Retreat direction

[proflui]

Can I control where my ground units retreat? I want my Malaya units to retreat towards Singapore but they all go to the wrong directions and got surrounded by Japanese force. Is there a tactical retreat option? Thanks!

[HansBolter]

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

[Macclan5]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

Amusing Hans [:D] The Peter Principal in action.

To Original Poster

Understand you are asking your troops to "fight to the death" practically. You have them entrenched, fortified, and likely poorly supplied.

Your orders are "Men - hold your position". Fight!

If they were non electron soldiers I suspect you might have a minor morale issue [;)]

Control of retreat direction is called "withdrawal" and can/should be done before you are surrounded and overwhelmed by a very large , armored, supplied armies.

Set them in combat mode but have them march backwards (Set Destination hex) towards Singapore down the roads (slowly in Combat mode) before they are cut off from behind.. for example. i.e. A Fighting retreat.

[crsutton]

The most likely path of retreat is to the nearest friendly base. That is not always the best way to go but there you have it..

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

The most likely path of retreat is to the nearest friendly base. That is not always the best way to go but there you have it..

Friendly base WITH a supply trace. I suspect this is the source of most of the heartburn on retreats.

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: crsutton
The most likely path of retreat is to the nearest friendly base. That is not always the best way to go but there you have it..

Friendly base WITH a supply trace. I suspect this is the source of most of the heartburn on retreats.

To clear a possible language misunderstanding, to friendly base along the supply propagation route from that base. Base itself can have zero supply, wont matter.

In very rare cases LCUs can retreat in different directions on the same turn, had it happening couple times in my games. I assume it is because supply propagation numbers from different bases were equal at that time, so random selection took place

[btd64]

Hex side control plays a role in retreat direction as well....GP

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Hex side control plays a role in retreat direction as well....GP

Yes, but mainly because no supply can pass a non-owned side.

[btd64]

Absolutely....GP

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

[proflui]

This makes defending in multiple layers pretty impossible. I have to consolidate all forces in the last city right away and this actually help the Japanese to conquer faster.

[BBfanboy]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

Along with that should be a way to set waypoints for the LCU in the way you can do with ships. Often you want the LCU to take a certain dogleg route (not just during retreats) and the only way to do it now is to move one hex at a time, wasting movement points every time you change hexes.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

I hear you John. Just ask Michael about western OZ and my troops retreat into the lions den[:@]....GP

[bradfordkay]

"This way, men!"

"Screw the Colonel! He led us into this mess! I am not following him one step more!"

[;)]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

Why is it "idiocy" to expect terrified, wounded, starving, often leaderless troops not to go in any direction that relieves the pain? A rout is not logic in action. There are hundreds of historical examples.

[Revthought]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

Why is it "idiocy" to expect terrified, wounded, starving, often leaderless troops not to go in any direction that relieves the pain? A rout is not logic in action. There are hundreds of historical examples.

d you are asking your troops to "fight to the death" practically. You have them entrenched, fortified, and likely poorly supplied.

I'll bite. In the case of Malaysia, when my men know that the entire front is retreating towards Singapore, that there is no support in any other direction, and no hope of rescue if they are cut off from the rest of the front, I suspect that their inclination will be to retreat in the direction of Singapore. Not towards that base in the jungle to the North of Singapore that's already been abandoned.

That said, I get your point. Sometimes the situation on the ground dictates the direction you can retreat. The forces in front of you can break through on a flank, and cut you off from the line of retreat you'd prefer to take (or have been ordered to take).

From a totally wishful thinking perspective, it would be nice if I could order the direction of retreat in conjunction with a "delay" order. For example, instead of "defending" I'm ordering my units to put up enough fight to delay the enemy in front of them as they withdraw in the direction of Singapore.

I suppose you could also call that order "withdraw" and then allow the player to set a destination hex that the AI will try and withdraw towards.

[rustysi]

TBH it matters little which direction you retreat in Malaysia. The Japanese player will pursue and hound your forward units to death. The only thing the Allies could do is to bring more units forward to assist and probably get chewed up as well. Not to mention they're need in Singers to build up the defenses. So die as gallantly as possible.[:D]

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Revthought

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: John 3rd




If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

Why is it "idiocy" to expect terrified, wounded, starving, often leaderless troops not to go in any direction that relieves the pain? A rout is not logic in action. There are hundreds of historical examples.

d you are asking your troops to "fight to the death" practically. You have them entrenched, fortified, and likely poorly supplied.

