Morale Settings Question

[Michael T]

Its a clash of ideologies, just like most wars [:D]

[Ketza]

Well its informative and entertaining! Would love to get a bunch of us in a room with a chalkboard and hash it all out [:D]

[Michael T]

I am thinking more a boxing ring, then we would see who has the fat arse [:D]

[morvael]

I have posted in the other thread, that connects to your discussion here: fb.asp?m=3370904

I believe morale 101 is the point at which you get free 1 point morale bump after each combat, no matter unit's relative morale to it's default NM. It becomes just a matter of scoring enough wins to get to the max (99).

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: morvael

I have posted in the other thread, that connects to your discussion here: fb.asp?m=3370904

I believe morale 101 is the point at which you get free 1 point morale bump after each combat, no matter unit's relative morale to it's default NM. It becomes just a matter of scoring enough wins to get to the max (99).

You 3 always seem to know the nuts and bolts of the game better then most, thks for the answer to the issue.

Basicly why 2by3 freaks out over the smallest change to any of the systems.

What us bones heads call the snowball effect. One small change has HUGE effects over 212 turns. The players that see the small effects like to morale can use them and have a big advantage over the hole 212 turns.

Players that ignore the tweaks fall behind the curve so to speak.

The morale tweak's effect on morale at the 100 setting is huge if you know how to take full advantage of the change. I believe that's why we are seeing huge German armies come 42 now.

Thanks for the info.

[mmarquo]

Speilverderber,

You have been drawn into a very unbalanced match with a player who, as the self proclaimed , "King of Morale" apparently knew exactly what the consequences of the custom morale adjustment would be. If you also knew what the setting were before the match and agreed nonetheless, then you must simply learn the lesson, accept the consequences, and move on. Your experience should serve as fair warning: evaluate your cyberopponent's personna, be careful about house rules and custom settings.

I do agree somewhat with Pelton on farming morale: in prior iterations of the game it was very common for me to have many Axis units with morale in the high 90's, simply from the multitude of easily winnable hasty attacks. Now, not so much. However, it does give a more realistic and challenging feel to the game. Players like Michael T and Pelton are the sort players who thrive on predictability; they like to solve the puzzle and seem to enjoy the challenge of developing a fool-proof method winning as quickly as possible; they have little tolerance for frustrating disruptions of their precise plans. This is how they enjoy the game, and they are obviously well-served by WITE. Other players seem to enjoy the historical simulation, and are more interested in watching how the entire WITE unfolds - not so much to test mathematical plans for a quick victory or draw, rather for the sheer enjoyment of the simulation. Personally, I fall somewhere in between, as I suspect most of us do. PM me if you are interested in a leisurely, friendly "hybrid" match.

MT,

What are morale settings in in your current AAR with Kamil?

[STEF78]

MT and Pelton are surely among the best players of WITE. I've learn't a lot from both of them.

On my opinion the game is slightly balanced in favor of the russians, like chess is slightly balanced infavor of the whites.

Is it so important?

I think not, personaly my goal is to have fun with this game. And it's a success!!!

And if someone wants to know if he is better than Mr or Mrs XX simply play one time with SHC, one time with GHC and you will see who is the best!!

[morvael]

I agree with every sentence of your post, STEF78.

[fbs]

ORIGINAL: STEF78

On my opinion the game is slightly balanced in favor of the russians, like chess is slightly balanced infavor of the whites.

After all the Soviets won the war.

And so I hope to do the same (at 110% for Germans at all settings, 100% for Soviets at all settings), although the Disreputable Nazi AI is beating the hell out of my units...

[Michael T]

Marquo, my game with Kamil, and all others have been 100/100 morale.

[mmarquo]

MT,

You took Leningrad, threatening Moscow and were at the outskirts of Stalingrad in 1941 at 100/100: how can anyone take complaints about morale being broken seriously? I agree that you are to be taken much more seriously given your match against a seasoned veteran, as opposed to others who prey on green players with ridiculous, self-serving adjustments of morale.


Marquo [:)]

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: morvael

I have posted in the other thread, that connects to your discussion here: fb.asp?m=3370904

I believe morale 101 is the point at which you get free 1 point morale bump after each combat, no matter unit's relative morale to it's default NM. It becomes just a matter of scoring enough wins to get to the max (99).

You 3 always seem to know the nuts and bolts of the game better then most, thks for the answer to the issue.

Basicly why 2by3 freaks out over the smallest change to any of the systems.

What us bones heads call the snowball effect. One small change has HUGE effects over 212 turns. The players that see the small effects like to morale can use them and have a big advantage over the hole 212 turns.

Players that ignore the tweaks fall behind the curve so to speak.

The morale tweak's effect on morale at the 100 setting is huge if you know how to take full advantage of the change. I believe that's why we are seeing huge German armies come 42 now.

Thanks for the info.

Pelton -people will always come up occasionally with odd results in scientific experiments. This is why scientists don't accept those results are valid ( as opposed to statistical freak or wishful thinking) until others have replicated them. You get results that others have not yet been able to replicate with axis morale at 100, but they can if morale is 101.

As far as I know the only way of getting morale higher than NM and other known bonuses is to win combats. You say you have found a way of increasing morale that no one else knows about. On that basis, it is going to be very hard for people to accept what you say unless you tell people how to replicate your feat without increasing the morale stings to above 100. The only other way I can think of is to mod the game by increasing the axis NMs which presumably would produce the same sort of results. I have no idea whether that would be possible for a player though.

So my strong recommendation to you is to come clean over your apparent secret exploit or whatever you call it if you want people to believe you get your results playing with the same settings as the rest of us.

[Michael T]

Players like Michael T and Pelton are the sort players who thrive on predictability; they like to solve the puzzle and seem to enjoy the challenge of developing a fool-proof method winning as quickly as possible; they have little tolerance for frustrating disruptions of their precise plans. This is how they enjoy the game, and they are obviously well-served by WITE

I don't think this is a fair reflection on myself. The only random thing in WITE that I find intolerable is random weather, and then only as the German side. I am quite happy for my opponents to choose random weather if I am Russian. Also WITE is probably the only game I have ever played where I have played with scripted weather.

But the thing that undermines your assertion about me only being happy with the known is the very nature of the WITE combat system. It would be the most uncertain combat system I have ever played with. It is almost totally unpredictable how a result will go, unless its a completely one sided battle.

I admit I do put a lot of hours in to milking the supply system for every drop of fuel I can find. But it is not cheating the system. It's just knowledge of how a system works and optimizing it. I do nothing that is not forbidden by the rulebook.

I like the look of WITW weather system so far. So WITE 2.0 weather looks promising.

Ultimately I seek a game that offers a fair, challenging and balanced fight no matter which side I play. Yes I play to win. But that is not the overbidding reason for play. It is the challenge of the intellect, between intelligent beings on the field of war (yes its a game, but it is war) that motivates me. And not just WWII, any war, from ancient to modern. I am a student of war. It fascinates me.

Marquo, in all honesty, I firmly believe that the current Soviet morale gains in 1941 are unbalancing the game in the Reds favour. Hence my advocation for a change. If I were not playing Kamil I would be taking on a top line German to prove my point. I simply do not have the time to play two games. I can barely manage one.

But I am past it all to be honest. If people are happy with the status quo and the game remains unchanged I will simply be playing Russian until WITW or WITE 2.0 comes along.

[Peltonx]

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: morvael

I have posted in the other thread, that connects to your discussion here: fb.asp?m=3370904

I believe morale 101 is the point at which you get free 1 point morale bump after each combat, no matter unit's relative morale to it's default NM. It becomes just a matter of scoring enough wins to get to the max (99).

You 3 always seem to know the nuts and bolts of the game better then most, thks for the answer to the issue.

Basicly why 2by3 freaks out over the smallest change to any of the systems.

What us bones heads call the snowball effect. One small change has HUGE effects over 212 turns. The players that see the small effects like to morale can use them and have a big advantage over the hole 212 turns.

Players that ignore the tweaks fall behind the curve so to speak.

The morale tweak's effect on morale at the 100 setting is huge if you know how to take full advantage of the change. I believe that's why we are seeing huge German armies come 42 now.

Thanks for the info.

Pelton -people will always come up occasionally with odd results in scientific experiments. This is why scientists don't accept those results are valid ( as opposed to statistical freak or wishful thinking) until others have replicated them. You get results that others have not yet been able to replicate with axis morale at 100, but they can if morale is 101.

As far as I know the only way of getting morale higher than NM and other known bonuses is to win combats. You say you have found a way of increasing morale that no one else knows about. On that basis, it is going to be very hard for people to accept what you say unless you tell people how to replicate your feat without increasing the morale stings to above 100. The only other way I can think of is to mod the game by increasing the axis NMs which presumably would produce the same sort of results. I have no idea whether that would be possible for a player though.

So my strong recommendation to you is to come clean over your apparent secret exploit or whatever you call it if you want people to believe you get your results playing with the same settings as the rest of us.

What are you talking about?

I posted the data read the data.

Adding in fairytales is simply odd.

I have no idea what your talking about?

I posted data after the combat wins.

If you find another way to raise morale about the NM limit let me know also, because I have no idea what your talking about.

Kind a lost as to what your even talking about?

I will quote MT sillyfollower:

I admit I do put a lot of hours in to milking the supply (Morale) system for every drop of fuel (morale) I can find. But it is not cheating the system. It's just knowledge of how a system works and optimizing it. I do nothing that is not forbidden by the rulebook.

[font="Microsoft Sans Serif"]In other words put in the time me and MT have and figure it out for yourself[/font]

[Wuffer]

flying pigs 2.0

but you were more funny than

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Pelton

ORIGINAL: sillyflower

ORIGINAL: Pelton



You 3 always seem to know the nuts and bolts of the game better then most, thks for the answer to the issue.

