The Custer stand and die syndrome!

[SeaWolf_48]

SC is a great game, but why don't the units retreat instead of standing and dying. This game would have made Hitler proud.

Units during war retreat when they are taking huge casualties.

I would like to see SC units retreat if they take 50% casualties, and only then substain 25% reductions.

Thoughts?

[JerseyJohn]

SeaWolf_48

Excellent, it would be a good improvement -- retreated units, if not destroyed by subsequent attacks, could then be reinforced. Retreating through an enemy zone of control could incur a penalty and if no retreat is possible casualties should be doubled.

Napoleon early in his career said, freely paraphrased, Any army looks fine in victory. How it fights after a defeat is the true test.

[ December 31, 2002, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[blackbellamy]

the hitler no retreat rule is not in effect units do retreat

after the attack is over, when it's your turn to move, you can click on them and move them back out of harms way ;p

if you want to simulate the hitler rule just make a house rule where any axis unit in russia can only move in a western direction by using operational movement

[JerseyJohn]

blackbellamy

I've never seen units retreat. We're not talking about withdrawing during your own turn, we're talking about units under attack that are being decimated and instead of breaking off combat and withdrawing a hex they remain where they are and keep fighting till they're destroyed.

If a retreat rule were invoked it would need an advance rule to compensate the attacker, where following the retreated unit's withdrawal, the unit conducting the attack has the option of moving forward into the vacated hex.

[SeaWolf_48]

Blackybellamy

I meant that they would retreat when they are attacked.

i.e. German Army (10 pts.) attacks Russian Corps (10pts.) near Kiev. The Russian Corps takes 6 pts. of damage, it just sits there and takes it. Then another Army attacks the same Russian Corps and poof it's gone forever.

I would like to see a unit retreat if it substains 50% damage, one space back, and only recieve 25% damage because they did not stand and die, but retreated like real Infanty units do. If the said unit cannot retreat, then it takes the damage and/or dies a terrible painful gorie morbid bloody death.

Other war games have this tactic, or rule.

Respond.....

[Friedrich_der_2]

If a retreat rule were invoked it would need an advance rule to compensate the attacker, where following the retreated unit's withdrawal, the unit conducting the attack has the option of moving forward into the vacated hex.

Panzer General had such a rule. And it worked fine. When the unit were heavily damaged they often retreated to a free hex. There have been some exceptions which I do not really remember. I think if the units had not fuel left It doesn't retreat.

Sven

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

It's a reasonable request.

Surely SC2 can add this to the game.

In a lot of games, sometimes retreat is mandated as part of the punishment upon resolution of a single throw of the dice.

That a unit will just sit there and let units hammer it repeatedly is a loss to realism.

[hans-micael]

I find this a bit over the edge - considering the scale of the game - the fact that units are decimated - reflects the power directed against the frontline and any subsequent disaster often reflect bad positioning of the unit - the crumbling Russian frontline is a different ballgame and must be to reflect the deviousness of the broken alliance - and the ousting of the educated russian elite officers. You must defend your units and make sure they can't be attacked from to many hexes. And if they can be attacked with air units - then defend them accordingly - or run to safer positions - and build a new frontline - this at least is my tactic to defend the russian units against the german onslaught :ø)

So forget about Custer - this is a very large scale operational theater - and the hexes represent a lot of land - and the turns are really long in days...

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

The problem with inflexible unit behaviour, is it only plays into "playing the hex shape" arguments.

I have heard people gripe about other board games in the past, based on the fact that you either just can't defend a hex, or thanks to the hex being an all or nothing prospect, you can't ever take the hex.

The dynamics of "hex" defenses just ends up being about the shape of the hex, and not simulating an actual attack.

Of course something that works for one side, will work for the other as well.

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

Further on this matter.

I remember all to well playing Fortress Europa (the old AH board game of that name).

My friend would amass troops to defend the inevitable Allied beachhead.

Nice carefully arranged clusters of perfect sums of panzer and infantry counters. Always looking for a specific sum of combat factor points.

But then the Allied Player merely picks a hex, gets a 1 to 1 attack, adds 3 air unit counters, converts from 1 to 1 through 2 to 1 through 3 to 1 and ends up at 4 to 1 odds.

Rolls the dice, and almost always declares, sorry you are eliminated. Poof no more units.

There was just no point to thinking about the defense of a specific hex. The only defense, was to just spread the units out and eat up as many hexes as possible. Chaff in front and good units in behind.

3 hexes deep and there was no point in having Air units, they were not given any real targets, the crud was all that was ever offered.

That isn't wargaming though. Certainly didn't depict the war. But it was a concession to a game mechanic that could be manipulated.

That's why I still plan to grumble about not being able to stack land air and naval units in a single hex, and why I think stand or die is silly.

Oh by the way, noticed I can actually defend coastal land hexes with ships, that's gotta be dumb some how. But the counter still gets in the way eh. Ships with wheels? Maybe a research option I missed?