Retreat/fight to the death and other ideas

[Legion]

Will there be something implemented to encourage retreat so that regiments won't be always fighting to the last man? I understand and agree that fighting to the death is necessary in some situations but in most cases it isn't. I'm just trying to think of a way to encourage retreating and regrouping instead of going Rambo. Maybe some sort of leaderboard or honor system. I'm not trying to force people to play a certain way I just think it's better to fallback and regroup rather than lead your men into a slaughter for no reason.

Another thing, I think that if the general of the army gets killed he shouldn't be able to respawn or that the respawn is a bit longer because if he can constantly die a respawn then how will taking out officers and commanders effect gameplay?

I think it would be cool to have a game mode that starts with each team on opposite sides of the battlefield and the generals have to choose what objectives to defend or capture and where to place units. That way the units won't already be in there historical position and gameplay could be random instead of starting the same everytime. And so that generals could pick there own points to defend instead of having them pre determined, or give them a option to choose from a map or something.
Or there could be a game ode where there is no objectives and the goal is to drive the other army off the field that way commanders could chose good strategic point to take on there own and use there own strategy. just some thoughts

[GreyDog58]

The regiments leader will most likely do what ever he can to keep his men alive, or lead them onto a glorious charge and sacrificing his line for a decisive victory for their team. Retreat of a regiment, will be often, in my eyes. Depends on who's leading.

[rebeldestroyer]

The regiments leader will most likely do what ever he can to keep his men alive, or lead them onto a glorious charge and sacrificing his line for a decisive victory for their team. Retreat of a regiment, will be often, in my eyes. Depends on who's leading.

I definitely agree with GreyDog the choice of charge or retreat is total dependent on what the regiment leader thinks everyone should do.

P.S. welcome to the forum GreyDog

[Etherton]

I think with retreating etc it all depends on what your position is and what your aim is. If you have to defend an area that is strategic then it would be better to stay to the last men. If however you have options to defend other parts its best to retreat whilst you still can

[GreyDog58]

P.S. welcome to the forum GreyDog

Thanks man. :P

[Mi'kmaq]

NO RETREAT, NOT ONE STEP BACK! (I'm just gonna say, my little gang will shoot and run into the woods. Top kek, dank meme amirite? )

[Octavian360]

This is a really healthy discussion to have regarding the direction of the game in my opinion. It depends on the direction that the devs want to go with this game. If they want to have an in-game morale meter; this would be a very neat, strategic and competitive utility in the game. However, I think this would classify the game more as a FPSRPG depending on how you engineer the mechanic. This is just one example and a great way to fuel more ideas!

[Legion]

I think morale would be a great addition to this game I just don't know how it would be implemented. Maybe if the regiment is taking to much fire or loosing a lot of men then they start losing morale and it starts to effect their performance, like maybe the players screen would blur or get a little shaky if they stay under fire and lose men for to long, then retreating would be a good option, retreating would allow people to regroup and gain morale so they could get back into the fight. That way fighting to the death, while possible, is not the best option.

[Hethwill_Khan]

The only deterrent for a "fight to the last" is a follow up scenario where you may or may not participate.

Let's say a event gets setup with 3 scenarios, regiments decimated in 1st scenario simply are ejected from playing 2 and 3.

This should put some psychological pressure onto the generals, and majors, and colonels and privates running for their lives.

In stand alone scenarios, well, not much one can do.

[Legion]

I don't think players should be elected and forced not to fight, I think a morale system would work good but there should always be an option to fight

[GreyDog58]

How about throw the suggestion completely away. The decision to run away, follow your officer, stay in a line, reload in a line, etc. Should be based upon the players choice, not forced upon him/her.

[Legion]

I agree but I still think their should be a morale system even if its not like the one I described. Morale would be a great addition it would add another element to gameplay and even with low morale people would still have the option to fight .

[Simon445]

About retreat thing, I think that your brain and hype will say "Damn, flag barrier is down, cannon balls are cutting the line what can I do ?" Doesnt really need anything special implemented.
And when you and friendlies loose many man, your morale will break in your mind and commander will order a retreat (if he doesnt get cut down by shots fired)

If commander sees that enemy is losing their "morale" and see that lines are getting smaller he will order a charge, because thats normal thing to do. And your imaginary morale will go up :p

And there will probably be some effects (vision getting blury when cannon balls hit the ground, hearing bullets flying over your head, mud splashing on your face, gore etc. etc. etc.) So your shots might get unaccurate.

