Retreat

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • VIRVCOBRV wrote:

      A well coordinated defense against a superior enemy is fundamentally determined by buying time.
      Yup. Slow them down. Split their forces, or get them to fragment their large formations to take and occupy more territory, then gain local tactical superiority to trap and kill their fragmented forces in piecemeal fashion.

      It also helps if you have a large industrial capacity, sufficient manpower reserves, and plenty of resources. If you don't, and you're playing against a competent opponent, he can just wear you down in a war of attrition.

    • WiseOdin wrote:

      enochen wrote:

      well yeah, but in a war you have to have people constantly keeping an eye on everything or you would get screwed.

      so why should simulated war be any different?

      I mean if you were at work and I someone snuck in an defeated a bunch of your armies and took your cites before you could react, how would that be any different?
      Difference, is I already have your units trapped in battle. For them to escape from that fight, to attack elsewhere is far different than you finding a gap in defenses, in the first place. Especially if the gap was created, by a large force moving to intercept yours. You going, "Backsies!" and moving your units to attack elsewhere wouldn't be proper, for an RTS to employ.
      so we want to play a simulated war game that doesn't actually simulate war?

      that's ridiculous. if you can't check on your forces while at work then I have to suffer in a losing battle instead of salvaging what I have left and trying to regroup?

      To your point I don't believe retreat should give the retreater and advantage. you would have to suffer extra losses on the way out. make turn advantage to the army with the upper hand where they get 1-2 extra attacks on you without you responding to make it more "realistic" as you turn tail and run.

      I find highly doubtful that a retreating force would turn around and just attack a weak point, and if so make it a rule where they retreating army can't reform for a day.

      Then you have time to respond and keep from getting sideswiped while away from thw computer.

      but I wake up every morning and see a bunch of stuff has happened while I was gone because people play in different time zones. I don't see how this is any different.

    • VorlonFCW wrote:

      Being able to retreat would turn the game into "Whack a mole" instead of Call of War.




      Like I said:

      If you split your force and some can retreat I should be able to split my force and chase them down. SO the result is we have two battles going on instead of one. Then you will want to split and retreat again, so I will split and chase you again, so we have three battles. Why bother?




      so I guess you don't believe in guerilla warfare?

      it's called war, and there are no rules.

      you want to fight like they did in the pre-revolution days - just line everyone up and fire at each other.

      real war isn't like that. If you are outnumbered and out gunned you can make a run for it and, as the old saying goes, "live to fight another day"

      hell, even macarthur fled the Philippines
      Images

      • josephstalin1-2x.jpg

        94.27 kB, 1,200×630, viewed 25 times

    • Quasi-duck wrote:

      I have never understood why the same people that want paratroopers do not want a retreat option.
      I hate both ideas. I still say, if you want paratroopers: Go to Conflict of Nations, where they did it right, and AA has a range associated with it. One of the main reasons I stopped playing maps in CoN, was because Air-mobile Infantry made the game way too easy. Enough with that soapbox, though.


      enochen wrote:

      VorlonFCW wrote:

      Being able to retreat would turn the game into "Whack a mole" instead of Call of War.




      Like I said:

      If you split your force and some can retreat I should be able to split my force and chase them down. SO the result is we have two battles going on instead of one. Then you will want to split and retreat again, so I will split and chase you again, so we have three battles. Why bother?


      so I guess you don't believe in guerilla warfare?

      it's called war, and there are no rules.

      you want to fight like they did in the pre-revolution days - just line everyone up and fire at each other.

      real war isn't like that. If you are outnumbered and out gunned you can make a run for it and, as the old saying goes, "live to fight another day"

      hell, even macarthur fled the Philippines
      Retreating forces would have to take huge losses. They're putting their backs to the riflemen and machine guns. Allowing for little suppressing fire. Without mines and hedgehogs (barricades) or barbed wire being part of the game, retreating really just means taking a step back, and still getting shot at.
      Free Time looks good on me

    • WiseOdin wrote:

      Without mines and hedgehogs (barricades) or barbed wire being part of the game, retreating really just means taking a step back, and still getting shot at.
      From what I remember from a few years back when people were asking for combat engineers, we assumed they were integrated into infantry divisions along with snipers, field fortifications etc. so I would assume it is the same with this. Also, frontline combat is generally not 24/7 fighting, even in WWI. If it was, wars probably wouldn't last much longer than they do in CoW.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: