Surrender or Die trying?

[rleete]

In a few recent PBEM games it became apparent that I could not continue the battles, due to losses. In each of these games, I surrendered. One was a defense where I was being overrun, another two were meeting engagements. In one case, my opponent expressed suprise, not knowing the extent of the damage he had inflicted.

My question is this: should I have surrendered?

The other option would be to continue fighting, only to be eventually wiped out or for the auto-surrender to kick in. How about a withdrawal. Is it considered unethical to just withdraw off the back edge of the map in order to reduce casualties and captives? Afterall, the opponent eventually wins, just not getting the benefit of casualties to increase the score.

I am not a ladder player, and while losing is something I try to avoid, it really makes no difference. Well, it annoys the hell out of me, but I get over it. What is considered the most honorable course of action? While I try to avoid the dreaded "gameyness" label, I play to have fun. To continue a game I have obviously already lost is pointless to me. Should I have continued for the benefit of my opponents, or was I right to have surrendered? Is withdrawal a valid option?

[Jarmo]

When you realize you have lost, the right and realistic thing to do is to try and withdraw offmap. But usually I don't bother and just surrender outright.

[olandt]

Be careful when surrendering. First off, your attacker may be hurt more than you realize. I recently defended versus an assualt and did surrender because I thought the game was basically over. I was in the process of retreating my troops off the board and asked my opponent if he cared to go on. He said "no, lets play a new scenario." So I surrendered. I knew I had bloodied one of his companies pretty badly, but I thought the other was still in good condition. I was wrong. I had reduced it to about half strength, I just hadn't routed any squads as most of the damage was done by arty and long range fire. It ended up as a Major victory for him, but I think had I stuck it out and did a successful retreat, I might have leesened his win to a tactical victory only (or just maybe even a draw). Retreats were not uncommon on the battlefield, so they should be part of the game as well. Sometimes it pays to stick through it, although sometimes it means many turns of backing units off the field.

[mensch]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by R_Leet:

My question is this: should I surrender?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes very much do that.. I gladly await the surrender from you!!.. wadda pal! wadda guy... *sniff* man.. your a real buddy.

now will that be C.O.D. of all your troops remains or Visa?

[Joe Shaw]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What is considered the most honorable course of action? While I try to avoid the dreaded "gameyness" label, I play to have fun.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If the bottom line for you is to have fun (as it is for me), then you have every right to stop playing when it's no longer fun for you. Surrender is perfectly correct and honorable in that situation and is MUCH preferred to simply not returning files, which has also been done.

As to being labelled "gamey", however, you should realize that some players get annoyed when their opponents surrender before the bitter end. I suppose they enjoy torturing cats too. Just be advised that in some cases you may run into this type of player.

From a practical standpoint, I very rarely surrender as strange things can and do happen in this game ... as they do in real life. I've rarely been so decimated that I don't have a hope of winning. Sometimes that hope turns out to be unrealistic but I usually fight it out to the end.

It's YOUR decision in the final analysis and if your opponent doesn't like it, TOUGH, they got their win. Of course I'M not too likely to want to play them again because they usually AREN'T in it for fun.

Joe

[Warmaker]

No shame in surrendering or withdrawing when all hope is lost.

One thing is to be careful in what "feels" like a close game. Due to the uncertainties of exactly estimating the casualties that you have inflicted I tend to stick to the stubborn side. The other guy may be just as hurt or worse off than you. Of course, this tend to me having higher than normal casualties for achieving my objectives.

When I play the Heer, I'll surrender. When playing Waffen SS or FJ, fight to the bitter end...

[Ricochet]

Don't forget the Cease Fire option. I know when my opponent asks for a cease fire he's at the point of

withdrawal, leaving me the field and victory. ( This doesn't happen as often as I'd like of course )

This also leaves the end map at the break point and you can see exactly the condition of all the troops without the

captured status.

I would hope my opponents would feel the same. (otherwise I'd just surrender )

Tournament games would be different. They would have to end either in a complete withdrawal, elimination or

surrender.

