Moral could make huge difference in the way we play BK, and for it to workas properly as possible, it should be accompanied by changes to - well - almost everything (weapon accuracy, general unit survivability).
The manual mentions something about staff cars, helping with moral when units are far from their main depot. Curious how that is working out (if I may, that is).
Every single piece that comprises infantry is a component. I have not tested the impact of all of them. But weapon characteristics have to be a very big part of this.
In the manual, there is mention of Moral Boosting vehicles (so to speak). These references were not removed so I really think that Moral was worked on up to the last minute when they pulled the plug on the modules. While vehicles might work a moral boosters, I think it is more viable to place commanders in a vehicle. Same thinking, but expanded slightly.
A single soldier has 5 to 10 Moral... that is not enough to fight. Soldiers are designed to fight in team or squads. But having said that, you can still give a single soldier any amount of Moral for his own base value. But unless this is a special solder for s specific purpose, you would not want to put a squad together with supersoldiers. The squad has to be balanced, with the command at the top of the structure. Emphasis must be placed on the Command because it is what (in Theory) holds the Squad together.
But think about a single sniper... he is trained to work alone. So obviously he works without further oversight. Since we are looking at a single unit... he is the beginning and end of the so-called team and would need 100 points to be effective. If he is killed. There is no fallback.
Back to your question; if you are able to collect single soldiers within an area, an officer will be able to reform a squad. Remember, soldiers assigned to Guns or Trucks can be used to refit squads as well. But I'm having a little argument with myself about that. Engineers are not necessarily the same as rifleman. So would these guys be better to get another truck? But no matter how you work out the numbers, a single guy with 5 to 10 points is not going to fight... you can control him but is is not trained to work alone and could refuse to obey orders. Sounds dumb... I know...
There is a deep code that seems to work against me on this... I call it the confusion code. This is when a Gunner of Engineer just starts walking around in the game. I can't quite pin it down yet, so unless I find this, I cannot predict how low moral soldiers will operate. In testing they seem to walk all over the place... the confusion, disarray, shock, low moral... I think most of us have seen these guys just walk off before. It has to be a bit of leftover moral code.
No doubt, part of a soldiers condition includes his HP and Ammo status. If his HP is 100% and ammo is 100%, he is ready to go back to work. The Formation code is there for this purpose... And this same Formation Code is a part of the original Concept behind Moral. This is the only method to rebuild a squad out a bunch of singles. After looking at this code, soldiers will always seek out their original commander first. If he is not present, then they are assigned to the next higher ElementID Commander, until all are assigned. So each Squad is built from the top down.
So let's analyze this a little. If you return a squad to the rear to for retrofit, and you have the commanders... you just need to resupply ammo and make sure all members are 100% HP. In the past, some Supply Trucks would give new replacements to undermanned Squads. I've never been a big fan of that function... although there has to be a method to do this. So the next best thing that I can think of is to collect the scraps of other leftover teams and squads.
The officer has the Disband Formation Command. He can disband his Squad, then Reform a new Squad out of what is available.... or a new Command Function can be added that allows him to
Fill-Out Formation. The Fill-Out Function would allow him to collect anything he needs to fill his squad out. So if he needs a BAR, then that is what the next guy brings. This reduces the code needed and works in reverse of a truck just throwing soldiers into squads.
Let's think about how replacements arrived in a theater. Most arrived in new Squads or Platoons. The onesies-twosies were rare while a battle was underway. So in this respect, I think the Supply trucks is unrealistic. But we all know from our research that when the heat is own, and confusion exist on a battlefield, Commanders would collect every soldier they could from anywhere.
Consider the situation on the morning of June 6 1944. Elements of the 101st Airborne were mixed with Elements of the 82nd Airborne. Platoon Lieutenants and Majors were rebuilding their Squads as they found soldiers... they did not care what unit they came from. They did not have time to play hide and seek and wait for the rest of their guys to show up. So the
Fill-Out Formation Function seems the best way to go. This allows a Commander to collect soldiers without a leader to come under their command.
