Morale, are there better stats?

Subject: Morale, are there better stats? Sat Mar 30, 2013 4:44 am

Its been bugging me for some time, so I thought I would bring it up while we wait for the reset. Just how does this stat affect the units? We know that when taking losses there seems to be a morale check at times to keep the unit engaged, and that this stat has direct influence on it. When you put a hero in the unit it drastically affects the unit as well. So are we to take it that if you want a unit to stand on its own without a hero, this is something to consider?

With my race, at least, this stat has been pretty useless. I do not have units break often, and when I do, its usually for the best. Now this was when units could be eliminated, so now with just an xp hit, does it really matter that much?

Does morale affect to hit chance, or any other aspect of battle? In this case morale boosting items would be useful, but if we are only seeing an effect on whether or not a unit breaks, then I would spend my items more on melee (to hit), strength (do damage), and endurance (resist damage).

For races with a low movement (cough, dwarves, cough) morale may be the difference between life and death, but again now that units do not have permadeath, and eventually we will have sufficient numbers of heroes to make sure each unit (that can) will have one, what if any, is the role of morale?

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Glorfindel wrote:: Its been bugging me for some time, so I thought I would bring it up while we wait for the reset. Just how does this stat affect the units? We know that when taking losses there seems to be a morale check at times to keep the unit engaged, and that this stat has direct influence on it. When you put a hero in the unit it drastically affects the unit as well. So are we to take it that if you want a unit to stand on its own without a hero, this is something to consider?

With my race, at least, this stat has been pretty useless. I do not have units break often, and when I do, its usually for the best. Now this was when units could be eliminated, so now with just an xp hit, does it really matter that much?

Does morale affect to hit chance, or any other aspect of battle? In this case morale boosting items would be useful, but if we are only seeing an effect on whether or not a unit breaks, then I would spend my items more on melee (to hit), strength (do damage), and endurance (resist damage).

For races with a low movement (cough, dwarves, cough) morale may be the difference between life and death, but again now that units do not have permadeath, and eventually we will have sufficient numbers of heroes to make sure each unit (that can) will have one, what if any, is the role of morale?

Very good question...

Heroes are extremely important in the beginning and in the later stage of the game. In the beginning, because they have better stats than an average Infantry troop and in the later stage because they will be quite powerful as the bonuses they receive per level are higher than what the units receive.

They also provide a morale bonus to the unit they are assigned.

Morale is currently used to determine the probability of a unit fleeing from an engagement. However, on Monday it will also affect the probability to hit a unit. As a unit is receiving casualties and its morale drops, its effectiveness will also be affected. Depending on its morale stat (default unit stat), the morale stat of the enemy (default unit stat) and the current battle morale of both participants, with every casualty sustained there will be a probability to receive a penalty to check to hit. This penalty will be determined by a Morale check. Therefore, the higher the stat of a unit, the higher the probability to "save" such a Morale check and the higher the probability to "cause" such a Morale check to the enemy unit.

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

Has this actually been added yet? That moral increases the chance to hit in combat ? Doesnt say it in the description yet. I just tried a match against a comp on normal, one squad vs one squad. When they lost moral they broke and ran, then turned around to fight again. Since im dwarves, i cant catch people who retreat, so retreating actually benefits them. They retreated and re-engaged 6 times before finally leaving the map with 1/4 of the squad. This doesnt seem like the way it should be, maybe when a squad retreats, it actually causes units to split off and flee the map entirely ?

Also, what determines how quickly moral comes back after a squad retreats? I noticed some guys will flee the map, and sometimes they turn around very quickly. Also if you dis-engage them, they'll often turn around and fight, seems to cancel their retreat, but as soon as they take a loss they flee again.

Posts : 138 Join date : 2012-11-12

Khor wrote:: Has this actually been added yet? That moral increases the chance to hit in combat ? Doesnt say it in the description yet. I just tried a match against a comp on normal, one squad vs one squad. When they lost moral they broke and ran, then turned around to fight again. Since im dwarves, i cant catch people who retreat, so retreating actually benefits them. They retreated and re-engaged 6 times before finally leaving the map with 1/4 of the squad. This doesnt seem like the way it should be, maybe when a squad retreats, it actually causes units to split off and flee the map entirely ?

Also, what determines how quickly moral comes back after a squad retreats? I noticed some guys will flee the map, and sometimes they turn around very quickly. Also if you dis-engage them, they'll often turn around and fight, seems to cancel their retreat, but as soon as they take a loss they flee again.

