Matrix Games Forums

I'd guess it's very unlikely to change now, but I really think that naval retreats should be improved.

As it stands, it can be worse to surround a fleet that you should pulverize than to leave it an escape route. If you leave it an escape route, you can at least pursue and hit again. Yet somehow, if they are surrounded then they can teleport a quarter way around the globe to a friendly port.

For example, my Germans just hit a WA fleet in the west Med. German fleets were in the Atlantic, German troops were in Gibraltar, and German fleets were in the mid Med. Britain is in German hands. I destroyed the heavies, but the carrier group and the lights teleported to safety in Canada (exactly 12 moves away).

I'd prefer at least if they run through existing fleets and passed arty covered narrows that they get op-fired at. It seems only fair.

i can feel ur pain ... iirc this topic was somehow discussed a mth ago ...

Joel, consider to stop the teleport thing in the next patch ... unless someone can name such kind of great escape thing in WWII.

AN

I consider this mostly a by-product of the IGOYOUGO turn system that lets you "surround" the enemy at sea pretty easily along with the fact that enemy units cannot stack together. Asking for op-fire on retreating units would likely lead to even more gamey situations than the current retreat - say 1 HF single handedly downing a large fleet just because it had to retreat through the HF.

If anyone has a reasonable suggestion I am all ears though - but I dont personally see one.

Well put Jan. Since its turn based and not real time the defender can't make apropriate counter moves to your own. So giving the defender an abstact retreat doesn't seem like to much of a flaw. I can except the possibilty that the British found an escape route to Egypt then out to Canada. On the other hand if Egypt was in German hands too then the British should have been forced to face the op-fire at Gibraltar. That is the case with the current rules right?

I dont believe retreating units suffer op-fire of any kind in any situation. Game wise the op-fire from Gibraltar isnt really different from any other kind of op-fire so I dont see why it perform any differently.

My understanding was that Keith tried to make it so that fleets could not retreat through narrows where the land next to the narrows was enemy controlled. I don't know for sure that he did this or that it works, but that was the plan.

Ya that was what I was trying to recall. Since the Med is closed in my example above, they should only be able to retreat to another part of the Med or stay in the same spot and face destruction. So If this narrows feature works what would happen? Does the British fleet retreat to another part of the med or what?

This is in the readme:

11. Rules Clarification - Naval Retreats
A) In section 8.6.2 item 3 should be replaced with the following "The unit moves to any adjacent sea region unoccupied by enemy or allied units (go to the area with the most friendly combat units)"
B) In section 8.6.2 it should state that naval units will never retreat through a narrows that is controlled by an enemy land region. Also, fleets are never allowed to retreat further than their maximum Speed rating.
C) In section 8.6.2 items 4, 5, and 6 should state that the units will retreat to the port containing the factory they are tracing to if there is one.
D) In section 8.6.2 item 7 should be replaced with the following: "The unit will retreat to the nearest sea area empty of enemy or allied units."
E) Fleets retreating from a port that is captured will follow the standard retreat rules listed in section 8.6.2.
F) Sometimes a fleet will automatically retreat from a port to an adjacent sea area when enemy units are moving into the area containing the port. This pre-combat retreat will occur only if there is an adjacent sea area free of enemy and allied units to retreat to.


Seems like if blocked in the med (i.e. enemy control of narrows and canals), it will try to move to an open area in the Med or it will be destroyed.

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen

I consider this mostly a by-product of the IGOYOUGO turn system that lets you "surround" the enemy at sea pretty easily along with the fact that enemy units cannot stack together. Asking for op-fire on retreating units would likely lead to even more gamey situations than the current retreat - say 1 HF single handedly downing a large fleet just because it had to retreat through the HF.

If anyone has a reasonable suggestion I am all ears though - but I dont personally see one.

Yeah, the way op-fire works in ordinary movement (each op-firing unit gets to fire at every passing unit) would be too much. I think it should be that in the case of a fleeing fleet, the retreat goes to the _nearest_ non-enemy occupied sea zone (none of this crossing the Atlantic stuff, stop when the seas are open) that is along a trace back to a friendly factory and if you pass through surrounding fleets then they get to op-fire once only at the retreating fleet. Normal combat rules for fire matching could be applied.

E.g. 2 HF 2LF 1CG retreat through 1HF 1LF, then the opfire would only be two shots, HF->HF and LF->LF, because the op-firing units only get one shot, not one per-retreating fleet.

The original way the game came out (pre-patches), where you could surround the fleets and 100% annihiliate them even if only 1LF was holding the escape route, was obviously too much.

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
Seems like if blocked in the med (i.e. enemy control of narrows and canals), it will try to move to an open area in the Med or it will be destroyed.

Hmm, didn't happen in my case. The whole reason the WA fleets were in the W Med was that they were holed up in Gibraltar and my Germans amphib'd from the Atlantic, causing the WA fleets to leave port.

I did not have Spanish Morocco (still neutral), but I certainly had Gibraltar. In truth, I only had Inf there, no Arty. Then I had HFs coming from the east and west to pound the remnants of the fleet, and they fled to Canada.