All Squads are defined or based upon the Commander. Since he is the first link in the chain, whatever the Squad is designed to do, follows him. So if this is a 10-man Squad with certain soldiers, that is what he will get back. So what do we do with the one or two stragglers? I'm thinking we need to Add a Function or Command to collect these guys into the Squads.
Perhaps we call this
Redefine Formation. This would not change the composition of soldiers collected, whatever weapon or characteristics they have remains the same... it only expands the Squad around the soldiers present. So an Extra BAR leads to another Squad Gun... or another Scout adds to the Squad EYES. Each soldier has specific things they bring to the Squad. So what about a bazooka? Add him. During a battle, we have to focus on survivability and battle-worthy, not what is clean and pretty. We start with Clean and pretty when we march our men out there... they don't come back that way.
The point here is pretty much anything looks like it is possible... but again, is this too much depth or micro-management?
You are correct gagarin. But let me point to a word you used - inconvenient. Once a Squad reaches a certain size, it is too difficult to maneuver around, and the formations are impossible to layout properly. 31 men is basically an entire platoon, or small company in most armies. It is 3 Squads plus the Leader, a Lieutenant or Captain. But the theory behind Rifle Squads is small, compact, self standing units that provide a purpose to the Platoon. With 3 Squads in a Platoon, you have the capability to move individual units up or back as needed, without having to move the entire force at the same time.
Jungle Operations were conducted by leap-frogging these Squads as they moved. The same tactical maneuver was used in Bocage. Wherever the Infantry are the Point, or the front, they chew up ground by moving concise and direct.
I propose the 15 man limit on the squad because there were some 15-man Squads during WW2. Read about the Unit Galahad, the 5307th Composite Unit (provisional).
15-man Squads are still quite manageable and you can still create formations that are functional. At a certain point, they unit breaks down and you have a mob of men either charging or retreating. Of course you can see the same thing with 3 Squads all moving at one, but you can at least reform these into their original groups. The 31 man would be impossible to turn or rotate quickly since every man has to move. You can turn 1 10-man Squad much quicker.
BUT... you guys are free to create whatever size squads you wish to try... I am not going to go out there and say... YOU CANNOT DO THIS OR THAT! I'm only the messenger, not king.
One more thing about Squads I think is key here. It is doubtful that most players have ever studied Squad/Platoon/Company/Division Organization, so they use their squads as standalone units.
If we go as far on Squads as I am proposing, the Infantry Company is a necessary Adoption. This is because of the Moral Option.
So when you think about an Infantry Company, you don't have to have the whole thing out there, but you at least need the basic Command Structure.
Infantry Squad = 9 to 15 men
Infantry Platoon = 3 Squads - Plus - Platoon HQ Unit (small Squad with Lieutenant).
Infantry Company = 3 Platoon - Plus - Company HQ Unit (small Squad Captain or Major)
You can carry this out to a Division Level, but then you get into a lot of units. Already you should be able to see that a Infantry Company is 9 Infantry Squads of different composition and 4 HQ Squads of Command. Also within each of the Command Unit is where you find your Supply, Mechanical, Engineering, Logistics and Medical Units... and also your HMG, Artillery, SPGs, and RPGs. Each of these assets are assigned to work with the Platoon level (or rarely) Squad level Commanders. But it is Companies that are usually going to work together as a Fighting Unit with the SubCommands working within that Command.
There is certainly no limit on how many units you can have on a map, but the more you have working or moving, the game will slow down or hiccup. But there is nothing prohibiting a mapper from placing an Entire Company on the map.
So looking back at the Moral System once more.
The Individual Squad has 100 points. This is an effective fighting unit
The next level Up - Platoon Command - Adds 35 points to the Moral for all Squads under that Platoon.
The next level Up is the Company Command - Adds 35 points to the Moral for all Squads under that Company.
So now the actual fighting Units - the Squads now have 170 points.
As the battle is underway and things start to go to hell... Imagine this scenario:Squad A-1 loses it Leader - (loses 35 points) - but maintains 135 points and continues fighting.
Squad A-2 loses both the leader, and assistant (loses 70 points) - but maintain 100 point and continues fighting.\
Platoon Leader and the HQ Unit is Wiped out - Loss of 35 points - Now everything begins to crumble top down...
Squad A-1 now at 100 points still effective ---
Squad A-2 now at 65 points and begins to suffer from lack of leadership
as the battle continues... any additional loss of a commander at Company level cause the entire force to be affected.
Individual Squads are affected by their individual casualties... each soldier that is killed loses 5 points...
Squad A-1 loses 4 men - (lose 20 points) - but still at 80 and still can fight.
Squad A-2 loses 3 men - (lose 15 points) - Now at 50 points and all abilities severely downgraded / Dispersion is 50%, Rate of Fire Doubled/ Cover Bonus Lost/ this Squad needs to be pulled out before it runs. At 35 points they are shocked.
In the above Example you can see how things begin to crumble depending on how the battle plays out. Now someone might say, "well how can they kill the platoon leader?" Platoon Leaders were killed all the time... they were directing their Squads and usually right up there on the front with Artillery or HMG teams. Some might attach to a Rifle Squad.
Now Imagine that the Company Command is wiped out. That is a 35 point hit for every units in the area. So how can that happen? If the enemy has Air or Artillery, it can happen.
A very common tactic was to cut the head of the snake off. Meaning if you take out the Top Level Command, the rest of the Units cannot function as well... and perhaps will retreat or surrender.
So in my Example, the AI is going to try very hard to locate the Top Command and take it out. ------ Well I
expect the player is going to do the same thing... right?
Of course the entire Project needs a full testing... and play tested.
Moral is a large huge game-changer... as i knew it would be... it adds so many layers to the game... that we really need to think hard about it before we jump off the cliff.
And i agree that since Moral is perhaps the most important single factor that can affect the combat units... adjustments to accuracy, rate of fire, cover bonus/Camo, sight, almost everything has to be rethought.
Think about a bunch of soldiers in a trench or laying prone... if they are under attack and their leadership has been killed, they are going to suffer. Unless there is a Number 3 that takes over... there is no command and they are working independently. The direction of fire, rate of fire, ability to see, ability to stay calm is all effected. They start making mistakes and unless someone asserts himself to bring it under control, the Squad faces annihilation. Even if 1 to 3 members begin to run, they can still be taken out before they get far. The game engine already has the code (Confusion Code) to make soldiers start walking or running away. So perhaps the moral level triggers this code at a certain level, say at >=35 points.
I waited until now to answer the weapon range question:
There is no way to avoid this. But I'm not going to propose anything extreme. Just within a Squad, there were weapons that more range than others.
A SMG does not have the Range of a Rifle.
A Scope Rifle has more accuracy than a Rifle with iron Sights.
A LMG is a Suppressive Fire Weapon with the range between a SMG and Rifle; BK does not have LMG/HMG suppressive fire unless you re-code it.
A Grenade is limited by the distance of a soldiers throwing ability.
A rifle launched grenade might travel twice the distance of a SMG.
A scout can see further than the other members since he is using a scope or binoculars.
The Commanders have Binoculars but unless they are on the front of the line, their distance is not as good as the Scout.
RPGs have a range between the SMG and Rifle
Mortars have a range of the LMG, perhaps a little further depending on round size.
Artillery: Howitzers have shorter ranges than Large Guns
AT Guns have a range of a Rifle plus 20-25%.
Large GUNS - Range based on Round Size.
More needs to differentiate between Artillery. The current system does not truly define how this break out in categories or TYPES.
So what is the balance or answer? I truly am not sure yet. I have been testing Squad Weapons in BK 1.2 to see how that affects play.
In my mind, A Squad is comprised of Rifles, Squad GUN (LMG) and SMGs. Throw in Grenades and launch Grenades, you pretty much have a lot of firepower. So the Moral factor can be the difference in Strength or Status. Tactics are going to be the decider much of the time in a Squad versus Squad situation. A Squad charge will usually lead to suicide... think about Bonsaii.
