Supremacy Logo

Casualties Should Affect Morale

I think the current system of -5 morale per country should be changed, as even a player with one province left on a tiny island in the middle of nowhere still inflicts a morale penalty as does a war with a country on the other side of the world where the two of you never actually come into contact with each other, instead I think it should be based on the casualty rate which makes a lot more sense then the current system.

If you are at war with 5 countries but have suffered virtually no casualties while inflicting heavy losses your citizens should have a morale boost as the are winning the war, while if you suffer heavy losses then there should be a severe morale penalty to reflect the grieving parents and families on the home front. Perhaps a -1 morale point for every 10,000 casualties per country you are at war with, capped at some point but this would be a much more accurate system and a much better way to handle it.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

21 Replies

29 Mar 2016, 18:00

I like the idea. Cool.

The past is a foreign country.
29 Mar 2016, 18:31

I like it,


If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
-Friedrich von Haye
29 Mar 2016, 19:30

I like the system

29 Mar 2016, 19:38

Interesting idea.


"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius.
"Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
29 Mar 2016, 20:31

I think the losses should make morale fall quicker. Some wars with AI can only reach around ~70k casualties, so that would only be -7 morale, which is a bit silly considering that the country has been overrun and the entire army annihilated, air forces and all.

29 Mar 2016, 20:41

Quasi-duck wrote:

I think the losses should make morale fall quicker. Some wars with AI can only reach around ~70k casualties, so that would only be -7 morale, which is a bit silly considering that the country has been overrun and the entire army annihilated, air forces and all.
Well it can be adjusted I just threw out 10k perhaps it would be based upon the manpower cap or the number of citizens you have to determine the morale to casualty rate
29 Mar 2016, 20:43

ShadowHawk5 wrote:

Well it can be adjusted I just threw out 10k perhaps it would be based upon the manpower cap or the number of citizens you have to determine the morale to casualty rate
Sounds good to me.
30 Mar 2016, 04:41

adding my two cents on the idea, asside from morale lost for every 10k, we should also have a morale penalty when an entire army unit or fleet were destroyed in battle, that way it means the losing country knows its going down hill.

"Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
-imperium thought of the day
30 Mar 2016, 10:06

V1nd1cat0r wrote:

adding my two cents on the idea, asside from morale lost for every 10k, we should also have a morale penalty when an entire army unit or fleet were destroyed in battle, that way it means the losing country knows its going down hill.
Sounds good, yeah. It should have to be over a certain amount of units though because losing 1k men it ain't that bad, depending on what you're doing.
2 May 2016, 02:48

I don't really agree with the 10k idea, because I had a war that went on for 30 days and there were massive casualties on both sides (I was had a few 10 thousands less). Otherwise, I think it's a great idea.

Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-Winston Churchill
Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
-George S. Patton
2 May 2016, 12:49

Kehsct wrote:

I don't really agree with the 10k idea, because I had a war that went on for 30 days and there were massive casualties on both sides (I was had a few 10 thousands less). Otherwise, I think it's a great idea.
Perhaps in the COW, it is different.

"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius.
"Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
2 May 2016, 17:28

I think thats a great idea too. Even though Im most often suffering heavy losses in every major battle,

2 May 2016, 17:37

HUNDMiau wrote:

I think thats a great idea too. Even though Im most often suffering heavy losses in every major battle,
Well try using tac bombers and artillery this will hopefully get players to take steps to minimize their casualties in battle instead of just relying on sheer numbers. It would also give players a better chance against block alliances
2 May 2016, 20:05

ShadowHawk5 wrote:

HUNDMiau wrote:

I think thats a great idea too. Even though Im most often suffering heavy losses in every major battle,
Well try using tac bombers and artillery this will hopefully get players to take steps to minimize their casualties in battle instead of just relying on sheer numbers. It would also give players a better chance against block alliances
Exactly what I'm trying to do.
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-Winston Churchill
Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
-George S. Patton
2 May 2016, 20:06

Maximilien wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

I don't really agree with the 10k idea, because I had a war that went on for 30 days and there were massive casualties on both sides (I was had a few 10 thousands less). Otherwise, I think it's a great idea.
Perhaps in the COW, it is different.
What do you mean?
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-Winston Churchill
Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
-George S. Patton
2 May 2016, 20:07

Kehsct wrote:

What do you mean?
Perhaps adding to the COW, it is different

"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius.
"Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.
2 May 2016, 20:07

Maximilien wrote:

Kehsct wrote:

What do you mean?
Perhaps adding to the COW, it is different
I still don't know what you mean.
Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.
-Winston Churchill
Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching.
-George S. Patton
2 May 2016, 20:09

Kehsct wrote:

I still don't know what you mean.
I'm the same, he is speaking in riddles.
2 May 2016, 20:09

Correct.

The past is a foreign country.
2 May 2016, 20:09

Kehsct wrote:

I still don't know what you mean.
Oh, I've confused.

Kehsct wrote:

with the 10k idea
I thought you said 30K (Thirty Kingdoms)

"I came, I saw, I conquered" Written in a report to Rome 47 B.C., after conquering Pharnaces at Zela in Asia Minor in just five days; as quoted in Life of Caesar by Plutarch; reported to have been inscribed on one of the decorated wagons in the Pontic triumph, in Lives of the Twelve Caesars, Julius, by Suetonius.
"Alea iacta est" Gaius Julius Caesar.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Suggestions
Quick Launch