I was just thinking about this the other day, and I am not sure if this has been covered elsewhere already..

One of the critical differences between most units / armies is how they react to pinning and to fear. This is built into unit strengths (marines don't run, daemons cause Fear), into weapon strengths (Heavy Bolters break an enemy's morale before the horde can reach), and some armies are meant to be defeated psychologically as much as physically (Orks, IG, armies that numerically would overwhelm smaller squads otherwise)

In a full PVP game though... players don't run, they don't break, and they don't fear death. And there are no table-edges to run toward and measure from

Is there any word on how that balance might be handled in this game? (Debuffs while pinned / fear until they take cover, inability to attack when they fail a save until they get far enough from the enemy, forced movement away, slowed movement unless moving away..?)

I have indeed seen one thread that covered this topic a bit, some time ago.
General consensus (correct me if im wrong) was no Moral in the game. People didnt want the death of other, random players to effect how they could play the game.
That being said, if you as a player witness your Squad-mates die around you, while you may not feel fear and could very well charge heroically into enemy ranks, you'll still die if you dont fall back.
Supression effects can be acheived with a tunnel vision effect on your screen. Thinking Battlefield 3, where the screen gets blurry and you cant see as far, perhaps from the edge or even a blacking out around the edges. Movement speed decrease perhaps. A Heavy Bolter is an area effect weapon, you should feel some kind of Supression effect, but not a moral effect.

I look at it as letting the player act how they wish to act, while still imposing supression and blast/splash damage effects to them. So if everyone else around me dies and i wish to carry on, perhaps dying in the process then i should be allowed to do so. A negative "moral" effect is not needed, death is already the consequence. If i wish to live, denigh the enemey a kill and preserve myself and/or remaining squad mates then i will fall back should i choose to.
Your last pharagraph sounds like the game takes over control of your character upon negative moral. You can't tell me you really want that?
Example: your charging into a gap in enemy lines, on the verge of shatter their defensive line and capturing a major tactical objective. You are on a kill streak, unkillable while the enemy meets death by bolter and blade. But then 6 out of 10 of your squad dies and the computer automatically takes control of your character, making him move slowly towards the nearest cover. You death machine promptly gets shot in the back, and the enemy regroups on the point while you watch from the death screen....
I would rage quit a game like that. And im not even the rage quitting type, my controllers have never been airboard before. But they would quickly learn to fly if a game took controll of my character because of other peoples deaths.

I figured there had to be a thread somewhere, just couldn't find it - and I love what you mentioned for suppression fire, that sounds great! (gives weapons like that a bit more of a kick, in an interesting way)

As for morale, I guess there are two areas that I'm curious about. So first off, not all morale is related to other player's deaths, some units have automatic effects that are between you and them. Daemons for example, but also things like common tanks charging at you (tank shock), and some psy powers that use that as a main defense. Without morale that cuts out a bit of the teeth from them, so I am curious about how they would be replaced / balanced out for that (if they would be)

On the second line, I totally agree it would suck to lose control of your character for any reason (I'm personally always against that, was just mentioning some possible ways I've seen stuff like that implemented, not that I am in favor of them). That said though, some armies become very strong if there is no chance of them 'breaking' or some-such. No 'morale' is fine, if that has been decided that's great and awesome. But I am still thinking something should happen if your squad is dying all around you as an ork, your warlord just went down, and you are still charging. Not losing control, but something like the tunnel vision from suppression fire, some slowed movement, some debuff to your toughness.. something to encourage you to take cover (of your own free will)? Just something to maintain the feel of the original game (and of countless movies / books outside the warhammer universe) where the wave of the enemy breaks against the determination of a few brave defenders.

First off, thanks for saying more then just: Lolz nos way noobzs #YOLO
Always makes it better when it a constructive discussion lol.

I personally dont belive in buffing much. I just dont want to see it as a part of the game that people start to lean and depend on above the gameplay, objectives and combat. That being said ill give an example of buffing that i would like, before moving on to my next point. Keep in mind this is walking a fine line, and ill try not to stray or conflict myself too much lol.
Example: A War Council member entres the theatre of war, leading his troops from the front lines. Due to his high rank, level, and position as a leading Faction member, this player gives everyone (of his Faction) a 10% boost in health who fight at his side (could be as wide as the whole terrority, part of it, or just within visual/200m range)
The enemy, knowing the effect this Hero has on the battlefeild, targets him. After the last of his body guard dies around him this unknown Hero dies in glorious battle. This removes the positive buff that he gave, but in no way negatively effects the players around him.
The idea is to create a loss of a bonus, and not negatively effect the "base" abilites of each player. So the worst you could be is what you always are, if that makes sense?

Which leads into the following point...
As you say Demons on TT create Fear, some armies/units/characters are immune to this. How do we represent Fear (and by extent all negaives attributed to "Moral") in a Shooter video game??
We agree that supression effects are easy to do, fluffy, and make sense. This is a video game, and so to me therein lies the answer. The creation of visual effects to simulate the effects of Fear on a player. Ill take from my idea for Physkers:
Your Character faces off aganist a Khorne Bloodletter. You still feel Fear (due to whatever reason). Your screen is effected visually, where you see random flashes of light, narrowed vision, perhaps the sensativity of your movement goes up; throwing off your aim. Your movement speed incressing, stimulating the effects of adrenaline. Audio sounds are used, wispers, cries for help and unknowable sounds at the edge of hearing, coming from first one side of the room, and then the other...
Above we used Visual, Audio effects to stimulate a Fear effect with the addition of positive effects that can still add to the effect we try to get. You are not weakned, you are effected. If you ignore the distractions, and quickly compensate for the higher sensativity effecting your aim and movement then you will have effectively overcome the "Fear" that your feeling, killing your enemey.

Again, i dont belive in negative effects. Particularly those that are caused by the death of those around you(in a PvP game too?). Removal of positive bonuses/buffs would have the same effects and still create the want for other player to protect those classes that could perhaps have area of effect buffs. This will also create "followings".
Using your example of a Ork Warboss: If the Warboss say grants those within a certain area a 10% bonus to health and 5% bonus to attack speed, then more Boyz and Nobz will swarm around him to share in the effect. By using small bonuses by Elites/Hero units that will very minimally effect gameplay (10% of 100 is an incress of 10, extreamly minimal) we have just created an Ork Mob, or perhaps the start of a Waaaagh. If the Nobz have a similar, smaller effect, you now have the Boyz protecting their "Squad Leader" and acting in groups. Large concentrations of Orks with many Nobz and a few Warbosses will have a stacking effect (limited to a 20% max amount for everything, as an example. Still not game-breakingly high, but will still have an effect.) creating the effects of a Waaagh.

My point: The worse you should every be stat wise is what your Character is normally.

Oh I like that perspective on both areas!

The Fear thing you mentioned made me think of Slender Man (or the vids I saw of it) and I love how you were addressing the various senses / symptoms of what Fear would feel like. From a simply gameplay perspective what you mentioned about your aim being off is easy enough to replicate (increased bounce in center of target, expanded aim-circle), but if a developer was good enough to actually produce that physical sensation in the player, and actually cause the player to want to run, to feel that this creature is terrifying.. mad props. (Seriously, not sarcastically - and other games have managed to so it is not impossible)

I like the group thing, with the idea of stacked bonuses. It would mean that individually the various units would start out a bit more underpowered (1 on 1), in a normal squad size they would be roughly equal to what a squad size would be for the opposition, and in large numbers would be substantially stronger than a large number of non-affected troops. So (using terrible numbers that are not meant to be real, just easy) an ork player should generally lose to a space marine, 10 orks should have a fairly even chance of beating 10 space marines once in range, and 20 orks should be able to overwhelm 20 marines as long as they kept their numbers up (if the marines weren't able to whittle them down before they got close). It does not provide 1:1 fairness, but it does provide faction:faction fairness - as an ork you should not be charging alone at a space-marine, you should be pulling the other gitz behind you. And the buffs could be represented as increased temporary-hit points (as you were saying), by more accurate aim while together, increased rate of attacks, increased damage... any number of ways.

Oh I like this very much - elegant, non-punitive, and still addresses the elements of the original game in a creative fashion!

As a side note; i believe in many games in multiplayer, players will run if a good number of their mates or in this case squaddies gets blasted to the warp. As we discussed in many topics, if respawn system takes players a bit away from the combat a losing fight would create an effect of fear and disturbance in ranks ( because we like staying in fight right people?).
Good reading material, good ideas btw...

Thank you, and Faction to Faction fairness vs player to player fairness is definately an awesome way to put it.
Now lets hope the Dev's think along the same line
Btw congrats Noctifer, you just figured out how to create the Waaagh effect for Orks in Eternal Crusade.
Im sure the people in "Orks" would be interested if you would like to repost

Well Bungala, the thought boils down to "who wants to fight a losing battle?"
Some people will, of course. But definately not a huge number. A respwan system is a whole different dynamic in how it should be done and how it will effect the battlescape. I'm excited to hear how they address it and hope that it is similar to how i think it should be in my head; a health mix of (restricted) direct and (mainly) indirect spawning.

will to put it simply........... A FORCED TACTICAL RETREAT would be the best corse of action aka leaving the scrubs up front while they think your behind them. TACTICAL I SAY! but sense ima berserker I don't have a choice.....

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! *war cry followed by bolter fire*

Done! Great idea, let's see what they think, and if they descend on this thread like a proper horde

I'm liking what we came up with, I can't wait to see if anything comes of it and, if it does, what kind of shape it takes!

Oh my, what is this thread i have stumbled upon - oh, excuse me, I mean - wot's dis fing I found 'ere? Looks like one of dem gameplay freds.
Look 'ere, I bin readin' a bit, an sum of yew gits talked about runnin' away an' utha pansy fings. If yew got two ork brain cells to rub tegetha, then yew lot would all know dat real orks dun run away (cept if yew need to, o' course), an' that real fightin' is about runnin' too da enemy (den choppin' 'im up), so, in retraspect -
...
Oh my. Proper ork speaking seems to be a bit harsh on the throat. Oh well, practice makes perfect. *sigh*, someday I'll be a real ork.
Ok lads, it's all clear, come on through.
*RUMBLES IN THE DISTANCE*