France conquest rules

[Helsingor]

I read the recent discussion about the French morale boost for surviving into Fall '40 and I also understand why France has to get a morale boost if the Germans elect to go for "all of France" and aim to take Algiers. If France didn't get such a boost, then it would very likely surrender due to having zero NM within a turn or two of the Axis deciding to go for Algiers, thus allowing the Axis to grab all of France without having to risk an actual campaign in Algeria.
BUT, my recent experience in a match leads me to believe the "France survival" mechanism is overdone.
In the match (still ongoing), I had reached the outskirts of Algiers in May '40 before I was able to take Paris. My opponent basically abandoned the French borders and set up a hedgehog around Paris--perfectly fair choice. Algiers was cut off at zero supply and the port was at level 3. I destroyed the unit in Algiers, but lacked the movement points to enter the city.
Because he had lost the Maginot line and various French NM objectives, French NM hit zero and I said "no" to setting up Vichy. French NM went up to 125 (I think), the capital switched to Algiers, then switched back to Paris, which seems right form a historical perspective.
I took Algiers the next turn, and Paris in the same turn. Then the fun began. Because French NM was still quite high (over 60, I think) , the capital switched to Bordeaux, which I captured in the following turn. THEN the capital switched to Oran (??!!!???). Fortunately for me, my opponent was probably as surprised by this as I was and was not able to shift a unit there. In my next turn, I marched into the FOURTH French capital and...France still did not surrender, presumably because there were enough French units and one HQ still on the board and the RNG gods were kind to my opponent. I had to destroy virtually every French unit remaining before it finally surrendered four turns after I took Paris and Algiers.
I know there has to be some game-balancing and I appreciate the mechanisms that are intended to make the Algiers option a challenge for the Axis, but the sequence felt a bit perverse. I know Oran is ALGERIA's Alternate Capital, but is there a way to make it NOT be one of France's Alternate Capitals? Otherwise, France has potentially FOUR Alternate Capitals, something not even the USSR (which, historically, took much more punishment from the Axis than did France) has?

[petedalby]

Yes - take Paris last. And kill more units.

Any major country will not surrender, even after it's lost all of its capitals, if there are sufficient land units remaining. I think the calculation is 3% x no of units?

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Yes - take Paris last. And kill more units.

Any major country will not surrender, even after it's lost all of its capitals, if there are sufficient land units remaining. I think the calculation is 3% x no of units?

That and the NM value is calculated in to for the check turn by turn. I don't know exactly what percentage or what ever the NM calculation is...but the lower the NM the better.

One MP match I was in (vs Pavia on YT), I as Soviets finally lost Perm in like mid 1944. Soviets still had +50 units on the map plus NM at around 60. We lasted around 12 turns to the consternation of my opponent. Soviets almost took back Kyubeshev (an alt- capital) but alas we failed the check just before as Soviet NM rapidly fell during the proceeding 10-12 turns.

This was epic!

Side note. One of Pavia's subscribers apparently was calling me a cheater...because this fellow wasn't 'read in' to the surrender mechanism and the possibilities of continuation of war with the country that lost its last capital.
That did annoy me.

[Duedman]

Fun thing. remembers me of Beauregard running 3 times in a single turn from my Northeners lol

As for the mechanics it would have been 2 units x 3% = 6%
But while small that is still not the bullet he dodged.
The 6% get multiplied by the current NM
Which in your case seemed to be very low. Lets take 10% - that would make a 0,6% chance to not surrender.
Lucky him

Minors got 6% per unit multiplied by the NM of their parent Major

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Fun thing. remembers me of Beauregard running 3 times in a single turn from my Northeners lol

As for the mechanics it would have been 2 units x 3% = 6%
But while small that is still not the bullet he dodged.
The 6% get multiplied by the current NM
Which in your case seemed to be very low. Lets take 10% - that would make a 0,6% chance to not surrender.
Lucky him

Minors got 6% per unit multiplied by the NM of their parent Major

Was that in the a ACW match between you and GamingWithTheColonel with the Colonel? I seem to remember seeing that.
Thanks for the formula. I forgot exactly what it was and couldn't find it.
I'll copy and paste this in a note.

