Rule 8.5.3 Naval retreat

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Rule 8.5.3 Naval retreat

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided >> Tech Support >> Rule 8.5.3 Naval retreat

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Rule 8.5.3 Naval retreat - 6/25/2008 5:44:18 AM

freetalk

Posts: 45
Joined: 5/17/2006
Status: offline

Unusual situation just happened.
The rule says that if a region with a port is attacked and the computer expects the port to be captured, fleets will move to an adjacent sea area.
Axis in France had several ships in port and several fighters (and land units) staioned there.
Allies launched a fighter airfield attack (approx 12 fighters against 6 in France).
Computer immediately moved the fleet to sea even though there was no possibility of France falling. No land units were even involved in the attack, only planes.
The fleet then became easy pickings for the allied fleet.
I suggest the rule be amended so that fleets move only if the region is actually captured,
or will only move if land units are involved.

Post #: 1

RE: Rule 8.5.3 Naval retreat - 6/25/2008 6:27:04 AM

WanderingHead

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline

Frankly, I've never liked this rule. Primarily because it can quite unexpectedly cause the attackers moves to become non-undoable. I think that the cannot-undo effect is significant enough in impact but subtle enough in when it will trigger that the rule should be removed (too easy to get caucht by it unexpectedly).

I've also seen some little issues like what you point out, which just shouldn't happen.

I'd be interested in what others think. Should the "retreat if port is *expected* to be captured" rule be removed? Obviously, the naval retreat would still occur if the port is actually captured.

But bear in mind that I don't expect any more code changes, so the probability that this is improved is fairly low. I'm just looking for the guidance on the odd chance that I do any more coding.

(in reply to freetalk)

Post #: 2