Matrix Games Forums

Hi,

I believe this might be another example of a strange surrender result. The 104th Army was in supply (and the supply lane reached by land [level 4 IIRC]) and had a retreat path East (across the 3-2 and the HQ). From what I understand of the rules, it should have gone to the queue.

As I said, they (unexpected surrenders) do not happen very often but they do from time to time. Maybe the port created some confusion in the interpretation of the retreat path in this particular case?

There is no retreat path for a Russian unit there...

It should surrender or shatter...

There is no retreat path for a Russian unit there...3 hexes is too far...2 is max.

It should surrender or shatter..

From what I understand of the rules, it should have gone to the queue.

Yes, that is exactly my point, it should have shattered.

I am pretty sure there is some small chance of a surrender over a shatter...BUT that would be a question for Al.

I believe this is pretty rare overall...which I am okay with to be honest.

There should be a chance a unit just surrenders.

Hum.. could be, and that would be fine. But then I would suggest to mention it in the manual (if only to stop players like me thinking it is a bug [&:]). Right now the manual seems specify very clear and different situations for shatters vs surrender.

But you gave me an idea. This exact situation should be easy to reproduce. I'll try to see if the results can vary from shatter to surrender. Still, the fact that when it happens it is almost always for a unit in or beside a port (in my experiences), could point to supply path interpretation.

Ok, so I tested it to see if there was indeed a small chance that sometimes a shatter could instead be a surrender.

I reproduced the same situation here. All Soviet units are in supply and the Soviet unit that will be attacked has a valid supply path/retreat path. However, been more than 2 hexes, if forced to retreat it should instead shatter to the build queue.

I made sure not to have any overwhelming odds, as the objective was to force a retreat only.

The unit surrendered 5 times in a row. It is only 5 tries I agree, but if the chance for a surrender instead of the normal shatter would be slim, it might be enough to at least have a look in the code if Alvaro has time for it.

I believe it might be a port problem. See next message.

But do straits count as a retreat path? (I don't know).

Here I tested under the same conditions (no overwhelming odds; retreat path valid but over 2 hexes, Italian in supply by land).

The unit in the port (beside the fleet) surrendered 5 times in a row as well at medium odds. No shatter ever even if that should be the expected results.

But the 2-5 unit beside it, not in a port, shattered 5 times in a row and went to the queue.

It is only a hunch, but the port might mix thing up.

But do straits count as a retreat path? (I don't know).

I'll test it by removing the 3rd unit in first example.

As stjeand said, it is too rare to be a serious problem (since even in ports, shatters seem to work usually more often than not), but if it can be solved, should be put on the list for an eventual fix.

But yea, not a priority.

ORIGINAL: Nirosi

But do straits count as a retreat path? (I don't know).

I'll test it by removing the 3rd unit in first example.

Yep, I removed the 3rd unit and the first one retreated across the strait in the back of the (previously) middle unit.

Not sure it should be removed...I think there should always be a chance a unit will surrender rather than shatter.

But a small chance which seems to be the case.

Yes the port is the issue.

We have conflicting situations that are tough to resolve for the computer. Say that was a 3 hex island with 3 units. One gets a retreat. It is in port supply like that unit. The computer doesn't know how to determine between these subtleties. A human can in an instant.