"Treachery!" Topic

I've now read two books on the Thirty Years War & am clearly an expert so it is with confidence that I can state high levels of desertion (even whole units or in extreme cases armies) were often a possibility.

I know much of this activity took place on route marches rather than on the battlefield but I'd like to add the possibility to a game (using the FoG rules, if that makes a difference).

What mechanisms could I usefully add to show treachery?

You could give each side a certain amount of money, they bid the money and roll the dice for enemy units.

If you were doing a campaign you could make a bonus for the side that won the last game.

So you would have 10 money and you can bid up to 3 per unit. Rolling less than what you bid on that unit brings them over to your side. Or something similar.

I think one of the major tasks of any army before the rise of nationalism as a motivator was to keep the troops in the field.

A simple attrition roll (1D6% 1D10%, something like that) every week for how many of your troops have gone missing.
Increase the roll if things are going bad and decrease it if things are looking up.

Opponent determines one of your units at random before the battle (only known to him).

At some point during the battle he can activate the treachery, % die is rolled. The longer he waits, the less % the treachery succeeds.
E.g. when activated in turn 1: 90%; turn 2; 80% etc. That way, there is a balance between when units are leaving the battlefield and the effect it may have on your plans.

The unit does not switch sides, but simply leaves the battlefield.

You can finetune this system, e.g. not allowing to activate a treachery when within a certain distance of enemy troops.
Or when you didn't play your treachery yet, you can forfeit it to influence the % of a treachery played on you.
Or different types (inf, cav, art) also modify the treachery %.
Etc.

An alternative is using chance cards to drive the random draws and settle for %s, but basic ideas remain the same.

Doesn't "Kingmaker" have a system to determine loyalty of subordinate units in battle?

Irregular Wars: Conflict at the World's End uses chance cards and the variable recruiting system to simulate this sort of thing.

When calculating the point cost, you could buy a unit for 80% of the set costs and then – at the start of the game, you roll a dice and see if it shows up. The percentage paid is identical with the chance that it shows up.

If you want it more interesting, you could roll after deployment – or even at first contact. Just make sure to pay at least 50%, so that this is not used as a bonus with 10%-units to lure your opponent onto the wrong flank.

On a more interactive note, you could add "bribe" points, but afaik that was pretty rare during the TYW, but may be viable for other theatres. Here you could pay an amount of the units cost for the same chance to desert (or half the chance to skip sides).

I like many of these ideas, especially the buying off/bidding one.

Balancing out the effects might prove difficult, but certainly is interesting.

I can see in some respects, knowing that a unit might be suspect, e.g. mercenary units, but in others, it might not be known at all, until they switch sides.

Having a unit be loyal to the highest bidder, or to the highest bidder if a certain level of money, plus a significant bonus over the amount offered by the other side would be very interesting.

I guess you could add a die roll into the mix, if you thought it appropriate, too, just for grins.

I can see morale failing, and/or faltering too, if units are paid as promised, or if hardships ensue, so the percentage losses of a force's strength over time are a good idea as well.

I agree with Pictors Studio approach and double the suggestion that you really need a campaign setting to get the right feel.

I would add "catastrophic success" to the unit allocation process. If you roll the absolute best roll you could to field your bid (which should be a 5% or less shot), you get maximum units but your opponent rolls to see how many actually report for his side (one or two, maybe) instead of yours. This is more in line with the title "Treachery" than the idea of desertion. If you don't want that part of the feel, then you can just loose the rolled units for catastrophic success.

In terms of bonuses, I would give big bonuses for winning as an underdog and small ones for winning as a favourite.

HarryHotSpur beat me to it. The cards for Irregular Wars work very well for the sort of thing you want, ochoin. I even use them now for some of my medieval games when I want some interesting variety. They're simple to use, and have a wide variety of random, but very workable effects on the games.

Some examples: Nauseous Lord limiting command radius, Rain's effects on black powder weapons and bow strings, boosts for competent or aggressive unit commanders, local knowledge of terrain or good local guides, very religious officers who inspire their troops, and many others.

I don't use them for every game. I cull out a few inappropriate ones (The Japanese weren't into human sacrifice, for example). The cards make a really nice addition to the game when some spice or variety is wanted.

Well, a smorgasbord of great ideas.

Thanks, everyone.

Offer me a 50/50 ice cream popsicle and I'll change sides, ON the battlefield too….