This has already been added when the game went live on Kongregate. Units lose morale when they are suffering damage. So if they lose a lot of morale without inflicting any damage on the units attacking them they retreat. While they are fleeing, if they are still being attacked, and are losing Units i.e. sustaining damage, in such a case their morale doesn't recover and they keep running or fleeing. However, in case the unit is not targeted while running away and doesn't sustain damage it slowly recovers its Morale and can once again participate in the battle.

So ultimately it all depends on whether the Unit is sustaining Damage. If it is, it will flee and exit the Battlefield, if it doesn't sustain damage and stays on the Battlefield long enough for it to recover its normal Morale value it can participate in the battle.

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

I meant the part about the Moral actually increasing your chance to hit, since its kind of impossible to test. Also wow that significantly widens the gap of effectiveness between Dwarvs and Elves. Whatever flees elf LI will be rundown until death since they're faster and will slash at their backs and whatever flees Dwarvs is going to escape and re-engage over and over (this once happened 6 times in a row ><)

Posts : 511 Join date : 2013-05-08 Location : Amber Shores

That's why you'd use archers.

Posts : 138 Join date : 2012-11-12

Khor wrote:: I meant the part about the Moral actually increasing your chance to hit, since its kind of impossible to test. Also wow that significantly widens the gap of effectiveness between Dwarvs and Elves. Whatever flees elf LI will be rundown until death since they're faster and will slash at their backs and whatever flees Dwarvs is going to escape and re-engage over and over (this once happened 6 times in a row ><)

Yes, the update about Morale dependent hitting. That is units with Good Morale deliver good damage, and those with less Morale are unable to cause much damage.

The part about Elves vs Dwarves is quite true, but if you have observed, Player units do not run as often and also recover Morale fast. On the other Hand AI Units if they start fleeing sometimes do not even look back till they cross the entire Map. So this is mostly going to come to play in PvP and not against AI battles.

The other way to look at this is, Elves since they are weaker than the Dwarves are going to lose Morale faster than the Dwarves. Whereas, the Dwarves are going to also recover Morale faster due to being stronger and with more Endurance.

So I'd just mention that the developers have painstakingly ensured the Game is Balanced. Embarassed

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

When they are available. Still, even dwarf archers are 13 speed so once its out of range its home free, and that range is 45, compared to the elves range of 60, so even a dwarfs best solution is the weakest alternative. Ironclads just need some sort of gap closer, or retreating gives a speed penalty.

Would be interesting if retreating actually hurt the moral of ALL of you squads... it should maybe Surprised

When i do observe my dwarves retreating they almost never recover since they cant outrun any light infantry, its basically a death sentence unless the enemy gets stopped. As far as elves vs dwarves, all they have is a +5 endurance bonus, equal damage and melee and moral, while elf LI have an AMAZING passive ability for deflecting attacks, making them much sturdier. Plus since elf LI have lower reaction, they attack faster, so they actually do more damage than dwarf infantry which results in more kills/moral.

Which means elves are faster, deadlier, and sturdier, can overrun foes who retreat, and can safely retreat themselves.
Unless dwarves are facing Orcs, then its a big bonus but i disagree with racial abilities that specifically counter one race and are useless in other cases, i mean if we hate orcs, are we like neutral with the demons and undead? XD

Subject: MvP Wed May 15, 2013 11:08 am

I personally don't have a problem with it. Sure I had a couple of questionable situation but I have 47 MvPs... No problem here Smile

I believe the formula. If they have checked into it and they tell me that its doing what its supposed to do then no complaints here...

Posts : 43 Join date : 2013-05-03

KingTutt wrote:: I personally don't have a problem with it. Sure I had a couple of questionable situation but I have 47 MvPs... No problem here

I believe the formula. If they have checked into it and they tell me that its doing what its supposed to do then no complaints here...

Check out the following thread; http://www.battleconforum.com/t180p15-new-mvp-calculations

If I'm not mistaken, it is one of the new features in the update.

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Khor wrote:: When they are available. Still, even dwarf archers are 13 speed so once its out of range its home free, and that range is 45, compared to the elves range of 60, so even a dwarfs best solution is the weakest alternative. Ironclads just need some sort of gap closer, or retreating gives a speed penalty.

