Matrix Games Forums

How come liberated POW's become battle worthy units?

I had several instances where my POW's, located deep inside my home nation, were freed by a lone rampaging cossack unit (or somesuch).

Now, I wouldn't have a problem with the POW's just melting back into the countryside, or even melting back into the owning nations labor/manpower pool, but somehow that lone liberating unit brings enough arms and supplies for my former POW's to become fully capable combat units.

So now I have an understrength enemy corps or army plundering my home nation while my main army, the one actually capable of dealing with the threat, is off in Austria somewhere fighting the good fight.

I took their guns and ammunition. I took their food, I took their supplies, and I even took their shoes. How they can recompose into a combat formation is beyond me [:D][:D]

Agreed. If no other solution (patch, etc) is provided for pows, then if nothing else they should be transported back to the home capital.

Also, I've put pows into garrisoned cities (in the 1796 game) only to have them released by the ubiquitous lone cossack unit. Is this WAD?

I have seen this a few times in the forum, why does no one keep an Army back where the POWs are sent ?

POW can be importent, also, if you send them to your homeland, you want a Army to guard the Main City, from the raiders

(I do notice that the AI plays like this also, they have all of there troops on the front, and nothing back home, really silly for a side like Turkey or Russia to have all there troops headed towards France and nobody back home)

{of course, you have to feed the Army, so you need to feed the POWs too, if the idea is to kill them off, then you do not want to protect them, just stack them in a low Forage city and let the go hungry)

HARD_Sarge

I'd like to see a few changes:

First, when the POWs are released (by any means...end of the war, liberated by friendly military, etc) have them poof back to the homeland in the form of population units randomly spread around the owning nation's territories. They should have to be rearmed and equipped, etc, and the owning nation should have to expend resources to make them a functional division again. This would make the manpower available to recreate the unit, but they'd have to be built again.

Second, give me the option at the end of a battle to either keep the POWs or just parole them immediately, which would make them poof back to the homeland in the form of increased population units (just like being released after the war). Sometimes I don't want to be bothered with the POWs, so I'd just want to send them home.

Third, while the free labor is nice, I'd like to see some effect of POWs on the terms of surrender...a suggestion someone else made in some post I can't find anymore [&:] The more POWs I have, the more stuff I can get from the enemy when he surrenders...and vice versa! (Perhaps a net sum thing...if France has 100,000 Prussian prisoners, and Prussia has 110,000 French prisoners, then Prussia has a net 10,000 prisoners which would give them more points for surrender negotiations...or give the French fewer if Prussia surrendered!)

Fourth, POWs should count for NML and Glory a little bit. I get NML for killing enemies, but I don't get any for capturing them...I would think capturing complete divisions would look really good on the newspaper headlines! Again, this suggestion someone else made in another thread that I can't find [:(]


b

I have seen this a few times in the forum, why does no one keep an Army back where the POWs are sent ?

Because it's a revolting idea.

I'm pretty sure POW's are supposed to be a good thing in this game. Like when they were making it, they said oh let the victor capture POW's, they can get labor and they can get horses yadda yadda. Meanwhile POW's have turned out to be terrible. Their benefits are either unclear or unnoticeable, they drain perfectly good troops to guard, they're always getting free and reforming into fresh combat units (which would get them all executed anyway if captured again due to their dishonoring their surrender etc but I can't execute them I can only starve them).

I can't remember a single historical instance in the Napoleonic Wars where POW's were a factor in anything, or occupied Napoleon's or Blucher's time, or were even mentioned at all.

LOL
I still don't see the point, or maybe you missed mine, why is there not a Army in the homelands, while you are out fighting a war

if there is a Homeland Army, then it is just something for them to do, to guard POWs, not having the Army there for the POWs

(which I think the way I wrote it, that maybe the way it sounded)

LOL

right now, I got a Army with 1 Mil Div in it, guarding 220,000 POWs in Paris

HARD_Sarge

(I don't have any raiders running around yet, once they start, then the Army will expand)

ORIGINAL: carnifex



I can't remember a single historical instance in the Napoleonic Wars where POW's were a factor in anything, or occupied Napoleon's or Blucher's time, or were even mentioned at all.

