Surrender routines. Please explain.

[pcasey]

ORIGINAL: Nomad

The area of a Hexagon that is 60 miles across is 3117.69 square miles. [:)]

BTW, the sides are 34.64 miles long. [;)]

You're right; I made a stupid geometry error .

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: Black Mamba 1942

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Erik, one thing that you and 2x3 might look at is having some chance that a unit will not retreat from a base hex when defeated at 2:1 odds. The control of the hex might be won at that point but the defeated units could stay in the hex with minimal loss to fatigue and/or disabled/disrupted/destroyed elements. It seems there is too extreme of a result from 1:1 to 2:1 odds. At 1:1 the attacker often loses a lot and the defender doesn't, then at 2:1 the attacker loses little and the defender is essentially out of commision for a month or more. That should be the result for some higher odds like 4:1 or higher. Anyway food for thought.

These are results that I would really like to see.[;)]

Retreated out of the base, but still in the hex, till further combat knocks them out.
Then surrender or Bonzai if no retreat is available.

I agree as well.

I think part of the disparity in combat between units that can retreat and units that cannot, is that retreats occur very rapidly - out of the hex in 1 day. I know this is due to the game scales, both time and distance, but this change would mitigate that to some extent.

[Andrew Brown]

ORIGINAL: moses
Heres why. You site an example where a unit continues to fight when surrounded. It does not logically follow that being surrounded is a defensive advantage. I think the overwhelmingly solid consensus view is that being surrounded is a disadvantage.

The reason I brought the example up is that some seem to be claiming that it should not be possible for surrounded units, in difficult terrain (jungle/mountain), to last a long time, even weeks, if attacked by a greatly superior force.

Because it could and did happen, I believe that it should be possible in the game as well. Note: not universal, but possible.

There were a wide range of possible outcomes in the real war, and I would like to see that reflected in the game. I don't want to see it changed so that every time a unit is surrounded, even in difficult terrain, it can simply be eliminated in one day.

[Nikademus]

Because it could and did happen, I believe that it should be possible in the game as well. Note: not universal, but possible.

Agreed.

Just had one myself. No weeks of holding out here. Granted, Bombur managed to evac some the day of the capture, but my forces eliminated the rest in two days fighting after the capture of the base.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Pakhoi

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 164192 troops, 780 guns, 64 vehicles

Defending force 10102 troops, 36 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 32 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied forces CAPTURE Pakhoi base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
730 casualties reported
Guns lost 12

Allied ground losses:
549 casualties reported
Guns lost 23
Vehicles lost 1



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Next day)

Ground combat at Pakhoi

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 162872 troops, 742 guns, 62 vehicles

Defending force 7619 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 86 to 1


Japanese ground losses:
3106 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

Allied ground losses:
559 casualties reported
Guns lost 12



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next day

Ground combat at Pakhoi

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 162369 troops, 763 guns, 62 vehicles

Defending force 3011 troops, 2 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 1510 to 1


Japanese ground losses:
4969 casualties reported
Guns lost 22
(Japanese eliminated)

Allied ground losses:
94 casualties reported
Guns lost 7