I'll bite. In the case of Malaysia, when my men know that the entire front is retreating towards Singapore, that there is no support in any other direction, and no hope of rescue if they are cut off from the rest of the front, I suspect that their inclination will be to retreat in the direction of Singapore. Not towards that base in the jungle to the North of Singapore that's already been abandoned.

That said, I get your point. Sometimes the situation on the ground dictates the direction you can retreat. The forces in front of you can break through on a flank, and cut you off from the line of retreat you'd prefer to take (or have been ordered to take).

From a totally wishful thinking perspective, it would be nice if I could order the direction of retreat in conjunction with a "delay" order. For example, instead of "defending" I'm ordering my units to put up enough fight to delay the enemy in front of them as they withdraw in the direction of Singapore.

I suppose you could also call that order "withdraw" and then allow the player to set a destination hex that the AI will try and withdraw towards.

There might be an orderly retreat to Singapore IF any officers were alive, or IF some NCOs could read a compass or IF Private Schmuckatelli didn't lead the run-off-into-the-bush-and-live movement. Hell of a natural leader, that Schmuckatelli.

There are two conflated issues here re the game.

1) Your base falls. The enemy takes possession, plus the AF, port, supplies, fuel, oil, resources, manpower. Forts return to zero. The losing side, you, retreats in good order, staying in the same hex. In a stack situation some LCUs might be destroyed in the loss, some might not be. There are morale checks, probably experience and leadership checks, probably some randoms. The manual gives an outline of the Japanese mechanism to an extent, including banzai charges, etc. But THIS is what you're talking about re Singapore decisions. An orderly retreat from the base. If you're left alone you can leave through any open hexside, in Combat, Move, Reserve, or (rarely) Disorg. mode. Usually your opponent is not that nice, but you could HR it if you wanted.

2) The other case being spoken of here and called a "retreat", isn't. It's a rout. Fortifications collapse, the enemy pours through the breaches, and pandemonium reigns. Your losing side leaves the hex pell-mell in full out, "every man for himself", "Red Badge of Courage" mode. There's no leadership, there's no morale, there's no structure. It's chaos. And there should be, in chaos, odd outcomes as far as direction goes.

If you don't like either of those you have the option in many cases of leaving the hex before the fight. Or moving some out while a core remains to hold the doors open. It's all about choices. [8D]

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

No control over retreat direction.

It will almost always be in the worst possible and most mystifying direction possible.

If this game EVER gets redone, I would put a 'button' in for a retreat location/direction. This idiocy of these units going the exact OPPOSITE direction from where they should go defies the imagination. My disaster in Burma with my game against Dan has seen not ONE, not TWO, but THREE horrific retreats dooming units to extinction.

Why is it "idiocy" to expect terrified, wounded, starving, often leaderless troops not to go in any direction that relieves the pain? A rout is not logic in action. There are hundreds of historical examples.

Well yes, this is the argument that I made with John 3 in his AAR. Sometimes there are other considerations such as poor leadership or just stupid orders from above. However, there are retreats and there are routs. The game does not differentiate. So in this case the question would be when should a player have control over a retreat direction and when should they not? What we have is probably a compromise solution done by the designers. I don't think it matters much because I can't see Matrix devoting the resources to change it at this stage of the game's life. But I would say 80% of the time with planning my units retreat where they need to. That probably is as good enough reflection of the reality as we are going to get.

Afterthought. Actually, some retreats leave the defender with units so disorganized that they cannot move for a turn or two. I suppose that these are the same as routs.

[Bullwinkle58]

You might have missed my post above where I outlined that the game already does differentiate between retreats and routs.

The difference is in a game retreat the losing forces don't teleport to a new hex across 40 miles in the same turn. They have to walk out.

The game already offers a huge gift in routs by teleporting at all. In reality troops panicking and running couldn't get 40 miles away instantly. They would also still be in the battle hex, completely shattered, and easy pickings the next day.