Matrix Games Forums

According to point 5.10. in the manuals:

When a country surrenders, the conquering side’s forces will receive a
Unit Morale Boost, while the opposing side’s units will suffer a Unit Morale
Penalty. This is a temporary effect which will have a moderate effect on
combat effectiveness in the short term.

However I'm not 100% certain how this has to be interpreted in WaW, as the "side and faction" situation is more convoluted there.

In the WW1 version it definitely effects everyone.

And I wouldn't say the game is balanced around it, most people just don't seem to know its power and how to harness it for max effect. Certainly made my Aussie opponent drop his Vegemite sandwich when I killed his fully entrenched Russian armies in the fortified hexes in front of Moscow with 2-3 blows each and hardly any losses for the Wehrmacht.

ORIGINAL: Bavre

And I wouldn't say the game is balanced around it, most people just don't seem to know its power and how to harness it for max effect. Certainly made my Aussie opponent drop his Vegemite sandwich when I killed his fully entrenched Russian armies in the fortified hexes in front of Moscow with 2-3 blows each and hardly any losses for the Wehrmacht.

Hi Bavre - love the imagery here. Maybe Old Crow could come up with a graphic?

More seriously, this is why I find these surrender settings at the unit level gamey. Why would the ships of the Royal Navy care if Montenegro surrenders? In my recent mods, I have just changed all these settings to zero. I prefer that the hit from surrenders of minor allies be confined to National Morale as you can fine tune that to the specific major.

Michael

ORIGINAL: Bavre

And I wouldn't say the game is balanced around it, most people just don't seem to know its power and how to harness it for max effect. Certainly made my Aussie opponent drop his Vegemite sandwich when I killed his fully entrenched Russian armies in the fortified hexes in front of Moscow with 2-3 blows each and hardly any losses for the Wehrmacht.

Yep...Bavre is pretty colorful...a wordsmith as it were. [:D]

Morale effect was a little bit nerfed in SC:WaW in last patch, but it seems that wasn't enough unfortunately. If Axis leaves Lux, Netherlands and Denmark alive until 1942 (to not increase US/USSR mobilization), then taking those countries will be a blow for Allies, esp. for Soviets. Add to this plenty of takings in Pacific, which can be taken at slower pace, and USSR plays in 1942 with great handicap, way bigger than in 1941, which seems counterintuitive. Morale gains may nullify also the effects of Soviet Winter, which was increased recently too.
This leads to cheesy counter strategies, like UK taking New Guinea and Salomons preemptevily, to avoid penalty themselves and lower Axis morale in process, at least for a turn. This is punished in game by NM loss for UK, but it's probably worth it.
I believe SC game(s) would be better without such a global effect. I understand that fall of Belgium/Netherlands demoralizes French troops in 1940, you can always script this, but why taking Brunei affects Eastern Front in such direct way is a good question.
Sorry for hijacking WW 1 forum, just saw a familiar subject and wanted to add 2 cents. BTW, WW1 seems a great game too, maybe time to dive in...

Well it is a problem in all the games, but due to the different strategic situation the implications were especially severe in the WW1 version with games vs veteran players decided in like half a dozend turns.
My suggestion would be to at least divide the effect into major and minor surrender.

HI All,

I played GringoAR and have to say his Serbian Melee was unstoppable. I'm praying for a Stalemate but its October 1916 and Russia just withdrew. He operated several German Corps, plus committed 2nd AH army group against the Serbs. Then added Cavalry from both. I tried my best to slow him down but it was not possible with human wave attacks. I even operated my corps from the North down to bottom before they got destroyed by end of 1914. Additionally, he didn't invade Belgium so he operated all those units to fend off the Russians and stop my incursions into Galicia. Do folks ever ship over French reinforcements or is that a losing adventure?

The standard Entente defence of Serbia if the Germans do not attack Belgium on Turn One is to transport a few French corps there as soon as possible, plus a HQ once General Foch arrives on the Western Front. Of course, this could turn into an even bigger disaster if you can't secure a defensive line between Pristina and Nish. The Entente also really needs to get Greece on its side, so that Serbia is not reliant on its one rail line to the sea through the port of Cetinje. All this can make for an exciting Fall and Winter in the southern Balkans in 1914-15!

Thanks for the tip. Do you feel it's a better use of resources to move those French units into Italy and declare War on Belgium as soon as the UK joins? I'm not sure if the French can maintain 3 fronts e.g. Germany, Italy, and Serbia. Because if you send 1 general to Italy and 1 to Serbia, not sure the French will have enough for Western Front. Love anyone's perspective here

My general rule upon seeing a German player not attack Belgium, is go for max artillery, shells, and buy all the guns so by spring/summer 1915. Then I try to overrun Germany from the West to take pressure of the Russians. I'm not sure if it's worth it to declare war on Belgium, but i hate having all those forces siting there and not fighting so I will take the Mpps and broaden the front for Germany.

However, I'm only a moderate player and appreciate any responses.

There are significant costs to the Entente of attacking Belgium. France takes a 3000 point hit to its National Morale; Britain takes an 8000 NM hit if it has already entered war. The USA also swings away from the Entente. Germany gets whatever resources it can hang onto in Belgium and its minimum front in the west is only lengthened by three hexes. So, it is a mixed blessing as an Entente strategy for relieving CP pressure on Russia or Serbia. It is worth playing out both options if Germany has decided to take the offensive in the West at the start of the game.

mdsmall wrote: Wed Mar 16, 2022 8:48 pm There are significant costs to the Entente of attacking Belgium. France takes a 3000 point hit to its National Morale; Britain takes an 8000 NM hit if it has already entered war. The USA also swings away from the Entente. Germany gets whatever resources it can hang onto in Belgium and its minimum front in the west is only lengthened by three hexes. So, it is a mixed blessing as an Entente strategy for relieving CP pressure on Russia or Serbia. It is worth playing out both options if Germany has decided to take the offensive in the West at the start of the game.

When playing Entente, I definitely am going to reconsider invading Belgium if a Central Powers player does a 'Russia First' on my hide again. Found something else potentially better that wont dink my National Morale, and keep Belgium neutral. As it is anyway, the Kaiser is going to have to try Belgium sooner or later after Russia goes down.

OldCrowB,

Do you care to share? You have me at another strategy I'm actually playing a game now and went hard for the Serbia blitz and was foiled. MY opponent shipped in 3 FRench Corps plus a general. However, I did capture Nish, and within 2 spaces to the secondary Serbian capital. Looks like it will be a slog. 1915 is such a crucial year.