"Runaway" stats.

[Hook]

"Out of Map" was intentionally ambiguous, as I didn't know if it included reinforcements that had not yet entered the battlefield.  I just checked and it doesn't, so "Left the Field" or similar it is.  Similar words "out of map" are used in several other places and I'm not sure what everything is used for.

Hook

[Gunner24]

"Left the Field"

is good, but is :

"Left the Battlefield" better ?.

[Count von Csollich]

is good, but is :

"Left the Battlefield" better ?.

how about good old British English and "Left the Field of Battle"... just a joke...

[Mooncabbage]

I believe it was the role of drummer boys and other musicians to remove the wounded from the line. I think the fact that there was a rule at any point forbidding soldiers to leave the line to remove wounded commrades suggested that this happened regularly. I believe this is modelled in game, with a rallied unit regaining strength and morale over time. Can anyone confirm this?

I would like to see units "retreat" instead of rout if they have only taken a small number of losses, atleast when on the defensive. This would reflect being pushed back. If they took more losses the retreat might turn to a rout. This already happens sometimes (regiments will make a "retreat move" where the men slowly walk backwards). I think routs should perhaps be confined to units that have had a spectacular failure of morale.

In LG is there any morale bonus/penalty for a regiment with a threatened or unsupported flank? Do friendly fleeing regiments negatively affect morale? I am not sure, sometimes I see corps taken apart piecemeal with regiments routing and being captured, while some other regiments stand steadfast. I would expect that if a corps commander was taking massive losses, he would order his corps to retreat rather than see it destroyed. Does anyone have opinions on this?

[Hook]

I believe this is modelled in game, with a rallied unit regaining strength and morale over time. Can anyone confirm this?

Don't know for sure, but feel free to watch in the game to see, and let us know.

I would like to see units "retreat" instead of rout if they have only taken a small number of losses, atleast when on the defensive. This would reflect being pushed back. If they took more losses the retreat might turn to a rout.

Already happening.  Probably only happens for higher quality units.  You have to have considerable control over troops to get them to do an orderly retreat, more than you'd have for a typical line unit.  Read du Picq.

1.  In LG is there any morale bonus/penalty for a regiment with a threatened or unsupported flank?

2.  Do friendly fleeing regiments negatively affect morale? I am not sure, sometimes I see corps taken apart piecemeal with regiments routing and being captured, while some other regiments stand steadfast.

3.  I would expect that if a corps commander was taking massive losses, he would order his corps to retreat rather than see it destroyed. Does anyone have opinions on this?

1.  Don't know.  Feel free to check.

2.  It appears they do.  In any case, it's documented that an elite or guard level unit fleeing will have a major effect on morale.  Check the manual.

3.  This is already happening.  Some corps will retreat completely off the field.

We've already determined what the "runaway" numbers are counting.  You may notice that the numbers are generally smaller in DemoII.

Hook

[Mooncabbage]

Already happening.  Probably only happens for higher quality units.  You have to have considerable control over troops to get them to do an orderly retreat, more than you'd have for a typical line unit.  Read du Picq.

This makes plenty of sense. I can imagine them trying to retreat and having it rapidly turn into a rout. I think routs should be involuntary, while a retreat is something attempted by the tactical and regimental AIs.

1.  Don't know.  Feel free to check.

I imagine this would be hidden in the engine if it was the case, so I think it's something that we can speculate on but JMM will have to confirm or deny for certainty.

2.  It appears they do.  In any case, it's documented that an elite or guard level unit fleeing will have a major effect on morale.  Check the manual.

This should most certainly be the case. Seeing an elite unit broken would have been devastating to morale. However regular old allies fleeing is something that has ALWAYS been a problem, historically, if not on the same scale as say, the defeat of the old guard.

3.  This is already happening.  Some corps will retreat completely off the field.

I have only ever seen corps retreat completely from the field. Usually they leave a rearguard which is very awesome. However I have seen corps completely obliterated with no attempt to flee and no mass rout, just slowly picked off... Which to me seems a historical or stupid (ie. incompetent commander). The corps WAS deployed in "defence on line" mode, and I think I read somewhere about this breaking the AI though. So perhaps it's that?

[Hook]

I imagine this would be hidden in the engine if it was the case, so I think it's something that we can speculate on but JMM will have to confirm or deny for certainty.

Given that the morale is shown and continuously updated, it's easy enough to watch various units and see what their morale does.  Moving units around during the setup phase is a good way to test various morale conditions involving unit or commander proximity.  No speculation needed.

Hook

[Mooncabbage]

Hmm good point. Although it still won't tell us (easily atleast) what effect a routing friendly regiment has

[Count von Csollich]

I would like to see units "retreat" instead of rout if they have only taken a small number of losses, atleast when on the defensive. This would reflect being pushed back. If they took more losses the retreat might turn to a rout. This already happens sometimes (regiments will make a "retreat move" where the men slowly walk backwards). I think routs should perhaps be confined to units that have had a spectacular failure of morale.