[Umeu]

Don’t think it is correct. Afaik, there is no multiplication with NM, at least not in WaW. The manual doesn’t mention it. Was it patched?

[BenurH99]

I read the recent discussion about the French morale boost for surviving into Fall '40 and I also understand why France has to get a morale boost if the Germans elect to go for "all of France" and aim to take Algiers. If France didn't get such a boost, then it would very likely surrender due to having zero NM within a turn or two of the Axis deciding to go for Algiers, thus allowing the Axis to grab all of France without having to risk an actual campaign in Algeria.
BUT, my recent experience in a match leads me to believe the "France survival" mechanism is overdone.
In the match (still ongoing), I had reached the outskirts of Algiers in May '40 before I was able to take Paris. My opponent basically abandoned the French borders and set up a hedgehog around Paris--perfectly fair choice. Algiers was cut off at zero supply and the port was at level 3. I destroyed the unit in Algiers, but lacked the movement points to enter the city.
Because he had lost the Maginot line and various French NM objectives, French NM hit zero and I said "no" to setting up Vichy. French NM went up to 125 (I think), the capital switched to Algiers, then switched back to Paris, which seems right form a historical perspective.
I took Algiers the next turn, and Paris in the same turn. Then the fun began. Because French NM was still quite high (over 60, I think) , the capital switched to Bordeaux, which I captured in the following turn. THEN the capital switched to Oran (??!!!???). Fortunately for me, my opponent was probably as surprised by this as I was and was not able to shift a unit there. In my next turn, I marched into the FOURTH French capital and...France still did not surrender, presumably because there were enough French units and one HQ still on the board and the RNG gods were kind to my opponent. I had to destroy virtually every French unit remaining before it finally surrendered four turns after I took Paris and Algiers.
I know there has to be some game-balancing and I appreciate the mechanisms that are intended to make the Algiers option a challenge for the Axis, but the sequence felt a bit perverse. I know Oran is ALGERIA's Alternate Capital, but is there a way to make it NOT be one of France's Alternate Capitals? Otherwise, France has potentially FOUR Alternate Capitals, something not even the USSR (which, historically, took much more punishment from the Axis than did France) has?

If for any reason there are too many French units once Paris is taken, if Dijon is taken, France surrenders, that's how you truly flank the Maginot Line.

[Duedman]

Don’t think it is correct. Afaik, there is no multiplication with NM, at least not in WaW. The manual doesn’t mention it. Was it patched?

I‘m pretty sure I read this in a post from Bill or Hubert. But I would bet only a small amount on it

[petedalby]

Duedman - I think you're right. 3% x no of units for majors & 6% for minors. But you have to go a long way back to find it.

So if USSR has 33 surviving units with all Capitals lost it is unlikely to surrender.

[James Taylor]

I had always thought that this was the case, enough units on the board and the USSR would never surrender. However in a recent game in which the USSR lost all its capitals in 1944 the game continuing into 1946, to my surprise the USSR surrendered.

Actually the USSR was in a counter offensive, all its previously lost units had been rebuilt with additional ones on top of that when the surrender occurred. I'm not sure what the national morale was at the time, but obviously something else entered into the calculation as there were way more than 40 units in the Red Army at the time.

[Umeu]

The first part of Duedman’s calculation is correct, but afaik, it doesn’t multiply with the decimal form of national morale (100% being 1), at least the manual doesn’t mention it. So maybe the devs can shed light on it.

So yeeah, 34+ units in Russian territory should prevent surrender. In the above case though, since you aren’t sure what the National morale was, of it was 0, Russia would still surrender. Or maybe Duedman is right, and at low morale, it’s not longer as effective, if NM was 50% or lower, it could be 40*3%*0.5=60% chance to not surrender, 40%chance it will.

[Duedman]

Took me quite a few tries with the AI to find it.
Second post of this thread

https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopi ... +surrender

Looks like the Manual is missing one additional piece in that the check for Majors (Majors only) also includes a consideration for the current national morale. We've made a note to have this corrected when the next round of Manual updates occurs.

For reference, it should read as follows:

Major Country Surrender = 3% * number of remaining units within the home country * Current National Morale