[GreyDog58]

I just want WoR to be like NaS but with better graphics and gameplay. Not Be forced to do something and ruin my freedom over the game.

[yoyo8346]

About retreat thing, I think that your brain and hype will say "Damn, flag barrier is down, cannon balls are cutting the line what can I do ?" Doesnt really need anything special implemented.

The only problem with that is that morale doesn't exist when you're playing a game. You're not actually in fear of losing your life, so player probably won't retreat by choice, unless ordered to. If morale was to be part of the game, it would definitely need to be some sort of negative effect to your controls, vision, or stats etc.

[Hethwill_Khan]

There must be a "benefit" mechanic for retreat. If not follow up scenarios where you can fight IF your company/regiment is still in the fight ( because it fell back and did not fight to the last ) at least something that can, in a stressful situation put the commanders into a decision making spotlight.

As I see it there are a lot of mechanics that can be used, taking inspiration from table games, but until we know the full extent of the "special" rules of the formations in game suggestions are just that.

If fatigue, ammo, unit order, etc, are in place and coded in maybe a retreat to a safe area can replenish a unit of ammo, rest, etc over a period of time ? Maybe also receive reinforcements through respawn pool ?

In similar games we all charge because there is nothing to lose nor to win if we fall back except waiting for other regiments to come up and help or for a better position, which doesn't happen often.

Hence a "benefit" mechanic could help IF there are no linked follow up scenarios.

[Legion]

That's why morale needs to be added so that their will be a benefit to retreating and regrouping, the benefit would be to regain morale and lose the effects of low morale.

[Josy_Wales]

All of this sounds good, but there are som big cons. If there is a moral system in a game where every player is controlled by a human, its going to be realy hard to make for it not to ruin/dominate the gameplay. If a regiment will get a negative buff when losing men, it will just encourage defence, hiding even more. if I understand it right, there will be a ticket system for regiments and makes it pretty pointless with a moral system. A ticket system will reward good leaders/officers, and I am afraid a moral system will take to much controll and be a bit annoying after some time. From what I know now, I hope the only negative buffs willl come from suppression by bullets/cannonballs and (maby loss of officer/flags).

Then again I'm open minded regarding this, and this is just my opinion ;)

[Legion]

My idea is that suppression and morale are pretty much the same. As you take fire your screen would shake or get blurru for a little bit and if you keep taking fire without doing anything about it then it will get a little worse, when I say morale all I really mean is some screen effects that get worse as you get lower morale, nothing major. Also I think it would be cool if when you are gaining ground or beating the enemy of causing losses then your morale would rise and you would be rssisyeny to morale shock or something. I'm not saying that having low morale should give you debuffs like slower running I'm saying that low morale should make your screen shakuer or blurrier or somewhere along those lines.

[Bravescot]

I like the whole idea but I personally think all the blur will take away from the effort the Devs put in to making the game look nice and also take away from the actual fire fight game play. I'd like to be able to see what I'm shooting at not a grey blur.

[Legion]

I was thinking something like red orchestra when you are getting suppressed. Even if there is no blur I think there should be some effect of getting shot at and losing men

[Etherton]

Im sure various blurring and suppression will be in that is realistic, after all its more of a realsim so id expect gunfire to create minor supression and explosions to affect hearing, sight and movement too.

[Pavoneo]

The only problem with that is that morale doesn't exist when you're playing a game. You're not actually in fear of losing your life, so player probably won't retreat by choice, unless ordered to. If morale was to be part of the game, it would definitely need to be some sort of negative effect to your controls, vision, or stats etc.


My thoughts exactly.

[Rithal]

Im sure various blurring and suppression will be in that is realistic, after all its more of a realsim so id expect gunfire to create minor supression and explosions to affect hearing, sight and movement too.

Yeah, I don't know what it will be yet, but there definitely needs to be some sort of driving factor that influences players to stick with their unit, and retreat when necessary. Something..... anything....