Ceasefire Discussion

[PoorOldSpike]

The following discussion took place last year in the Brits v 21Pz tourney thread; if anybody's got anything to add go ahead-
-------------------------------------------------------

POS- Does anybody know anything about the Ceasefire button?
It's one of those things I've never researched fully.
Does it freeze the existing points in place, or do you risk losing some by hitting the button?

DER KUENSTLER- Yes, ceasefire ends the game just as it is - the points are tallied as they are - so if you are winning and want to score more points for kills, then you don't want to ceasefire.
I have used ceasefire before with opponents when we are both out of options and the game keeps going on and on (variable ending) or one person is getting slaughtered and you want a chivalrous ending.
Both players have to agree to press their "ceasefire" button.

POS-But suppose the score in a game is reading 50-50, and some of the flags are neutral, then we hit Ceasefire.
Will the score REMAIN 50-50, or will the computer decide to give the flags to our opponent and the score changes to 40-60 in his favour?
ps - In other words, is the score GUARANTEED not to change when we hit Ceasefire?

LETO- No, it is an educated roll of the dice, as your own score is only the "perceived" score the computer gives from a calculation of what you know and what you don't.
Therefore, you could be winning a game by a score of 60-40 on YOUR viewscreen, hit ceasefire, and then find that two flags that you thought were yours had hidden enemy squads within 20 feet of it, making them go neutral, while the full effects of what you thought you had killed of the enemy troops was much less than you had anticipated, and the end game score after the CF comes up radically different (let's say 48 to 52) than what you had seen, and now you lose (draw).
You must remember that the score is reflected only by what you know, which is your own casualties, and flags that you can assuredly measure as uncontested by the enemy.

POS- Thanks mate that's what I suspected, hitting ceasefire can be risky especially if you think you're winning..:)
It therefore seems that whoever thinks he's winning should NEVER hit ceasefire in case his score drops, but the guy who's losing SHOULD hit ceasefire because he's got nothing to lose and can hope the computer boosts his final score.. :)
ps - So why is the ceasefire option in the game at all, what good is it?

LETO- Re read DK's excellent explanation of its usage above.

POS-Well if I read all that right, nobody (including me) is going to be daft enough to hit ceasefire if he thinks he's winning..:)

THE COIL- I've cease-fired when winning, when I knew I was way ahead. Beats playing 10 turns of "hunt down the remaining infantry squad". To clarify some of the above explanations, CF doesn't change the score, it freezes the score in place - but your perception of that score might be somewhat different than actual. But if you know there is no enemy near the flags and you're way up on kill points, there's no real danger in it...

POS- Yeah that's the best bet, the key phrase is "way ahead"..:)

THE COIL- Yup - if you're up 60-40 and the control of the flags is questionable, then it probably doesn't make sense to do it...Of course, if it's that close, it's usually still a pretty good fight

BLUEHAND- I look at ceasefire as an honor thing. even if I'm winning i'll hit it sometimes because I'm sure I'll win but I feel the other guy fought well, and, if he were the real general should logically just withdraw his remaining troops and call it a bad day. that and there have been several fights where I was being crushed and I just started backing troops out to see if I could successfully withdraw from a bad day with a few of my troops...
It seems better to me to let the other guy get partial credit for a battle than to encourage last minute waves of half dead troops trying to storm the flags.

THE COIL- That describes my basic battle plan in most games where I'm the attacker.

POS- Ah, but the 'last minute' is very uncertain in variable-ending games.
For example if you storm away on turn 20 of a 25+ game, it could still carry on another 5 turns..
I prefer to capture the objectives much earlier in the game rather than risk a last-ditch suicide charge..

[Kelen]

:stir: And ideally I would like all of my Armour and AT guns to score first shot kills everytime, my artillery barrages to always hit on target, my vehicles never to bog, and my aircraft to a) turn up, and b) turn up when my enemies armour is sitting out in the open. Unfortunately it doesn't always happen that way.

Going back to the ceasefire thing though, it depends on why you are thinking on calling a ceasefire. If it is because the game has stopped being enjoyable to play, and you just want to close it up and get on with a new one, then it doesn't make any difference as to the points score. Previously I've agreed to a ceasefire where I've been ahead in the game and thought that I was on for a major, if not total victory, but my opponent had obviously gotten so disheartened with his position that it seemed the gentlemanly thing to do. Ended up with only a minor victory, but it meant that we could start another game which hopefully he would enjoy more.

If, however, you are one of those people that are desperate to score every possible point that you can, or simply enjoy trying to humiliate an already beaten opponent, then it is unlikely that you will ever agree to one, (unless of course it is your troops that are being massacred and you want to try and reduce the scale of your defeat, and again score a few more points!)

In my opinion, the ceasfire option is there to be used is it was in real life. Either to avoid the massacre of an already beaten force, or to bring to an early conclusion a battle that has obviously run it's course, i.e. both sides have taken a pounding and majority of units on both sides are low on ammo.

A ceasfire does have to be agreed though, so just because one side offers or requests one, it doesn't mean that the other person will accept. (Again, as it was historically).

[McIvan]

What I tend to do is to offer a ceasefire to the opponent at a specific level.....ie agree terms. If they accept, then we ceasefire.

That takes away the element of the unknown that could actually lead to a player who thought he was winning ending up losing. If the points are different to what is expected, then tough luck either way....should have played it out, shouldn't you :)

[Kelen]

Actually agreeing terms is a good point. Rarely in history did parties agree to a ceasefire without first agreeing terms.

Also, because of the uncertainty around the points, (reflecting the FOW), it is possible for 1 commander to feel that he is being soundly thrashed and ask for a ceasfire, but the other commander also felt that he was losing, (and possibly was).

There are various cases throughout history of one side giving up the fight because the other has successfully bluffed them into believing that they are in better shape than they actually were. A case of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.