Well maybe it would be nice, but it is in complete conflict with the current game design. It is like saying you want a rook to jump over the pawns in chess.

If they ever implement retreat option they need to rebalance combat resolution for this game. Its already bad enough to deal with the numerous shoot&scooters now imagine if you give them a retreat option...

Exactly. Hold still and die, None of this runnin' away business


Retreat would simply prolong the game. If you are not prepared yet, how much more will you gain by retreating to the next province?

I can think of a number of gamey tactics to use in the event of retreat being implemented and I am not that smart

I am sure orhers can come up with even gamier stuff so please let sleeping dogs lie...

Well you can still retreat before you engage in battle, that's about it.

I personally think if you have the ability to retreat you need some sort of punishment for doing so. Maybe in the form of resources, a daily fee for x number of days, provinces, or something else. But it just doesn't sound workable to me.

Or we could just leave retreating between the 2 players at war. Propose a Right of Way treaty if you want out, otherwise you have to live with your poor choices.

Restrisikos night thoughts about retreat ..


For various reasons retreat may not exist here in the game -- remember, it's not a simulation or a shooter, but a real-time long term strategy (board) game where not all players are always at the gaming table at the same time in order to respond to sudden actions.


A retreat option would not only completely change the combat system but will lead the game as a whole (again) a little further away from the original strategic (thinking) game in the direction to a trivial action game.
It also would give gold users another enormous advantages.



Just a small example of many:
Someone places defense in a city (say in the evening) and goes to bed (or in the morning and goes to work -- or whatever..) ..

.. a "night-active" enemy attacks that city and then realizes that his troops will not make it and would be wiped out ..

.. with "retreat" he might pull out his failing troops and save them from destruction (while they would lost otherwise, which so far is the normal gameplay and game content) ..


.. so one hand the retreat will unfairly would prevent the legitimate advantage / victory of the offline opponent (because he can not react, as, for example, to pursue the fleeing troops and give them the death blow) ..

.. and, would be more worse, the retreating player then may heal his units just quickly with gold and attack the now battered units of the sleeping (offline being) defender again, or attack them with other fresh units or / and in another compilation and defeat them comfortably now.



Thanks to the SBDE even numerically superior attackers has relative losses in the end, but with a retreat option, they could then for example attack in waves with always fresh units and so would have much less own losses in the end.
Of course you can already attack in waves as it is now (which experienced players logically also do), but you can reinforce melee troops only by further units and not avoid / reduce losses by take them out of the combat to improve their condition by regrouping or using gold if condition comes to low.
.. so with retreat it will be possible to undermine the SBDE even more than it is already possible now.


Theoretically, thanks to the retreat, with a couple of fast tanks and a little gold padding, one could overrun every tough opponent overnight - in, out, golden, onwards and so on..



Therefore, with a "retreat" option there at least necessarily has to be an automatic option like "tracking" or something similar for the remaining troops ..
(.."tracking" is partly present for the AI (>>such as described here for example<<), but of course it's only recognizable in distance attacks -- in contrast to that a tracking option, wich could be halfway useful for players, should be able to manage far too many variables which all has to be chosen and entered by the player; would be too cumbersome ..)
.. moreover, on retreat from melee both options would void eachother so both are redundant anyway ...



This game is (still) a strategic construction game and not just a shooting game -- the actual fight is just a part of the whole challenge. Much more important is planning ahead when, where and why is what to do or sometimes maybe better not to do. One should not always try to rape this planning game as a Jump 'n' Run action-game, but that's exactly what it will become like if such "blue-eyed improvements" will introduced .


Imagine, for example, besides retreat we also have the often desired disbanding of units and in addition, what is also a gladly demand, an easier and higher availability of resources (just only 2 others of the lot of popular suggestions for improvement of the last Years) -- that means to have the ability to spam units in greater numbers and reequip at will and also to attack and retreat whith them at will -- CoW would be like Pac-Man or Donkey-Kong ..


.. does anyone really want that ..?


So think ahead -- and if an enemy is still too strong, then do not attack him yet, and then you do not need a retreat ..

To me, retreating is not something that should be implemented. As an example, I recently participated in a 100-player map where I was pitted against multiple enemies, defending at a "corner" at the NE tip of India. Each day when I went to bed I had to make a decision - do I leave my troops here, or do I fall back 2-3 provinces in case they all rush at me? This went on for 4 days - I retreated 3 times, and stayed once. Each day had different results, but I still had the option to retreat - I just had to think ahead rather than making a quick, panicked decision if I had gotten overrun. As Restrisiko pointed out, to include a retreat option would require a MASSIVE change to the game mechanics.

In the design Clone: Clash of Nations, they have a retreat option where the retreaters take an extra hit.

Seems to work there, but it is again a major advantage to the intense on line player who is there a lot of time.