Matrix Games Forums

I've been playing the OAW series from the beginning, but there's one thing I've never really understood and since I'm logged in I thought I'd ask. How does the computer decide in which direction a defeated defending unit retreats? I don't know how many times I've driven off an enemy unit, which does not retreat away from my attacking forces or towards its own supply point, but towards my lines. For example: I attackers are directly north of the defending unit. The defending unit then retreats northwest to a spot adjacent to the attacking units, instead of just south which makes so much more sense. Just wondering.

ORIGINAL: augustus

I've been playing the OAW series from the beginning, but there's one thing I've never really understood and since I'm logged in I thought I'd ask. How does the computer decide in which direction a defeated defending unit retreats? I don't know how many times I've driven off an enemy unit, which does not retreat away from my attacking forces or towards its own supply point, but towards my lines. For example: I attackers are directly north of the defending unit. The defending unit then retreats northwest to a spot adjacent to the attacking units, instead of just south which makes so much more sense. Just wondering.

It's pretty much random - as it should be. Retreat from combat (RFC) is not a voluntary act. It's imposed by force. The defeated retreaters may not have a choice as to what direction they retreat to. If their lines have ruptured in the center, they may be split up and forced to retreat laterally, no matter how much they might prefer to retreat away from the enemy and towards their own lines.

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

It's pretty much random - as it should be.

Why would the direction of retreat be random? If forced to retreat the unit retreats in either 1) the direction perceived to be the better defensive position or 2) the direction dictated by the attacker. Neither of these moves are random. My understanding is that TOAW uses a logic tree to select the direction of retreat with the direction toward friendly troops and supply being at the apex of the tree. Of course this still leaves open the probability that the unit will chose an unlikely direction, but that probability should be rather small as compared to the preferred direction. Random, as it should be . . . no, I don’t think that is correct.

However, my question about retreating units is; why do units always split into three sub units, never into two sub units?

Regards, RhinoBones

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

It's pretty much random - as it should be.

Why would the direction of retreat be random? If forced to retreat the unit retreats in either 1) the direction perceived to be the better defensive position or 2) the direction dictated by the attacker. Neither of these moves are random.

The latter is random from the perspective of the Operational commander (you). Even if it could be "dictated" by the victor, that victor is the tactical-level commanders of the individual units involved. And, of course, it isn't usually so easily controlled. Rather, it's dictated by the (largely random) combat results. Where and how the defense fails is not easy to control - by either side.

My understanding is that TOAW uses a logic tree to select the direction of retreat with the direction toward friendly troops and supply being at the apex of the tree. Of course this still leaves open the probability that the unit will chose an unlikely direction, but that probability should be rather small as compared to the preferred direction.

I'm not aware of any such feature. And, if you try pushing an RBCing unit around the map, I think you'll be hard pressed to find any sign of it.