Would be interesting if retreating actually hurt the moral of ALL of you squads... it should maybe

When i do observe my dwarves retreating they almost never recover since they cant outrun any light infantry, its basically a death sentence unless the enemy gets stopped. As far as elves vs dwarves, all they have is a +5 endurance bonus, equal damage and melee and moral, while elf LI have an AMAZING passive ability for deflecting attacks, making them much sturdier. Plus since elf LI have lower reaction, they attack faster, so they actually do more damage than dwarf infantry which results in more kills/moral.

Which means elves are faster, deadlier, and sturdier, can overrun foes who retreat, and can safely retreat themselves.
Unless dwarves are facing Orcs, then its a big bonus but i disagree with racial abilities that specifically counter one race and are useless in other cases, i mean if we hate orcs, are we like neutral with the demons and undead? XD

Morale will play a significant role during an engagement. When the enemy's Morale is at 65% then apart from the Morale Check to Flee, it also gets a Morale Check to "Shiver". If it fails, then it will receive a penalty to its Melee for that round. It can be quite devastating.. As for Dwarves being in a disadvantage, all I have to do to prove to you that they are just fine, is show you my Avatar. Wink

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

RuneSlayer wrote:: Morale will play a significant role during an engagement. When the enemy's Morale is at 65% then apart from the Morale Check to Flee, it also gets a Morale Check to "Shiver". If it fails, then it will receive a penalty to its Melee for that round. It can be quite devastating.. As for Dwarves being in a disadvantage, all I have to do to prove to you that they are just fine, is show you my Avatar.

Are undead immune to this mechanic as well ? It could work like HoMM5 has it, undead are immune to the effects of moral, negative and positive.

You being a fan of dwarves is only more disheartening that they could be allowed to be what they are >< i covered it in detail, in many posts. Even if they werent the slowest Light Infantry, between their stats and passive abilities, humans have better survivability (higher armor than dwarves!!!!!) and elves have better survivability and more damage (better reaction, EQUAL strength to dwarves, incredible passive shield) They are obviously the least popular choice for Light side, i've only once seen a dwarf far enough to have Heavies in co-op while a wall of elf archers and heavies are super common. I'm fine with elves having better archers and with their infantry being faster and attacking faster, but having equal armor/strength to dwarf LI is criminal ! The passives feel like they should be reversed, Elves with the hatred, Dwarves with the shields.

Posts : 483 Join date : 2013-04-27

Khor wrote:: Which means elves are faster, deadlier, and sturdier, can overrun foes who retreat, and can safely retreat themselves.
Unless dwarves are facing Orcs, then its a big bonus but i disagree with racial abilities that specifically counter one race and are useless in other cases, i mean if we hate orcs, are we like neutral with the demons and undead? XD

Youre also only comparing the light units vs light units. Dwarven Heavies are significantly sturdier than other heavy units.

Dwarven missile units dont have the same range as archers, but they do better damage to armored foes in that range due to armor penetration.

Posts : 483 Join date : 2013-04-27

Khor wrote:: The passives feel like they should be reversed, Elves with the hatred, Dwarves with the shields.

Making huge changes to the passives like this would be a bad idea and very unfair to players all around who have invested much time into the game.

Also, there will be new units with different abilities. I suspect dwarves will get some type of unit that moves faster than the other dwarven units (dwarven berserker like Runeslayer's avatar). Tweaking numbers for balance is one thing, but changing major gameplay mechanics that affect races is a bad idea.

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

Its a fair comparison, especially when we are stuck with these units to introduce us to the race, and by all rights elves are better at what dwarves should be best at and elves worst at. How is changing it unfair? The games still new, according to you the passive 'isnt that good' and i doubt anyone went elves because of it anyways. The anti-racial passive on both sides should be changed out anyways, a skill that useless 66% of the time and too good for 33%, two imbalances dont make a balance ! A clean, event +5/10/15 melee passive would be better.

But more importantly the emphasis on Defense for the dwarves is paramount. The elves dont need a defense passive because they have SPEED, a unit that can safely retreat vs a unit that cannot. Slow and methodical is their way, as each engagement is a much higher risk, not only to the whole squad but to the HERO as well. Get tied up in battle, you dont know if you'll win before someone tries to flank you or reinforcements come, or archers position to rain arrows on you. THAT is when you 'retreat', but dwarves do not have a retreat button, only a 'suicide' button. That is why i believe they deserve such a passive instead.