Basicly why 2by3 freaks out over the smallest change to any of the systems.

What us bones heads call the snowball effect. One small change has HUGE effects over 212 turns. The players that see the small effects like to morale can use them and have a big advantage over the hole 212 turns.

Players that ignore the tweaks fall behind the curve so to speak.

The morale tweak's effect on morale at the 100 setting is huge if you know how to take full advantage of the change. I believe that's why we are seeing huge German armies come 42 now.

Thanks for the info.

Pelton -people will always come up occasionally with odd results in scientific experiments. This is why scientists don't accept those results are valid ( as opposed to statistical freak or wishful thinking) until others have replicated them. You get results that others have not yet been able to replicate with axis morale at 100, but they can if morale is 101.

As far as I know the only way of getting morale higher than NM and other known bonuses is to win combats. You say you have found a way of increasing morale that no one else knows about. On that basis, it is going to be very hard for people to accept what you say unless you tell people how to replicate your feat without increasing the morale stings to above 100. The only other way I can think of is to mod the game by increasing the axis NMs which presumably would produce the same sort of results. I have no idea whether that would be possible for a player though.

So my strong recommendation to you is to come clean over your apparent secret exploit or whatever you call it if you want people to believe you get your results playing with the same settings as the rest of us.

What are you talking about?

I posted the data read the data.

Adding in fairytales is simply odd.

I have no idea what your talking about?

I posted data after the combat wins.

If you find another way to raise morale about the NM limit let me know also, because I have no idea what your talking about.

Kind a lost as to what your even talking about?

I will quote MT sillyfollower:

I admit I do put a lot of hours in to milking the supply (Morale) system for every drop of fuel (morale) I can find. But it is not cheating the system. It's just knowledge of how a system works and optimizing it. I do nothing that is not forbidden by the rulebook.

[font="Microsoft Sans Serif"]In other words put in the time me and MT have and figure it out for yourself[/font]

What I am talking about is very simple. It is basic evidence testing that is the foundation of all western science. Something is only true if others can replicate it. You have not provided any data with morale at 100 to prove you can do what others can only replicate with morale at 101. This is because your screenshots do not, and cannot, show what morale setting is being used.

In other words, it is possible to replicate your screenshots using 101 morale setting, but no one has yet done it with morale setting 100. Your data shows what you achieved but does not help you to disprove allegations that you got them using a morale setting of 101 or higher.

I am a scientist turned lawyer and try to look at evidence in an obsessively logical way*. I am not accusing you of not telling the truth. However others have not been able to copy what you have done in the way you have said you did it. They have copied it when using higher German morale which you deny doing.

Therefore I have said to you that you need to tell people what you are doing so that they can copy what you do in the way you say you have done it. If you do not, then people will not believe what you say.

Whether you care about people thinking that you are lying is up to you. All I have tried to do is to explain to you what I believe you will need to do to stop people thinking you are. If you tell one of the game testers what you do and they confirm they get the same result, then your critics will have been proven to be wrong.


* before anyone goes on about how lawyers misuse evidence sometimes in order to win cases, I know that. It doesn't have any useful part in the area of law I practise in, and I don't do it: knowingly anyway [:)].

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Pelton



I will quote MT sillyfollower:

I admit I do put a lot of hours in to milking the supply (Morale) system for every drop of fuel (morale) I can find. But it is not cheating the system. It's just knowledge of how a system works and optimizing it. I do nothing that is not forbidden by the rulebook.

[font="Microsoft Sans Serif"]In other words put in the time me and MT have and figure it out for yourself[/font]

This comment has nothing to do with the issue in hand.

MT has always be open about what he does. As you have posted yourself, he never uses the exploits that he finds but reports them as bugs.

[morvael]

I would like to simply have a cap introduced that would not allow morale increase (for any reason) over national morale. Elite units are already taken care of by having their special +5/+10/+15 morale bonus, that raises their "national" morale to new level, and they should stop at it. This could be connected to game difficulty setting by having the max adjusted by morale percentage, so (for example) at 110 morale, you could see units rise up to 110% of their "national" morale, but no more (for example, playing at 110 morale 45 NM would be increased to 49). The speed of the rise itself should not be affected. Also, a victorious combat should give a chance (leader morale roll) of a +1 increase for every 10 points the unit is below NM. So for a unit at 30 morale with 45 NM it should make two rolls after victorious combat, resulting in 0-2 morale increase, while a unit at 42 morale with 45 NM should make only one roll, resulting in 0-1 morale increase.

[Flaviusx]

Sillyflower, strictly speaking, nothing in science is ever "true." It's all provisional. Science doesn't do truth.

Yours in epistemological nitpicking, etc, and with apologies to Karl Popper.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Sillyflower, strictly speaking, nothing in science is ever "true." It's all provisional. Science doesn't do truth.

Yours in epistemological nitpicking, etc, and with apologies to Karl Popper.

does this not mean your post is not true either?

However, the law does deal with truth albeit in terms of probabilities, and I am a lawyer with a scientific background, not v versa.