• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Surrendering

I like the idea of surrendering as the only way to change teams. This could be considered just a gameplay thing, or it could be representative of the many soldiers on the eastern front who switched alegiences to avoid a hitch in a POW camp :p
Now that you guys are talking, I do seem to remember a time on SPARTA(insert extra A's) when some russians (or persians) surrendered. The germans (or Spartans) let 'em live for a while, then shoved them all in the hole :eek:

This sometimes happens when there is only 1 man left on a team on sparta, and the other team disarms him with a rifle bash, then pushes him into the hole :D
 
Upvote 0
I could only see myself surrendering if playing a map like Kriegstadt or Gorlitz and there being very extrenuating circumstances such as lack of reinforcements. However, never surrender on Basovka. A while back, I was playing with a mix of clan guys, and we managed to cap trench with only 2 minutes left, but blitzed and won the map with 3 seconds remaining. Luck, or skill? ;)
 
Upvote 0
I think such an engagement would be over in only a few minutes. Not really worth the time to play. The game's not designed around that type of gameplay. WWIIOL is better suited for that because you have a MUCH larger scale, and (as I understand it) your character improves over time, so you want to try to keep him alive.
 
Upvote 0
Is it still possible to find that game Squad Leader?

It looks pretty cool Today 03:55 PM

Yeah, it was a great game; it was designed for two players, but you could divide the forces to handle up to four players comfortably.

What I own (not for sale for all the $ in the world) is the originally game, what came to be called "Basic" Squad Leader (though hardly "basic" at all; the rules for all 4 of the "basic" games ran 97 pages of single-spaced small print!!! But you would start with Squad Leader's initial twelve Scenarios, played gradually, with each new Scenario adding a few more of the rules, and then play Cross of Iron with it's Scenarios), and the three expansion games Cross of Iron (Eastern Front (with the Rumanian Army included), Crescendo of Doom (the Blitz and the British Army), and G.I.: Anvil of Victory, which revised a lot of the rules, and had Scenarios about the Normandy Breakout and the advance into Germany.





















They even published Scenarios in various gaming magazines of the 1980's, and in separate Scenarios booklets. The game's designers based these all on historical events, except one which portrayed an assault by Russian forces in the vincinity of the Fuhrer Bunker.

One of the innate ideas of the game, was that with the right strategy and with some luck, you could change the outcome of the historical events.

Here are most of the scenarios they published at this website; you'll need Adobe / Acrobat Reader to read them:

www.wargameacademy.org/sqla/scenarios/index.html

Maybe some of you guys who have the computer skills could make some maps based on the historical events described in these Scenarios for RO; don't give them the same name though.

Unfortunately, Basic Squad Leader is no longer sold at stores or manufactured.

The owners of Avalon Hill, Inc. sold their company for something like 6 million dollars to Hasbro, Inc., a giant toy and "game" corporation, and they have chosen to concentrate their efforts on another popular Avalon Hill designed game, Axis & Allies, a sort of Parker Brother's Risk or Monopoly game version of WWII. Basic SL has sat shelved for at least the last 12-15 years.



But there is an Advanced Squad Leader (ASL) game that is commercially available.

ASL is the next generation of the game that started in 1986; I've never played it or got into it; I sort of got a little tired of buying a new gaming module every year or so. I think the final basic game (G.I.) was like $45.00, which would be like $65.00 today.

ASL is availabe for sale, and is a small spin-off division of Hasbro. Since it is a small company, the game modules, except the initial one, are expensive and cost around $70.00-$80.00 (U.S) or more each!!

The initial ASL, to my understanding, was just an extensive revision of the 4 Basic Squad Leader games, bound as one book. It costs $80.00 U.S. + Shipping & Handling. I think they sell a starter game for $24.00, but this is more like 1/2 a game compared to the old Basic SL; and your going to need the full ASL Rulebook sometime if you're going to play ASL. The subsequent ASL Modules do have maps and counters, but I think the maps are just plastic paper, wheras in the original games they were printed on a cloth covered board. I believe they're also packed in a ziplock bag, whereas the old Basic games cames in an attractively designed box.

