Emotions and Critical Strikes

[Aametherar]

Originally Posted by Kire

Yes this would be very very lovely =), i also liked it at empire earth (it was far far away so i could mixed a game name =P). This would surly add some fun factor to game and gaining like titles -Kire the emperor or God Kire or King Kire ....- =P. But dont know how would democracy work... Asking parliament or people if you can attack player or to gain some money or create units ?=P
It would be also nice for role playing factor.. if one soldier is brave in combat and you like him you, as king, would give him title, but would not change stats.

Democracy could work the way it does in Galactic Civilizations for example. The better you treat your people the more they support your actions. They judge your leadership, and you get production bonuses for example from happy workers, where if they hate you they can rebel or run from battles more. Putting more power into the hands of your units by living in a democracy could give the greatest benefits as well as the greatest possible negative affects. An example of them not liking you is cause you tax em too much or declare war on another player and lose, or are just always at war getting them killed etc. I'd imagine it being more the type of government a turtle player would chose.

You could even have a religious based government...I'd go to war with you though ^_^. God Aametherar commands you to bow to the orcs.

[Darathor]

I don't like having my guys run away. It is in the TW series because it's realistic and has instanced battles. It would be way harder in an mmorts because it would be hard to calculate the number of units the unit that is under attack is near and how many are coming to aid them. It seems too complicated and unnecessary. Also, it would mess up a bunch of strategies, like sending a small force as a diversion, it wouldn't work as well if they ran away almost immediately when confronted with a vastly superior force.
For governments, if implemented(not sure if I want them) I would like to see few detractors, but make the bonuses unique. I don't want to choose a government but be limited in something and be beat just because they have a different government. You should only win because of you being a certain government only if you utilize all its advantages, not because its advantages exploit your opponents government weaknesses.

[Joseph Visscher]

Originally Posted by Puppeteer

I'm not sure if I like the whole morale system. Fleeing would become irritatingly annoying. I'm their commander, not their adviser. My orders are not optional.

Righto!
Gameplay over realism, having your units disobey you and flee is realistic but very very annoying to most people, that alone turned me off that game.
Only special situations you will lose control over your units, such as confusion spells.

[The Witch King of Angmar]

Or like in BFME, the Nazgul screech. *shutters*

[MrBlack103]

It was fun to use, though.

[Aametherar]

I think i'm the only one here who's never played BFME. I also agree gameplay above all else!

[zach12wqasxz]

i think having a morle lvl thing would even out when your slaughtering broken troopls

[Aametherar]

Honestly I agree that having troops flee is annoying, knowing you have the advantage and watching your troops all start breaking and fleeing is annoying. I more like the idea I put up of capturing higher lvl units after the battles over based on actual kills then ransoming/sacrificing. Maybe you didn't kill them but captured them, it'd be more an aspect of mmo mode, not affecting in battle at all with stuff like fleeing.

[szebus]

Originally Posted by Aametherar

I think i'm the only one here who's never played BFME. I also agree gameplay above all else!

No, You are not.

Originally Posted by Aametherar

I more like the idea I put up of capturing higher lvl units after the battles over based on actual kills then ransoming/sacrificing.

The same way, when you're units flee, they should be considered captured, at least some of those who flee.

[Josh Warner]

Originally Posted by Aametherar

Honestly I agree that having troops flee is annoying, knowing you have the advantage and watching your troops all start breaking and fleeing is annoying. I more like the idea I put up of capturing higher lvl units after the battles over based on actual kills then ransoming/sacrificing. Maybe you didn't kill them but captured them, it'd be more an aspect of mmo mode, not affecting in battle at all with stuff like fleeing.

morale is just another way to win a battle. If one player manages it well using various support units/fear units and the other doesn't, the first guy should win. It's another aspect that the player has to control. And while it's frustrating to see your army start to panic and break when you know if they continued to fight would win - that's the reality of it. Soldiers don't see that big picture, they see something big and scary in front of them or killing their friends, and they want to get away from it. I personally hope morale is here in some form for in battles as long as there are counters to it like everything else. Expensive and slow training units that increase morale/decrease how fast it goes down etc for example. So if you build them early without know what your opponent has, your army will be weaker, but if your opponent has units that lower morale and you don't your army will rout, another way to reinforce small scale gameplay, scouting and skirmishing to see what your enemy can bring to bear.

Originally Posted by Joseph Visscher

[color="Navy"]Units cheer when they defeat the enemy in a battle., currently units do not cower or become fearful, they'll just fight to the death, this may change though.

Well, I hope that changes! if not oh well, I just think it adds another layer to gameplay that can be fun when done right, personally not a fan of activated 'fear' or 'confusion' but maybe the countering system will make it work.