Yeah the next unit for dwarves gets Rage so it will likely be a quicker and hopefully strike heavy infantry.

Its not as simple as 'dwarves hurt more because armor pierce', elves have got 25% more Missile skill which i could just call "25% more damage output" automatically. 25% more range too but you dont always NEED that much, it changes game per game, just like Speed does, you may not need to move around a lot, or it may make ALL of the difference, makes them both hard to assign value too, so i'll just use the Missile thing as an example. The Armor Penetration also might have small print, like duration. I wonder if Faction balance will ever be an issue though, when one faction has more range overall than the other ?

Posts : 483 Join date : 2013-04-27

Khor wrote:: Its a fair comparison, especially when we are stuck with these units to introduce us to the race, and by all rights elves are better at what dwarves should be best at and elves worst at. How is changing it unfair? The games still new, according to you the passive 'isnt that good' and i doubt anyone went elves because of it anyways. The anti-racial passive on both sides should be changed out anyways, a skill that useless 66% of the time and too good for 33%, two imbalances dont make a balance ! A clean, event +5/10/15 melee passive would be better.

Yeah the next unit for dwarves gets Rage so it will likely be a quicker and hopefully strike heavy infantry.

About Unit Access:

I agree that only having access to 1unit for too long is a bad thing - largely because it creates perception problems of the types that you have complained about. I think its a completely valid point that dwarves do not gain access to a faster moving / flanking unit earlier than tier 6. Thats a problem that should be fixed.
That said, while early game experiences matter, but they should not drastically change how the overall late game is balanced.

About asymmetrically balanced abilities:

Two imbalances can make balance as long as both imbalances have equal opportunity of being at play; and as long as it creates a different and viable gameplay style. In fact, I think we need more of these types of skills / choices.

Hitting harder with less range is exactly the kind of tradeoff that is good to see because it could be argued all day long which way is the better way to go. It is up to player skill and gameplay choices that affect how much the bonuses and penalties come into play.

Dwarves with more armor pen and less range should not seek out long open lanes like Elves would. Dwarves may target heavy inf earlier than Elves would. How should you change the other parts of your army because of this? Do you take cover more so than other races because of it?
I do agree that the hatred talents should be reworked because these talents give a bonus that does nothing interesting to change player behavior when a dwarf fights an orc. The orc cannot do anything to change how that racial affects him, and the dwarf cannot do anything to change the effectiveness of that skill. Thats not interesting gameplay in my eyes.

At best I can see racial talents like that having a very niche role in PvE, but either way, it needs some sort of all around flat bonus added elsewhere.

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

Does that mean that all the new units are confirmed to be tier 6, and thus hardest to get? Was hoping they wouldnt be. I dont think it would at all effect late game balance, after all, dwarven heavy infantry are defense beasts, i'll probably retire LI as soon as possible. Considering it WOULD be a tad redundant to have defense oriented light infantry AND heavy infantry, i think i'd prefer a melee/strength passive after all.

It may just be that a stat adjustment would work better, +5 to armor and maybe +5 strength. I dont know where that puts us in relation to the dark side, but i know that'd put us at 35/35 compared to 30/40 on human (endurance/armor)
With the humans still retaining better mobility. Elf LI should take a hit somewhere, either in strength armor or endurance, and keep their attack speed as highest.

It sort of becomes a ratio of chance to win VS severity of defeat. Like say, Demons vs Elves, the demons have a statistical advantage, should the elves be forced to retreat they CAN due to speed, they can regroup. If the elves manage to force the demons to retreat, the demons are DEAD, they cannot outrun the elves thus they will be overrun.

Hitting Hard with less range is a reasonable trade off but i prefer comparing the Missile scores, since accuracy is a constant, while the effectiveness of range changes with each engagement.

Also you are using the Gunners passive ability to justify his stats, without bringing in the Elven passive ability, 25% attack speed is basically another 25% damage output. I think Stats should be compared to Stats, and passive to passives. The elves unquestionably deal more damage but im fine with that because the -30 armor is more than just armor penetration, the skill seems to be worded so that it debuffs a units armor, making it more vulnerable to attacks from all sources. Wish we could know how long it lasts. Unlike 25% bonus attack speed, this ability can have greater or weaker use depending on the situation.

As for your question, yeah i think dwarvs should take cover more than other races, with lowest speed we dont want to get caught out in the open ever.