I really don't want to contradict you always, certainly not my intention, but this is the way I see it...with historical reference...
The 1/14th Line at Austerlitz was detached by the Brigade Commander Thiebault to occupy Pratzen village...they marched onto the village with the assurance that it was unoccupied...when encountered they were taken by surprise and routed without any significant losses...Thiebault later on mentioned that he was disgusted by the behaviour of the commanding officer Mazas who had much experience , for not sending out proper scouts...
The batallion later on tried to redeem itself by coming back to the fight...with success
If you want to see organized retreats, try to observe attacks on villages: you will see that if one battallion has lost considerably the second one of the regiment will replace the first and continue the attack, while the "used" batallion retreats to safety as last in the regiment ...

[Mooncabbage]

I think you misunderstand me. You are a french native speaker yes? I am guessing from your grammar.

I spectacular failure of morale does not have to be caused by losses. The surprise of the village being occupied might qualify to be a rout, it certainly was in real life. What I AM saying is, an organised retreat should be a choice the Regimental and Tactical AI can make, as a reaction to pressure, WITHOUT the unit routing. As it stands this never happens at a regimental level.

For example, if a regiment is attacked by 2 enemy regiments, the colonel will issue a retreat order. The regiment will slowly march backwards towards support, fighting a rearguard action along the way. They might have only taken light losses, but the colonel can see that they will lose and so choses to preserve his command.

Then a battery opens fire on the regiment, lowering their morale and causing them to rout. This is not something the colonel has chosen to do, it is something that has happened spontaneously among the men.

Can you see the difference here?

I believe what people are saying is that in game units rout inappropriately, from too few losses. I was suggesting that the units could be made "braver" and be balanced out by retreat orders by the AI.

I wonder, is the morale system based largely on losses? I think there needs to be a certain "shock" element to morale, where a regiment can stand to be bled slowly, say in a firefight, but factors like surprise, routing allies, being vastly outnumbered, and taking a large number of losses in a small period, say from concentrated artillery fire, can cause them to rout without taking many losses at all.

Apologies that my thoughts do not seem very coherent right now, I am on some strong painkillers and they have just kicked in.

[Count von Csollich]

Allright I really didn't get that the way you ment it...(I'm not englisch native..if that's what you mean, and i usually don't correct the things i write...but from my earlier comments you might have realized that I am Austrian. However I've learned English, French, Latin, Ancient Greek and Italian - so it all gets a little bit confused up there, hope that I'm still comprehendable)  
Concerning game-programming I must pass, as I already mentioned "many" times now...

And for all the people who don't know Austria: THERE ARE NO KANGAROOS IN AUSTRIA  

[CBR]

I wonder, is the morale system based largely on losses? I think there needs to be a certain "shock" element to morale, where a regiment can stand to be bled slowly, say in a firefight, but factors like surprise, routing allies, being vastly outnumbered, and taking a large number of losses in a small period, say from concentrated artillery fire, can cause them to rout without taking many losses at all.

From what I can see the only way a unit does not rout after taking 5% losses(Line quality) is if there is a break of one minute where it does not take losses. If such a break happens then the "clock" resets and it has to take another 5%.

From an old post by JMM there is a shock based on losses which is 3% for Guard units. I take that as 3% in one minute.

If I was to take a guess based on the tests and battles I have done so far then armies need to consist of Elite quality units or better to get the same percentage of casualties that we see in several historical battles.

[Gunner24]

I think there should be a Corps order :

"Withdraw".

If a Corps Commander can see he is about to get badly beaten he should be able to make some kind of organised withdrawal, to a safer position.

What is everyone using at the moment to do this ?......which order would be best if you want to dis-engage ?.

[Count von Csollich]

I think there should be a Corps order :

"Withdraw".

If a Corps Commander can see he is about to get badly beaten he should be able to make some kind of organised withdrawal, to a safer position.

What is everyone using at the moment to do this ?......which order would be best if you want to dis-engage ?.

That would be a good idea!
I've read on this forum that the deploy order somewhere to the rear can be used in combination with the checkboard formation would be best...hope I remember correctly  

[JMM]

From what I can see the only way a unit does not rout after taking 5% losses(Line quality) is if there is a break of one minute where it does not take losses. If such a break happens then the "clock" resets and it has to take another 5%.
From an old post by JMM there is a shock based on losses which is 3% for Guard units. I take that as 3% in one minute.
If I was to take a guess based on the tests and battles I have done so far then armies need to consist of Elite quality units or better to get the same percentage of casualties that we see in several historical battles.

There are 3 levels before a unit routs.
a) losses during the last minute above X1% (instantaneous   flight)
b) losses during the march (beginning on an order) above X2%
c) absolute losses above X3%
There are several other conditions to take flight.

X1 is 8,7,6,5,4% for Vieille Garde,Moyenne Garde,Royal Garde,Line or Light infantry,conscrit
X3 is 42,26 to 28,21 to 24,15 to 20%
X2 is calculated from these 2 values.

JMM