Marc Anton Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 What is better for the result, retreating a tank with a dammaged gun from map or let him stay until game is over ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Streety Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 You may know this already (and I'm not attempting to offer a definitive answer), but I always understood you take a morale hit for units that have left the field. So I pull them back but keep them on the field, hidden or out of the way where possible. Their presence at the rear might also help raise the morale of other troops routing as they reach the rear (but I'm not sure of this). However, some damaged tanks with bow machine guns sometimes can still fire their mg (at least in CMAK, been a while since I played CMBB), so I try to keep these in support. There are of course other reasons for not withdrawing a damaged tank - they can draw fire, carry infantry, and (I think) also help score/balance towards the game engine deciding who if anyone is occupying a flag at the end of a battle. However, if damaged tanks are still on the map at the end of a battle in which your side is forced to surrender (which sometimes happens in Quick Battles whether you offer to surrender or not) then these vehicles (like all your vehicles still on the map) count against you as destroyed - I just checked this on CMBB, withdrawing some tanks then surrendering and seeing that the withdrawn tanks were NOT listed as destroyed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shahidsaif Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 however i do not know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Marc Anton, I'd say this depends on your morale state and what rules you're playing under. In ROW, for example, if you were losing, you were a fool not to evacuate everything you could. Why? POWs counted double for points. It's a ticklish balancing act, but Streety's right. For certain applications, and depending upon threat level, a tank with just a bow MG working is still a serious threat. Not only have I been known to use King Tigers in this manner, but I've also used them to get my pricey Panzer crews to the rear for exit--atop my defanged King Tigers. In one case, my evacuating my torn up force was the difference between a major victory for my opponent and a marginal tactical victory. In turn, that hurt his points in ROW. I'd say that, if you're about to lose, save as much as you can, but recognize you may trigger Auto Surrender in the process. But isn't it better to lose some of the battle survivors rather than most of them? If nothing else, think of retreating forces off the map as limiting the overall damage to your side and the magnitude of your foe's victory on the other. Good luck! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Marc Anton, I realize now I didn't quite get it right. ROW or no, POWs count double the VPs (Victory Points) of ordinary casualties inflicted. This is a basic game mechanic and has been since CMBO (page 102 in the manual). ROW, played under the Nabla system in which your performance, in often lopsided scenarios, was based not on whether you won or lost, but on how you did, in terms of points, relative to everyone else who played the scenario on the same side as you. You could lose and still win--if you outperformed everyone else for that side, in that scenario. That's why points were so important, for Victory Points were the metric of success, and limiting losses, rather than fighting to the death, made not only military sense, but game sense. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.