Posts : 483 Join date : 2013-04-27

--
A couple quick points:

The next race-specific units are the special units which are unlocked beyond heavy inf.
There has been dev talk about units unlocked through the guild warfare system. Those would not require delving so deeply into the research tree.
You need 40% of your army's AP composed of light units (LINF or Archers) so your LINF and Archers are not completely obsoleted by HINF.

--

Khor wrote:: Hitting Hard with less range is a reasonable trade off but i prefer comparing the Missile scores, since accuracy is a constant, while the effectiveness of range changes with each engagement.

--
About any buff / nerf mongering:

--

Khor wrote:: Also you are using the Gunners passive ability to justify his stats, without bringing in the Elven passive ability, 25% attack speed is basically another 25% damage output. I think Stats should be compared to Stats, and passive to passives. The elves unquestionably deal more damage but im fine with that because the -30 armor is more than just armor penetration, the skill seems to be worded so that it debuffs a units armor, making it more vulnerable to attacks from all sources. Wish we could know how long it lasts. Unlike 25% bonus attack speed, this ability can have greater or weaker use depending on the situation.

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Great posts gentlemen.

A few things to clarify:

1) The new units are not going to be special units. They are Infantry type and could be considered as damage dealers.

2) Even a simple +5 in a stat can make tremendous difference in the outcome of an engagement, especially when that stat is Melee, Strength or Endurance. The +10 Armor for the LI of the Humans is not as "important" as the +5 in Endurance that Dwarves have.

3) Dwarves and Elves have +10 in their Morale stat, which is 10 points more than the other races. This increases the success of a Morale Check in case of a Flee check or a Shiver check.

4) Ancient Hatred passives have been given to both factions. The idea behind it is the concept of the game itself. CO-OPs and PvPs with several races participating and players having to organize their armies to gain the upper hand on the battlefield. The magic lies in CO-OPs and especially PvPs.

5) We are also working on an additional Morale mechanic, which will enhance the current Morale system.

Posts : 483 Join date : 2013-04-27

RuneSlayer wrote:: Great posts gentlemen.

A few things to clarify:

1) The new units are not going to be special units. They are Infantry type and could be considered as damage dealers.

2) Even a simple +5 in a stat can make tremendous difference in the outcome of an engagement, especially when that stat is Melee, Strength or Endurance. The +10 Armor for the LI of the Humans is not as "important" as the +5 in Endurance that Dwarves have.

3) Dwarves and Elves have +10 in their Morale stat, which is 10 points more than the other races. This increases the success of a Morale Check in case of a Flee check or a Shiver check.

4) Ancient Hatred passives have been given to both factions. The idea behind it is the concept of the game itself. CO-OPs and PvPs with several races participating and players having to organize their armies to gain the upper hand on the battlefield. The magic lies in CO-OPs and especially PvPs.

5) We are also working on an additional Morale mechanic, which will enhance the current Morale system.

Thanks for the clarifications.

Can you explain why endurance is more important than armor?

About the hatred passives:

They feel a bit too luck based - especially in PvP - to the point that they detract from the tactical play.
I wouldnt be happy if X team won because they happened to put together a bunch of dwarves that beat the team with extra orcs on it. The effect is much more apparent in small-scale PvP (1v1s happens a lot).
I can see how it has an interesting role in larger PvE encounters though.

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Hegorn wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:: Great posts gentlemen.

A few things to clarify:

1) The new units are not going to be special units. They are Infantry type and could be considered as damage dealers.

2) Even a simple +5 in a stat can make tremendous difference in the outcome of an engagement, especially when that stat is Melee, Strength or Endurance. The +10 Armor for the LI of the Humans is not as "important" as the +5 in Endurance that Dwarves have.

3) Dwarves and Elves have +10 in their Morale stat, which is 10 points more than the other races. This increases the success of a Morale Check in case of a Flee check or a Shiver check.

4) Ancient Hatred passives have been given to both factions. The idea behind it is the concept of the game itself. CO-OPs and PvPs with several races participating and players having to organize their armies to gain the upper hand on the battlefield. The magic lies in CO-OPs and especially PvPs.

5) We are also working on an additional Morale mechanic, which will enhance the current Morale system.

Thanks for the clarifications.

Can you explain why endurance is more important than armor?