If you throw enough at the charge that the defender cannot overcome the numbers... the defender will fall at the cost of three or four times the defenders. Most armies would not just throw their units into a battle like this. But Japan used this tactic when they had numerical superiority or if the local commander was desperate and assumed the cause was lost. The '
do as much damage as possible' or '
sell our lives as dearly as possible' does not work in modern warfare... unless you are out of other options.
I see RPG/bazooka teams much like the HMG and Mortar Teams. These were usually smaller teams assigned to add fire support to platoons or squads. I don't see this actually attached within squads. Perhaps others think differently, and NIVAL did do it.
And there were all kinds of Special Weapons that you have to consider; the Boys and PIAT from the UK for instance. Is a Rifle launched Grenade a Special Weapon or something a squad would carry? In my mind, it is a Squad Weapon. It takes the place of hand grenades.
But I am far from solving all of this.
You have exactly hit the head of the nail... This would be a form of Resource Management. Instead of Mining Gold and Solver and cutting trees for lumber... you are managing your army resources. The resources are in the form of a single factor- moral.
Moral = Command.
So does this become problematic or add to the depth of realism?
I am exploring this every way I can to see to keep this as simple as possible. What I have proposed is about as much as I think it can be simplified. We are talking about 3 levels of Command providing Moral... The reason it does get this much discussion is due to how much it will effect the game as we know it.
So let me ask this question: What if NIVAL had left Moral in BK1.2?
We would not even have this discussion... would we not?
Here's what I believe happened during development. NIVAL stated early on that the game would be of a tactical nature without resource management. At the time, I don't think they considered Moral to be a Form of Resource. It was only thought of as a true to life Factor... much like how much ammo a unit carries.
But in testing, they had trouble resolving the balance and how things could be affected by the Moral. And I think they were only considering 2 levels of Command to impact the Moral. The reason I took it to three levels is to maintain a buffer or a safe zone where a squad or armor unit has some depth and fall back. Taking out one command level should not render your forces impotent.
That is exactly why a Squad needs an Assistant Squad leader. If you take out the Commander, and there is no backup, the squad is done. And the level of Moral should start high enough that it does not take a sudden dive and cause a catastrophic melt-down if a commander is lost.
So I arrived at where I am after careful testing and thought. I had to try to understand what the original code writers were thinking... or what they tried. I can read the embedded code that is still there.. they just did not switch it on. But what it does not tell me is exactly how it worked. The actual Code that processed this function was removed in the final cut. So that forced me to guess or surmise. I formed my opinion based on what I could see, but without the missing code... its like searching for the treasure without the map.
So, again, you all need to think about this and let me know how you feel about this.
But let me say this. I don't want to get real hung up on this single issue. This a thumbs up or thumbs down thing. In the end, while it would influence much of the game, I hope you guys don't overthink this. Since a lot of changes will be coming, I think of it as something like a learning curve to adapt to all of it. When you add the tow capability to a tank, that is a major change when you think about it. Or when a TRV can go out and recover a tank or truck... isn't that a major change as well?
All the moral factor is going to do is force the player to take care of his infantry, and use them as a viable units. he has to take care of his command structure. It means mappers will have to make sure they include HQ Command Squads at a level to support all of the units. That does not seem to be a huge change to me. But what happens on the smallest combat units is very much different. It is not like you are going to be forced to look at every single unit to monitor Moral... There will be visual signs that things are going badly... just like there are now. If the squad is out of ammo... you see it. Well if the Squad Moral is low, you will see that too. So don't over think this and be too concerned about how you keep track of it. It just becomes part of the game.
And that is exactly how I believe the guys at NIVAL considered it.
I will answer questions as long as you have them...
***
I hope to start a testing phase in June so stay tuned for announcement.
It will still be pretty rough and raw in that form, but enough code is already written to start getting opinions. I am finalizing the game tables and code binary changes now. At the moment there are 15 new functions in the Command Binary. Most are based on what you are already used to... in other words... logical steps.