[ 08-12-2001: Message edited by: Ricochet ]

[Mark IV]

I will fight until it is truly hopeless. Often, this is to the last cartridge, but sometimes it is so obvious that my fighting force is destroyed and the other fellow's so intact that I feel I may be wasting his time.

I have found that olandt's advice is often correct. If you are in bad shape, so is the other guy, but you can only see your own damage. When your opponent was surprised at your surrender, it tells me that you "left money on the table", because he was hurting so badly that he did not realize that you felt that YOU were in trouble.

I have once or twice indicated to a PBEM opponent that I do not feel a real life fighting force would continue under the circumstances, but that I am willing to do so, so long as the little digital unfortunates will respond to orders. This gives the opponent the option of enjoying the fruits of victory (unrestrained massacre), or terminating and going on to something more rewarding. I have never minded presiding over a disaster if the other fellow has earned it... such turns are easily and quickly processed. I am not one to feel the digital pain of my little soldiers, once their viability is destroyed. There is also a certain talent to disengaging and retreating off the board with as much of one's force intact as possible, and I will certainly indulge an opponent who wants to work this angle of CM... but I personally am not wired this way.

There is a short list of opponents who have proven so vexatious that I will continue killing them, or trying to, even if it is from directly beneath their hulls with my dying breath. Goanna and Geier spring to mind, and on occasion The Hated Pod, the latter more out of habit as he is the traditional enemy, rather like dogs and cats, Germans and French, or perhaps more aptly, birds and worms.

I have never hesitated to accept a proffered surrender at any point in a game. If the guy surrenders before I think he ought to have, I count it as a legitimate victory, and quietly (or not, depending) question his intelligence and disposition afterward. Actually, the best commanders would strive for victory with a minimum of casualties anyway.

Better an early surrender, than those miserable gutless cowards who disappear without a word or a trace 'cause things went badly, and lack the decency to terminate the affair with honor. I will watch my last tank burn and my last crew ridden down and sabered without flinching, but I would never walk away from a game without a final resolution.

[Capitalistdoginchina]

If i am losing I always play to the end unless my opponent indicates he is ready and willing to accept my surrender. Even though i may be losing heavily i will play it out and give my opponent the satisfaction of a full glorious victory. I find it a challenge to inflict as much damage as i can to the opposing force when the chips are down. Many players, when they feel they have you beaten, relax their concentration and become careless. That is the time to strike back with what you have and give him a fright, you may not win but make your opponent earn his victory.

If i am winning i like my opponent to do the same, there is no fun when your opponent throws in the towel as soon as things turn sour - much of the challenge is to continue the momentum of your advance and overwhelm the other guy. Sometimes it can take a long time to sneak a platoon or 2 behind enemy lines in an attempt to encircle a victory location, it is very rewarding to be able to complete your plans and and see the result of all your efforts pay off. Remember this is a game, it is human nature for people to enjoy winning any game, so let him enjoy his win unless he indicates he is ready to accept your surrender.

If i can see that my opponent is totally overwhelmed i would mention to him in my e-mails that now would be a good time to surrender, whether he chooses to surrender or not i leave it up to him.

Just my humble opinion.

CDIC

[Vanir Ausf B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Captitalistdoginchina:

If i can see that my opponent is totally overwhelmed i would mention to him in my e-mails that now would be a good time to surrender, whether he chooses to surrender or not i leave it up to him.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've thought about doing this many times, but the one time I did try it my overly sensitive opponent mistook it for gloating. :confused:

Having said that, if it is obvious to me I have no chance to even force a draw I will surrender or at least offer cease fire.

[olandt]

My post on another thread just reminded me of what is said on surrender in Sun Tzu's "The Art of War." To paraphrase it, the best battle result is a victory where you didn't even have to fight. Your goal is not to eliminate every last enemy, but to convince the enemy that you are superior and to fight you would be folly. This is of course out of the scope of CM, as this game represents even, or near even matchups most of the time and the option to take battle has been already accepted. In addition, the lives of your soldiers have no meaning in CM and the background context of what you are doing is sometimes lost. This all is why I'm still searching for the game that would allow me to fight wars the "Art of War" way, in a satisfactory method. CM is only the best TACTICAL war game, not a strategic war game.