They've published about 16 ASL Game modules during the last 20 years. I remember seeing them, and they were always very expensive. I think some add the Afrika Korps and the Imperial Japanese forces.

Here's the site where you can order ASL:

www.multimanpublishing.com

SL is a very challenging game that takes a fair amount of time to learn. There are oodles of rules. It makes a very decent WWII simulation for a boardgame, and was the best WWII boardgame game ever on the market.

They are gaming societies that play the old Basic Squad Leader across the U.S. and around the world; there is one in Washington, D.C.

There's also now a computerized version of ASL Boardgame that is played online; you need to own ASL to play it. I don't know much about it.

www.vasl.org

Here's some of Virtual Squad Leader's Scenarios, if you'd like to see them.

www.aslscenarioarchive.com

There were dozens of other boardgames games that Avalon Hill published, now sadly all shelved. Panzer Blitz; Luftwaffe; Richthofen's War; 1914; Stalingrad; Midway, and other games based on the diffrent historical time periods. These games were more similar to some of today's RTS computer games, dealing with entire battalions and utilized railroad transport, and large countries.

Probably the most famous game Avalon Hill ever made was a game called Diplomacy; Secretary of State Henry Kissinger played this and visited the Avalon Hill offices once. I played it twice; it was more of a game that focused on negotiation than warfare simulation.

There were even other companies like Avalon Hill, though a lot of these also died out. Simulations Publications Inc. (or SPI) comes to mind. They had a great game called World War III and a WWI game called Tannenberg.

If you want the Basic SL Games, try maybe Ebay or Amazon.com; just hope none of the cardboard units (you don't need them all) or map boards are missing.

This is what Hasbro is currently working on: Skee-Ball (October 14, 2007, Detroit Free Press, 7F)!!! Do these people even play games???
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Well, there is one problem with surrendering, namely that we are on the eastern front, not much surrendering going on there outside of the first few months of the war if my memory serves me.

Ofcourse there was the fear of what the enemy would do to you if you surrendered, but there was also the fear of what your own side would do to you if you where ever "rescued" and found to have surrendered to the enemy.. neither of the two are very pleasent prospects in this particular war.
 
Upvote 0
you must not forget that taking a prisoner alive and delivering him to your commander, so he can be interrogated, was something you could be rewarded for, and would get you noticed by your commanders for eventual future promotions or other advantages. most of the intelligence information came from prisoners and so was it also common that soldiers were sent out at night to go capture enemy soldiers for interrogation.

we see it as cowardice to surrender, but many soldiers were jaleous of those that surrendered, because for them the war was over.. even if i would think twice before surrendering on the eastern front to any army.

so for players to surrender you must have a valid reason, no one will do that for nothing. you need to have an advantage out of it, like : only way to switch teams, will make you respawn instantly, ...
 
Upvote 0
Authencity wise, there is one bit of a problem.

A basic soldier (any rank lower than corporal E.G.) could be practically useless, while it depends pretty much on the situation. So if you found a basic enemy rifleman and took him as a prisoner - he might have been shot some minutes later because he is no real use. Maybe, but odds are against us.

On the other hand some high-rank NCOs or officers in general are diffrent animal. Again, quite variable thing considering situations and such.

While surrendering sounds quite neat idea, the RO's overall gameplay action would make it bit useless in it's current state. Maybe something we might see in RO2?
 
Upvote 0
There is no point in surrendering. It would be easy to motivate people to accept prisoners, but really, why surrender? The only thing that would make it worth while is if you lost points for dying (which you dont, and really shouldnt) or gained points for not dying (which doesnt make since and would result in a buch of score-whores wondering around the spawn staying alive). Making it the only way to change teams is kind of good, but, a pointless waste of time. The only reasont to do this is if you were tired of playing conventionally and wanted to see what happens...
 
Upvote 0
Mass surrender just to restart a round is foolhardy.
...unless there is one Russian cowering across the river in Danzig with 3+ minutes left in the round, ignoring all pleas to get out and die like a man so the rest of the team can play again. A quick surrender vote could speed things up in that type of situation.

Other than cases like that, I take no prisoners. :mad:

:p
 
Upvote 0