French prisoners did present a real problem to Britain during this period... and yes they did have to be fed. Some sailors were allowed to serve in the navy, and some on merchant vessels, some worked in early mills under parole (though usually still guarded - down sides to this was taking jobs from uk workers, and potential spread of republican ideas[:-])

We ended up with thousands crammed onto prison hulks... decommissioned men o war at anchor in large harbours and bays... conditions, food, hygienics, etc were all very poor, death rate quite high...........

(I don't have any raiders running around yet, once they start, then the Army will expand)

So then you will be paying upkeep for an Army or a Corps and 3 or 4 divisions, and on top of that you have to feed the whole 220k POW's plus your own guys. And your homeland army will be completely useless to do anything but guard the POW's. You certainly won't be able to send them into battle, because the very first battle you lose means 220K worth of fully armed men springing up to plunder and siege.

I didn't miss what you're saying. I know that to deal with the POW annoyance I have to waste time and effort guarding them. But I don't like that method [:D] My method involves bitching on the forums, because every single method of dealing with the POW's is unacceptable for me from either a gaming perspective (waste of divisions and relevancy) or a humanist one (starve them!).

ORIGINAL: Malagant

I'd like to see a few changes:



Third, while the free labor is nice, I'd like to see some effect of POWs on the terms of surrender...a suggestion someone else made in some post I can't find anymore [&:] The more POWs I have, the more stuff I can get from the enemy when he surrenders...and vice versa! (Perhaps a net sum thing...if France has 100,000 Prussian prisoners, and Prussia has 110,000 French prisoners, then Prussia has a net 10,000 prisoners which would give them more points for surrender negotiations...or give the French fewer if Prussia surrendered!)

Fourth, POWs should count for NML and Glory a little bit. I get NML for killing enemies, but I don't get any for capturing them...I would think capturing complete divisions would look really good on the newspaper headlines! Again, this suggestion someone else made in another thread that I can't find [:(]


b

Hi, Agree completely with these ideas, surrender points can be reviewed as some reward for take the risk of have these prisoners lurking in home regions that can represent a real threat for the nation having them.

with best regards,

alaric.

I don't have any problem with POW's. I just do what i learned they did historically, put them on a ship and drop them in an island (Majorca, Corsica, Corfu, Crete, ...).

If the ia is so fool to go and try rescue them, i will blocade their ships, just that issue didn't happened yet.

Is a good tactic. I get all the (little) benefits of some extra labor in low inhabited areas for some time and can make some upgrades there (barracks, ports, roads or farms mainly) and i don't have any inconvenient (ok, a little annoyance to try embark/disembark them, as the interface is not so user friendly in that aspect).


PD: i have a friend that is very cruel with POW's. He plays as Russia and have the poor POW's forcing march up and dow in the snow, from North Novgorod to Georgia). They usually last "two rounds" of such sadic race.

So then you will be paying upkeep for an Army or a Corps and 3 or 4 divisions, and on top of that you have to feed the whole 220k POW's plus your own guys. And your homeland army will be completely useless to do anything but guard the POW's. You certainly won't be able to send them into battle, because the very first battle you lose means 220K worth of fully armed men springing up to plunder and siege.

LOL still got to disagree

shame on you, if you do not keep an Army at home, say you got a war with Aus/Prus/and Spain, you got Armies deep into there land, and the UK declares war on you and then lands troops on the coast, you just lost the war

most of my games, I have ended up with a 6 sided war (strange, have never had all 7 go to war with me, but have seen 6 a lot of times)



that Russian player may be smarter then most of us, that is a good idea, strange part of this game, when a side is defeated, they can get stronger, then 3-6 months to rebuild/refit there troops and they are more then willing and able to go back to war again

HARD_Sarge

shame on you, if you do not keep an Army at home, say you got a war with Aus/Prus/and Spain, you got Armies deep into there land, and the UK declares war on you and then lands troops on the coast, you just lost the war

He's not arguing about keeping a Home Army...he's saying that Home Army shouldn't be tied down to guarding POWs.

If the British land, and he sends his Home Army to fight them, some damn guerrila will walk in and free the POWs.

