do could be based on the experience, and health of the russian unit, how fanatic they are etc whether they have officers with them etc. I know this is a minor detail but i think it would be sort of cool.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 Play green troops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 Originally posted by Chad Harrison: Reason I ask is because at the beginning of the German/Russian conflict, the Russians surrendered en masse quite often. After the Germans killed a lot of their prisioners, that came to stop as the war drug on. They didn't kill a lot of prisioners, however, they didnt treat them well, and there were serious food shortages etc. The "mass killing" was what the comissar told the troops, to get the troops to not surrender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 Reason I ask is because at the beginning of the German/Russian conflict, the Russians surrendered en masse quite often.I disagree. Most of the surrenders took place after a battle, eg. when the force was beaten and low on moral, with strong enemy on pursue. This is outside the scope of a CM battle, however, except when one side surrenders. But in battles Russians often put up very strong resistance, even if in vain. Often they did, also, surrender. But as said, green or conscripts are more likely to give up en masse. Maybe it would be useful to have a scenario editor Global Morale setting to make the GM lower at start of a battle (like if a unit has been under siege for a week and is low on supplies), or say, "Cowardice" variable that could be used like "Fanaticism" but would just make it more likely that troops would surrender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 Originally posted by Sergei: "Cowardice" variable that could be used like "Fanaticism" but would just make it more likely that troops would surrender.Nice suggestion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slappy Posted August 18, 2002 Share Posted August 18, 2002 On a related note: (this may help or not) The squad that surrenders with one combat effective remaining will likely have a half dozen injured non-KIAs which surrender as well. It has always mystified me that these are not considered captured for score purposes, even if there is a global surrender. In this case, you get credit for all combat effective surrenders, but the wounded captured are counted as killed, as are the wounded who escaped off map with the rest of their units. It seems to me that most non-lethal casualties would still allow prisoners to be interrogated within enough time to be of use. Any thoughts on whether this was: a. Overlooked and a mistake? b. Overlooked because wounded non-KIAs are not tracked in general. These guys could be 1000m from their unit by the end of the battle? b. Intentional - Captured wounded are more trouble than they're worth and so don't count extra? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted August 18, 2002 Author Share Posted August 18, 2002 Originally posted by CMplayer: Can you formalize what would go into such a surrender so that it can be coded? What factors would lead to such a decision to surrender, and how would they be evaluated?What frustrates me the most about the way it is now is when you troops who are surrounded, cut off from help, and broken! just start running around being shot to pieces. Adv. Squad Leader uses an Encirclement rule; ie. when the troops are recieving fire from all around them. Perhaps a solution could be to look at how STRONG of firepower is being recieved and from how many angles. If STRONG firepower sources all lie straight ahead, and the squad/platoon breaks, it will run the opposite direction. Nothing wrong with that. But, if it is recieving STRONG firepower from the front AND the rear, at close proximity, surrounded by open ground, its choices are to either run and be gunned down in the open, or to surrender. I am no code master, so I do know how difficult this is to code, but I know it would not be easy. My original question was not asking for it, but inquiring whether we should expect a change, or a change would be appropriate. I do know that when you squads loose men, it is because of critical wounds, KIA, individuals surrendering, individuals running off, ect. What is great about CM prisioners when are taken is that they can be recaptured and freed. As it is now in CMBO, your platoon is surrounded and under heavy fire. They will break and run most likely, even with close troops, if global morale is high. From my 1 1/2 years CM experience, that seems to be the most proboable occurance. They will try to route away and be slaughtered in the process. BUT, if they were to surrender en masse, there would be the possibility of that side to free them. So, a number of factors could play into the calculations of surrendering. It is just my personal opinion that surrendering seemed to occur more often in reality than it does in CM. Does anyone else share this view? Or do I just have a bad point of view on WWII reality? Chad Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted August 18, 2002 Author Share Posted August 18, 2002 Originally posted by Slappy: Any thoughts on whether this was: a. Overlooked and a mistake? b. Overlooked because wounded non-KIAs are not tracked in general. These guys could be 1000m from their unit by the end of the battle? b. Intentional - Captured wounded are more trouble than they're worth and so don't count extra?I think with regards to this, it was for ease of coding. That it is easier to say that those men are *gone*, rather than figure on the spot who is wounded, KIA, routed, ect. Remember that at the end of the battle, the KIA number is only a random number IIRC (correct me if I am wrong! ), and is not calculated during the battle. Chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted August 18, 2002 Author Share Posted August 18, 2002 Originally posted by Sergei: Maybe it would be useful to have a scenario editor Global Morale setting to make the GM lower at start of a battle (like if a unit has been under siege for a week and is low on supplies), or say, "Cowardice" variable that could be used like "Fanaticism" but would just make it more likely that troops would surrender.That is one of the best suggestions I have heard yet on this. That way, if per say, you had a battle at the latter end of Barbossa when nearly all Russians where running, but this one pocket decides to stand, they could start with a much lower global morale. Making them green troops would be one solution, but then you take the entire bag of defects that come with green troops. What if they were veteran troops ready to make a stand, but their hearts werent really in it at this point? CMBO cannot model this AFAIK. And I think it would give scenario creators a great tool to be able to model this. Just my thoughts. Chad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts