Dis-engaging from battle

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

    • Dis-engaging from battle

      Is there any way to retreat/disengage from battle at all? I've often found myself in a spot where I'd prefer to turn and run and live to fight another day when I see the odds are stacked against me. But it seems that you are stuck to stay for a slow (or fast) death no matter what. Especially at sea... what's the point of having fast destroyers, if they can't escape from a battleship? Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks
    • Agreed, kyrie626. For instance, if you order a division into a city, and the trip takes 6 hours. By the time you arrive, you realize that reinforcements have arrived and you have no chance of winning, but the battle has already started. You have no choice but to die.
      Or, what if you are attacked, and you think your troops are more valuable than the province, or you want to fall back and regroup? Retreating is a legitimate strategy, and needs to be implemented.
    • kyrie626 wrote:

      An option to retreat under fire makes perfect sense. It adds to the realism, it is senseless to have every single battle being fought to the death.
      I agree fully, Kyrie Elazion. This game as a whole is absolute victory/defeat, but battles shouldn't be absolute victory/defeat. No WW2 commander (other than Hitler, and he was insane and uneducated when it came to military tactics!) would willingly let an entire division fight the 'Battle of Attrition' without retreat to at least attempt to achieve a tactical war.
      It's been a while
    • Cheeki_Breeki wrote:

      Agreed, kyrie626. For instance, if you order a division into a city, and the trip takes 6 hours. By the time you arrive, you realize that reinforcements have arrived and you have no chance of winning, but the battle has already started. You have no choice but to die.
      Or, what if you are attacked, and you think your troops are more valuable than the province, or you want to fall back and regroup? Retreating is a legitimate strategy, and needs to be implemented.
      Or those players make to many mistakes in the first place?

      In your first eample the player is reckless. In the second he is fairly dumb I gess. He either should have pulled back earlier intead of enaging or he should not have kept his troops in a vulnerable position (near an unthrustworthy neighbour with obvious weaknesses in his army) so they wouldn't be attacked at all.
    • If you knew everything that your enemy would do, there would not be any war. And what about simple hit-and-run missions? Those are not possible with no retreat option. Retreating would add a whole new level of strategy to the game. Perhaps there should be a mechanic that means you will lose some of your troops while retreating, but battles should not be a binary, win-lose, all or nothing deal.
    • Cheeki_Breeki wrote:

      If you knew everything that your enemy would do, there would not be any war.
      That makes no sense.


      Cheeki_Breeki wrote:

      And what about simple hit-and-run missions? Those are not possible with no retreat option. Retreating would add a whole new level of strategy to the game. Perhaps there should be a mechanic that means you will lose some of your troops while retreating, but battles should not be a binary, win-lose, all or nothing deal.
      Try to hit and run without engaging. It's very logical you don't want to engage if you do hit and run tactics. You want to get out asap without wasting time fighting. If you fight and retreat, you lost the confrontation since you achieved nothing and you probably suffered most losses. Just conquer provinces and destroy his economy.

      I looked up your stats. Have you recently started or did you play on another account before?
    • I wonder how the above conversation would have gone if people took into consideration the scale of the map and scale of the units. Can one have a "hit-n-run" maneuver on a scale of hundreds, if not thousands, of square miles; by hundreds, if not thousands, of troops?

      Retreat on a similar scale could be possible if the coding could be worked out. However, retreat, in most games, gives the non-retreating side a (+) modifier to hit & damage while the retreating units get a (-) modifier (if allowed to fire at all). Also, in some games, retreat is an option only for the fastest units (which may get an automatic up to 50% loss of health).

      The only possible practical solution might be is to have a certain number of combat rounds and then both sides break-off their attack until ordered to resume (by one side or the other..HC members can pre-set this like Fire Control).
    • I Patton wrote:

      The only possible practical solution might be is to have a certain number of combat rounds and then both sides break-off their attack until ordered to resume (by one side or the other..HC members can pre-set this like Fire Control).
      Wouldn't that mean that you would have to click resume every few minutes? That would make it impossible to send a unit to attack a province, leave for a few hours, and come back when it is done. I think having only certain units be able to retreat, or maybe only allowing units that are faster than the enemy they are engaging to retreat, is a good idea, and they definitely should be put at a disadvantage. Perhaps retreating units would have the enemy gain +25% damage and not be able to fight back. However disadvantageous it is, it is still better than all-or-nothing.
    • Cheeki_Breeki wrote:

      I Patton wrote:

      The only possible practical solution might be is to have a certain number of combat rounds and then both sides break-off their attack until ordered to resume (by one side or the other..HC members can pre-set this like Fire Control).
      Wouldn't that mean that you would have to click resume every few minutes? That would make it impossible to send a unit to attack a province, leave for a few hours, and come back when it is done. I think having only certain units be able to retreat, or maybe only allowing units that are faster than the enemy they are engaging to retreat, is a good idea, and they definitely should be put at a disadvantage. Perhaps retreating units would have the enemy gain +25% damage and not be able to fight back. However disadvantageous it is, it is still better than all-or-nothing.
      I think everyone knows a combat round occurs once every 60 mins. (for land units). So, no, one wouldn't "have to click resume every few minutes".