I still don't follow how you guys are thinking

if or if not, the Home Army is in place, it is guarding the POW's, if you want it to or not, the POWs are not in the Home Army, they are in the same city as the HA is

if he has a HA, so what if it guards the POWs, I have a HA to protect Paris, it just so happens, that I also send all of my POWs to Paris

in the case I set up, the HA stays in Paris, along with the POWs (unless the HA is too weak to defend and win, then shame on me) the UK army is going to be headed to Paris, that is how the AI thinks, none of your cities mean anything to the AI, but the Cap, they move into the Cap, they break your morale, your morale breaks, you lose the war

watch Turkey fight Aus, it don't take any land, it moves its army until either it runs into another army, or it reach Veinna, and then it either beats the army there and starts sacking the city, or it loses and moves back, if Aus can't push them out of Veinna, they will lose the war in a short time

so saying, since I will be having a HA, I will let it guard the POWS, until the time it is needed

HARD_Sarge

Look, you can come up with whatever gamey solutions you want to take advantage of a short-sighted AI and tend to the POWs, but it still doesn't make any sense at all that if they're liberated they show up as fully functional armies.

And what are you going to do if you play Multi-player and the enemy doesn't charge right at your capitol blindly? [;)]

I don't see any need for your tone (of course, writting posts, it can come across different then it was meant, so maybe I am wrong)

I do not plan on playing any PBEM games, I don't see how they could play any detail battles, and those are too importent to let the AI handle (I maybe wrong, I didn't plan on playing any PBEM games, so did not really read any of the rules or details in the manuel on it)

I still do not see anything gamey about what I have posted ?

if you take POWs, you will guard them, now using an Army to guard them is a little overboard, but that is how the game works

I see how the AI and how a number of human players are going to use the game system, as being gamey, run to the other guys Cap, break there morale, and then take what you want as your prize

and as the first post, and others have been about how do you stop the raiders from freeing the POWs, I thought I was offering a soild idea on how to do so

I still think the best idea for POWs is to kill them off (but the style of how I play, I can't bring myself to do so, even though it would improve my chances of winning)

I will agree, I think it is wrong for POWs who are freed to be fully armmed, but after my first test game, I have never had any freed, so it is not a complaint of mine

HARD_Sarge

Playing Austria in a 1796 scenario, I was beaten handily in western Bavaria. What was left of my army(one division) retreated. The rest were taken prisoner. France marched on toward the capital while I delayed them with my remaining forces.

I moved my decimated army counter into the French province immediately across the Rhine which contained all my prisoners. They hopped in and I proceeded unimpeded into Paris with a fully fed and equipped functional army. Quit game and started over.

ORIGINAL: carnifex

How come liberated POW's become battle worthy units?

I had several instances where my POW's, located deep inside my home nation, were freed by a lone rampaging cossack unit (or somesuch).

Now, I wouldn't have a problem with the POW's just melting back into the countryside, or even melting back into the owning nations labor/manpower pool, but somehow that lone liberating unit brings enough arms and supplies for my former POW's to become fully capable combat units.

So now I have an understrength enemy corps or army plundering my home nation while my main army, the one actually capable of dealing with the threat, is off in Austria somewhere fighting the good fight.

I took their guns and ammunition. I took their food, I took their supplies, and I even took their shoes. How they can recompose into a combat formation is beyond me [:D][:D]

The developers made a successful case of treating POWs as undercover agents and Cossacks as accomplices.

LOL still got to disagree

shame on you, if you do not keep an Army at home, say you got a war with Aus/Prus/and Spain, you got Armies deep into there land, and the UK declares war on you and then lands troops on the coast, you just lost the war

I think you're the one missing my point.

Let me explain it again, using your example.

My "real" armies are fighting deep in enemy territory. I have 220k POW's sitting in Paris, with a "Home Army" there to guard them. Now let us examine two probable compositions of this Home Army.

a) Home Army equals 2-3 Militia. Each turn you pay 19-21 upkeep. Theoretically this should repel any attack from a cossack or some other single wandering unit. However, this Army is completely useless as a real fighting force. If the British land in Normandy, they will bring a real army, one with Guards, Cavalry, etc. Your POW's and their escorts will have to run south as fast as their feet carry them.

or

b) Home army is a real Army, designed to go toe to toe. You have a leader, 5 Inf, 1 Art, and 2 Cav. Each turn you pay 35 upkeep. You sneer at cossacks and will defeat a Prussian Corps that breaks through and beelines for your capitol. You think you're even money, or maybe even slightly favored if Beresford shows up with his Army to cause trouble.

Now, anything in between is a waste of money. If you pump up option A with a couple of more units, you will still get beaten by the Brits, and since you're already repelling the occasional marauder, it's overkill.

