RANT: Won Battle, Lost War

[Bonyduck Campersang]

I lost a big battle while trying to capture San Lorenzo, got defeated badly. Then I quickly trained a larger army, assaulted San Lorenzo again and crushed them emphatically. Now with the increased GPT from San L.'s expansive territories, I was training up 2 more armies as well as reinforcing my existing ones. Just 10-15 turns later I receive a notification that Luvia Drusilia has forced a surrender, taken a hefty sum of gold, taken one of my southern outposts, and taken back San Lorenzo. I don't tend to give up as a rule, but that's a straight quit from me.

I really try to love this game, but it's so dashed hard

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

Yeah, war can be tricky. The AI can only force surrender when you run out of war support, which is more likely when you have a ticking penalty such as declaring a surprise war. It is easy to declare war and force surrender without taking much territory you want but also to struggle to wipe out their war support while keeping yours high, e.g. when lacking opportunities to engage. How did your respective war support levels look during the war?

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Yeah, war can be tricky. The AI can only force surrender when you run out of war support, which is more likely when you have a ticking penalty such as declaring a surprise war. It is easy to declare war and force surrender without taking much territory you want but also to struggle to wipe out their war support while keeping yours high, e.g. when lacking opportunities to engage. How did your respective war support levels look during the war?

They had 100 (due to some of my cities being in their sphere of influence) and I had 80 at the beginning. I never thought to check after capturing San Lorenzo because I assumed it would be higher due to winning a battle + conquering their cities with two additional territories

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

Keeping an eye on war support can be useful to achieving objectives. If you want to take territory, for instance, you need to make sure you occupy/claim that land before they run out of war support, or you could find yourself unable to negotiate for it. If you want to maximize gold, a few decisive battles/sieges could eliminate hostile war support in the opening turn(s). Higher starting war support on your side translates to increased leverage in peace negotiations.

For a future war, consider checking war support levels every couple turns or after battles/sieges to get a sense of how morale is changing on each side and why. This will also give you a sense of when you are close to forced surrender.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

For a future war, consider checking war support levels every couple turns or after battles/sieges to get a sense of how morale is changing on each side and why. This will also give you a sense of when you are close to forced surrender

Yes, but how do I avoid a forced surrender? I was winning

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

A forced surrender only happens when one side reaches zero war support, so to avoid it you must keep positive war support. This can be tricky when you face multiple ticking penalties (surprise war, ideological proximity, sphere of influence...) that force you to prioritize war support gains. Losing a big battle--in particular, losing many more units than your opponent--can deal a blow to your war support.

You understand correctly that winning battles and occupying cities are major sources of war support. It is useful to know that forcing retreats increases your war support as well. If you find that an opponent has relatively few units, it can be useful to focus on retreats instead of battles to "farm" war support. The civic Materials Procurement and the Forbidden City wonder both give one-off bonuses to war support on declaring war.

When at war, looking at war support levels can tell you when you desperately need to win battles just to stay in the fight and when you can regroup without fear of a forced surrender.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

A forced surrender only happens when one side reaches zero war support, so to avoid it you must keep positive war support. This can be tricky when you face multiple ticking penalties (surprise war, ideological proximity, sphere of influence...) that force you to prioritize war support gains. Losing a big battle--in particular, losing many more units than your opponent--can deal a blow to your war support.

You understand correctly that winning battles and occupying cities are major sources of war support. It is useful to know that forcing retreats increases your war support as well. If you find that an opponent has relatively few units, it can be useful to focus on retreats instead of battles to "farm" war support. The civic Materials Procurement and the Forbidden City wonder both give one-off bonuses to war support on declaring war.

When at war, looking at war support levels can tell you when you desperately need to win battles just to stay in the fight and when you can regroup without fear of a forced surrender.

In this Humankind is far closer to Reality than any other 4X game so far.

Look, for a good example, at the history of Frederick the Great of Prussia: won over half of his battles, some incredibly one-sided (Rossbach, Leuthen), but kept losing men at almost the same rate at his opponents who all had far more resources (read: War Support) than he had. He was about to lose the Seven Year's War completely ("Forced Surrender") when the death of Ekaterina of Russia caused the alliance against him to collapse and he clawed out a negotiated "victory".
Or, for another German example, the Nazi state in 1941: won some of the most amazingly one-sided tactical/operational victories in history, captured over 3,000,000 Russians, occupied most of European Russia - but in the process lost 25% of their total attack force and over half their tanks and equipment, while (in Game Terms) the USSR had a firmly-established Communist system and Stalin, both of which gave increased War Support, and so the Germans could not force a surrender or obtain a victory. By 1945, War Support collapsed in Germany (in the units of the 6th SS Panzer Army, probably the most die-hard of Nazi fanatics, morale collapsed in March 1945 and the divisions disintegrated into small groups running for safety, while in the rest of Germany civilians were begging the German army remnants not to fight for the towns for fear of Allied air and artillery response: that's Collapse in my book)

Serious military historians and practicing Generals have long recognized that destroying the enemy's Will to fight is much more likely to cause a war to end successfully than trying to destroy his Means to fight, since an enemy with a Will can always find the Means, but once his troops no longer want to fight, or the civilians want to sacrifice, it's Over.