Waving the white flag

[jp10]

What specifically started this subject for me was historical scenario battles (understandably more available in WW2, MBT has many hypothetical battles) like the Wolmi Do landing (136 captured) 2nd Para in Darwin (1000 prisoners) and the battle of Asal Uttar where after the end of the battle a Second Lieutenant leading a team of 20 soldiers searched a sugarcane field and shouting out for those hidden inside to come out – the Commanding Officer of Pakistan’s 4 Cavalry came out along with two majors, one captain and 17 other ranks to be made prisoners of war.
I have tested these battles and other scenarios that had a notable POW tally several times and only rarely have units surrendering. Holding their positions, pinned or routed till they disperse (and using up my ammo) yes, but routed, HQ broken and in contact with my forces they still refuse to wave that white rag.

The requirement to be encircled is too constrained in my opinion. I offer that a routed unit with an adjacent enemy unit triggering a surrender check would be an appropriate standard. If they don't surrender then (Hande hoch! Waffen weg!) then they can be fired up.

[Felix Nephthys]

Originally Posted by jp10

What specifically started this subject for me was historical scenario battles (understandably more available in WW2, MBT has many hypothetical battles) like the Wolmi Do landing (136 captured) 2nd Para in Darwin (1000 prisoners) and the battle of Asal Uttar where after the end of the battle a Second Lieutenant leading a team of 20 soldiers searched a sugarcane field and shouting out for those hidden inside to come out – the Commanding Officer of Pakistan’s 4 Cavalry came out along with two majors, one captain and 17 other ranks to be made prisoners of war.
I have tested these battles and other scenarios that had a notable POW tally several times and only rarely have units surrendering. Holding their positions, pinned or routed till they disperse (and using up my ammo) yes, but routed, HQ broken and in contact with my forces they still refuse to wave that white rag.

The requirement to be encircled is too constrained in my opinion. I offer that a routed unit with an adjacent enemy unit triggering a surrender check would be an appropriate standard. If they don't surrender then (Hande hoch! Waffen weg!) then they can be fired up.

But the game isn't meant to play that way though as I understand it. You can play most scenarios over and over again and never get the same outcome as before, that was the fun of it in my opinion. There will always be that random element where one unit might screw up horribly in one battle and the next day you play the same battle again and it might save the entire position. If it wasn't for that then what's the point of playing? It's fun to take a historical scenario and see how well you might do in that situation but at the end of the day, it's just a game. If I wanted it to come out the same way it did historically then I might as well just read the book. Besides, those situations I don't think could be handled by any game on the market anyways because they are of such an extraordinary nature to begin with. I'm reminded of Kirk with the Kobyashi Maru test in Star Trek, to change the conditions of the test in order to win.

As for the adjacent unit next to a routed unit, doesn't the game already handle this appropriately? With preferences you can already make a unit into either Terminators on one hand or a 3 year old with a skinned knee on the other. Then sometimes you always have the element of surprise where your whole day just goes to hell, like in the picture below.

[scorpio_rocks]

Originally Posted by jp10

What specifically started this subject for me was historical scenario battles (understandably more available in WW2, MBT has many hypothetical battles) like the Wolmi Do landing (136 captured) 2nd Para in Darwin (1000 prisoners) and the battle of Asal Uttar where after the end of the battle a Second Lieutenant leading a team of 20 soldiers searched a sugarcane field and shouting out for those hidden inside to come out – the Commanding Officer of Pakistan’s 4 Cavalry came out along with two majors, one captain and 17 other ranks to be made prisoners of war.
I have tested these battles and other scenarios that had a notable POW tally several times and only rarely have units surrendering. Holding their positions, pinned or routed till they disperse (and using up my ammo) yes, but routed, HQ broken and in contact with my forces they still refuse to wave that white rag.

The requirement to be encircled is too constrained in my opinion. I offer that a routed unit with an adjacent enemy unit triggering a surrender check would be an appropriate standard. If they don't surrender then (Hande hoch! Waffen weg!) then they can be fired up.

Remember when the last few men of a unit "disappear" when the unit disperses they are more than likely captured rather than killed (or at least hiding in that field).

[Aeraaa]

Originally Posted by scorpio_rocks

Remember when the last few men of a unit "disappear" when the unit disperses they are more than likely captured rather than killed (or at least hiding in that field).

Tbh I imagine it as even more abstract than that: casualties in the game include men that are not participating in the battle anymore. The reasons can be several including:

1-KIA/WIA (of course)
2-POWs
3-Men in a unit that lost cohesion and therefore not knowing what to do
4-Soldiers distracted by other tasks (like carrying the wounded)
5-Soldiers cowering from intense fire
6-Routs (irrecoverable)


There can also be combinations in the above eg casualties of type (5) become casualties from type (2), because the cowering soldiers have been found by an advancing enemy and captured.

In fact with the above method, men can be assumed to be fired upon when they actually aren't physically in the same hex anymore. Believe it or not, this is IMHO more realistic. In reality, there isn't any indicator that the place you fire upon has any enemy on it and many times you fire into an area, rather than point targets. The probability that you actually fire blindly into an area is quite high (and Z fire does not completely cover this case).


Also with the above method, actual battle casualties are probably 1/3 on average of the final tally in a scenario. It probably fluctuates between attacker and defender (attacker probably around 1/2, defender around 1/4, since defender usually has more casualties that couldn't escape and were captured). Around 1/3 should be casualties that can be recovered within a small amount of time (routed soldiers going back to their unit).

[Felix Nephthys]

Originally Posted by scorpio_rocks

Remember when the last few men of a unit "disappear" when the unit disperses they are more than likely captured rather than killed (or at least hiding in that field).

The impression I've got is that he wants a "hard surrender" when the game already handles this, and I think he wants it to happen much more often and alot easier as well. In my opinion the game is already working fine the way it is in this respect and has been since it came out 23 years ago. It's simple, blast away at an enemy unit long enough and it will be pinned and eventually retreat and rout, kill enough and it will disperse and disappear and under the right conditions and depending on the quality of troops it may surrender. Sometimes units will simply fight to the last man also and that's just something you'll have to deal with. I'm sure every player wishes the enemy would sometimes just give up but like real life it's never certain that will happen, just take a look at any campaign against the Japanese during WW2.




Jack Crow "Remember that day we thought they'd just give up?"