About the hatred passives:

They feel a bit too luck based - especially in PvP - to the point that they detract from the tactical play.
I wouldnt be happy if X team won because they happened to put together a bunch of dwarves that beat the team with extra orcs on it. The effect is much more apparent in small-scale PvP (1v1s happens a lot).
I can see how it has an interesting role in larger PvE encounters though.

Mainly because the weight of Endurance in the formula is bigger than that of Armor's.

We have to retain some form of roleplaying to be honest. Not everything is plain mathematics. Smile

Posts : 483 Join date : 2013-04-27

RuneSlayer wrote:: Mainly because the weight of Endurance in the formula is bigger than that of Armor's.

We have to retain some form of roleplaying to be honest. Not everything is plain mathematics.

I was hoping to find out how the weightings were different. Is is safe to read into your earlier statement and say that Endurance has ~2x the weight of armor?

Fair enough. I think it will become a smaller and smaller issue as more units are added. There will be more choice to completely avoid using units with Hatred in small group PvP. It might be worth more scrutiny if more competitive PvP gameplay modes are introduced.

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Quote :: I was hoping to find out how the weightings were different. Is is safe to read into your earlier statement and say that Endurance has ~2x the weight of armor?

To a certain extent, yes

Posts : 128 Join date : 2013-05-15 Location : In the mines

Can you clarify how range dimishes accuracy? I'd like to learn all of this information if i can and i hadnt heard anything about that before. I had always heard that Armor was better than endurance and i asked more than once! Hopefully all the details will be revealed. (this makes that human LI passive much more attractive)

As far as an army requiring 40% LI/Archers, this really only makes the elves even more amazing as both their LI and archers are amazing units. I'm fine with having generally worse archers, its usually expected for a dwarf. But regardless of races and what stereotypes they carry, a slow moving melee unit, especially in this game, is more deserving of such a defensive passive ability. I'd like to know just how endurance works to aptly compare it to a 45% chance to soak damage, but even a Common piece of equipment can give one 5 endurance, and late game the difference will be marginal while a passive like that scales extremely well.

I think the most important difference still lies in the Elves speed as their key to survival, not shields that they CLEARLY stole from dwarven smiths. This is not untestable too, just have Dwarf infantry and Elf infantry (ungeared, various ranks to see how the passive scales) engage Archers and see who survives longer. If dwarves do somehow out survive the elves then i'll be totally satisfied with them. Slower, sturdier, perfect.

As far as moral goes, im a little curious as to why elves even have equal moral ? Even moreso than Orcs ! Orcs crave battle, elves loathe it, and given that they live so long they have so much more to lose ! I thought, if anyone, humans should get 70 moral and elves 60, if not just for 'lore' reasons, then because elves are better at retreating.

I know Balance takes several shapes and overall faction balance is more important, thats why i only compare the units with humans/elves, since elves are the most popular and dwarves the least popular. I only 'cherry pick' stats that can be properly valued, like how range might mean nothing on maps with many obstacles, while higher Missile rating will always help in any battle. I also know that new games are never initially balanced, it just doesnt happen there are probably glaring issues we dont even know about that will only come as the meta-game evolves.

I hope to see some kind of 'support' units/heroes in the future, like a bard or Warlord unit that inspires moral.

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Quote :: Can you clarify how range dimishes accuracy?

The further the target is, the more difficult it is to be hit.

Quote :: As far as moral goes, im a little curious as to why elves even have equal moral ? Even moreso than Orcs ! Orcs crave battle, elves loathe it, and given that they live so long they have so much more to lose ! I thought, if anyone, humans should get 70 moral and elves 60, if not just for 'lore' reasons, then because elves are better at retreating

We are stepping into a discussion right now which could take weeks or even months. Smile

It is a matter of how you perceive Morale and how you want to present this to a game. For us, Elves and Dwarfs have the highest Morale because they are 2 of the most ancient races with countless battles in their rosters, troops who are steadfast and will face an enemy whatever the odds are. They will raise their shields and hold their ranks even if they have the strongest enemy against them. Orcs on the other hand only rely on the momentum... If something goes wrong, then they will flee like flies. They only go to war because that's the only thing they know, but if they have to run, they will...only to fight another day.

Quote :: I hope to see some kind of 'support' units/heroes in the future, like a bard or Warlord unit that inspires moral.

Heroes actually provide a free Morale reroll if a unit loses it, so in a way they are there to inspire the unit and hold the ranks if things go bad. They will also reroll a Morale check for rallying.