So now let's say you go with option A. Turn after turn you spend 20 for upkeep. Your Army is completely useless for actual fighting. In essence, you have no Home Army. You have the Military Police Army instead, which for the rest of the game will run from province to province seeking the perfect safe pastures for it's legions of prisoners.

You mention an actual Home Army though, so you go with option B. Turn after turn you spend 35 for upkeep. Your Home Army just sits there - you don't know when the Brits will land. Perhaps never. But let's say they land an Army, which you figure you probably can beat. Except now you're firmly in the Land of Negative Expectations. This is because your payoff when you win is minimal, and if you lose you lose big. If you win, the Brits retreat one province, reinforce, and can go at you the very next turn, if not the turn after. What did you win? A month's delay while you scramble to force march the nearest "over there" Army back home.

Now what happens if you lose? You have 220K fully armed enemy soldiers sitting in Paris. Hello surrender screen. Even if you feel your Home Army will win 5 out of 6 fights, that means 84% of the time you gain almost nothing, and 16% of the time you lose everything.

In the end, to fully defeat a British incursion you will have to march a real army from wherever it is back home so it can fight the Brits and have no negative expectation if the fight goes sour.

So in the end, your beefed up Home Army is still not a real army because it cannot absorb a loss without catastrophic consequences. In effect, you're much better off just going with option A, since you're gonna run anyway, because it's much cheaper.

Now, you have an alternative to A and B, and that's to keep a super Home Army in Paris, one that will squash all invaders like a bug. Of course this is completely impractical, since you will face the prospect of paying approximately 60 upkeep for absolutely nothing for the rest of the game, in case the Brits don't cooperate with you and invade.

There are two more factors that enter into play when deciding how to take care of the POW problem.

One, the tremendous opportunity cost. Every unit guarding POWs or protecting the homeland, is one unit that isn't arriving to reinforce that critical battle in Styria. And if you lose that battle and the pursuit wrecks your shit, no amount of spit and polish Home Armies will save you when the victorious enemy armies roll into your backyard, looking for plunder.

Two, the real additional costs. So far I only mentioned the strict upkeep costs for the hypothetical Home Army. But the prisoners must be fed as well. And your Home Army can't disband into cities because who will guard the POWs? So they have to sit there in the same province eating up all your precious baguettes. Meanwhile don't forget the additional 15 upkeep from the Depot.

You had better hope that whatever it is that POWs actually do for you that's supposed to be beneficial is worth to you the 35 to 50 money and whatever food they consume each turn. If anyone can do some tests to see what the actual effects of POWs are I would appreciate it, because I had some and I wasn't going wow this shit is just building itself, which is probably the break-even point for me to bother with them.

So anyway, to sum up: POW's = albatross.

POWs do show up as armed troops if liberated but at what strength? The few times it's happened to me, I was able to beat them back down pretty quickly so I just assumed they were pretty weak (even if I cause a full strength division to surrender).

Hi carnifex

Well, I have won about 7 campiagns, since the game was released, not in a PBEM game, so I Don't know how those work

but I go more with the B option (maybe my fault, I mentioned that in my current game I had a Army with a Mil in it, it is the only game that has had one)

I normally have 100 K or so of troops in the Home Army, Paris is also my mine building point, new units go into the Home Army, old units move into other Armies

I will have to say, the only Army I have not defeated in Paris is a Turkish one, all the other sides have made it to my homeland, and I have beaten them in Paris

(one good point of Paris fighting, is the Army that loses, mainly is finished)

I have had 500 K of POWs in Paris, I was going to take a screen shot at the end of the turn, but two of the sides gave up the war, so lost the nice looking picture (oh, did you know you can move POW's from Div to Div ?)

I had a game, where the UK did not have an army, all of there fighting troops, were in Paris, I didn't have a fleet, they did, so I never left my side of the channel, but they couldn't do anything back either

I have had games were I was sacking 4 Caps at the same time (Cap Cities are the only ones I really like to sack, as they will stay with there owner when they give up, if you sack a city, you want to take, you only have to pay to rebuild it)

maybe just different styles of play

I will pay for the upkeep of my Armies and not complain about that side of the war

oh yea, you say, chase the other Army, no, the Home Army stays in place, you should have other armies to do the chasing when someone comes into your homeland, the Home Army is the Anivl, they guard the prise, which is the Cap

HARD_Sarge