Sandman,

you hit it right on the nose in that Discipline and Resolve determine how much punishment a unit can take. There''s also the concept of taking damage, and simple fear itself. For example, when a unit is charged, it should be forced to take a morale check to see if the unit will break. Indeed, a unit should take a morale check to MAKE a charge. I find it ludricous in most RTS''s that you can order a peon to attack a powerful unit, and it doesn''t balk that it''s going to be destroyed. So there''s the factor that, "I''m taking a lot of damage...I don''t know how much longer we can hold out" and the "JESUS CHRIST, it''s a swarm of barbarians charging us!!" type of morale check.

I also thought that Discipline would encompass training as a whole, but then I realized that that too would need its own factors. For example, a unit might have been well trained in how to shoot (take for example British troops in the Napoleonic era that were about the only major standing Army that was trained to actually aim their shoots) but may not necessarily follow orders well. In essence, training itself would take several factors. So discipline to me was more like having self-control. Again, this is different than courage because the most disciplined troops can act well behaved even under circumstances that aren''t particularly threatening. For example, maintaining silence while walking on patrol.

But you''re scary factor sounds good. Some units will have built in reputations which can be multiplied based on certain conditions. For example...going up against one Mongol unit was bad...going up against 10 of them is far worse. You can also take into consideration environmental factors like being on high ground, being behind cover, etc.

Another important factor is leadership. A good unit saddled with a bad leader can be disastrous (Scot''s Grey''s for example...which got eaten up by the Polish 1st Lancers...who admittedly were a pretty tough unit themselves at Waterloo), or rabble militia in the hands of an inspirational leader (for example the Colonial militia at Cowpens or Guilford Courthouse). I think leadership is another extremely important facet of strategy games that are overlooked, and is intimately tied in with morale.

I played Close Combat2: A Bridge Too Far and I agree that it is an excellent game. Indeed I think it is perhaps the best strategy game I have played. It had perhaps the best morale system I''ve seen implemented in a game. It also had an excellent campaign mode...where casualties inflicted in one battle will continue to the nest, as well as taking things like fatigue and logistics into account.