No retreat LL games? Especially NML/NWO
-
Upkeep cost is an interesting concept but I don't think it would work in TripleA, you'd still reach a point where you have huge stacks, you just can't buy more units.
Limiting the amount of units that can be used per province could work together with upkeep. But thats a whole different ballgame then.
-
Upkeep codes do exist in the Triplea but there is no fractional numbers but still possible to assert decent upkeep rates to every units for preventing stacks. Just need to increase the cost of everything like tenfold or twentyfold then appointing upkeeps to units. 1 Pus upkeep per round for infantries would be reasonable since infantry cost would be 30.
-
Yeah but like I said, it doesn't matter much because you ustill would rather want to gain units than lose them at a loss, especially with such a low maintance per unit. So you wouldn't throw them away.
At some point you reach the max of both you and your opponent and then you just sit there. There's no big practical difference, except if you're close to a big production center and you can sacrifice one side to buy on an other or something like this while defending the other one with forts or cheaper units than you just had.
-
@Ondis I actually feel the opposite issue. I don't see why in dice you cannot surely decide to strafe, and are forbidden from doing so if you kill all your enemies. I believe it is dumb that having good dice denies options you could instead have had if you were less lucky.
I believe you should be allowed to retreat also after having killed all enemy units (meaning, of course, having a properties or something for that). Or at least be able to decide not to use some of your good rolls, so to leave that single enemy unit that would allow you to retreat (tho the fact that there must be 1 unit left doesn't make sense).
Flanking needs mostly a high level of defence superiority (like infantries at 1/4 instead of 1/2), and anyways TripleA lacks most of the various advantages you would get from it (for example, making defence weaker, or attack stronger, if a same attack power comes from multiple directions, instead of only one border).
-
@Cernel Flanking has the effect of, if multidirectional retreats were not possible, of forcing the enemy either back or having the enemy lose an entire portion of their front or even theit capital.
Without attacking you could also split your force into two, sacrifice one and have the other run the other way around the main enemy stack.
Concerning dice; Retreats are retreats. Generally an army retreats when it has lost a battle.
This whole concept of strafing units with your units is alien to me to be honest. If you win a battle then you're supposed to land on that spot. I hate comparing a game to real life because it doesn't have to be real life but this is one of those cases I can't but feel forced to do it. The only time I know where such battle raids were fought in WW2 is in Africa but groups like the Desert raiders.
But again that was more akin to exploiting the strategic depth of the enemy, hitting isolated groups, and moving on.
If you want strafing then implement some sort of strafing/bombing mechanic for artillery or airplanes that only lasts one roll of the dice.
In fact what should be happening if a vastly superior force is attacking your weaker defenders is that YOU as a defender should get the option to retreat after X rounds of combat.
Now that would create some interesting dynamics.
-
@Ondis A lot of Medieval warfare consisted in raiding, especially for the Turks in Anatolia. Assuming that retreating is possibly only the consequence of a fail and that you always and only aim at taking and staying with all your attacking forces in the territory you invaded is ahistorical. Of course, this adds the fact that TripleA doesn't allow you to represent booty, as the triggers giving you PUs for destroyed TUV are very basic, and anyways that is not taking into account the resources of the target territory itself.
-
I really support retreating option of defender forces. Attacker side can already stop its assault while defenders just have to continue fighting unless attacker decides to stop attacking.
-
@Schulz Its some what possible by having a map with only 1 round battles so that the defender can choose to either retreat or counterattack on their turn after just taking 1 round of casualties.
-
Well Prastles (and other authors) map as I wrote to Hepps called Age of Tribes does this well with a couple of rounds of combat, same with Star Wars maps. But on maps with already too many units I dont think its possible, it would just draw out combat.
Yes, a possibility to retreat! Both for the defending and attacking forces.
Let's compromise!@redrum Do you think its possible in a future release?
-
@Cernel said in No retreat LL games? Especially NML/NWO:
@Ondis A lot of Medieval warfare consisted in raiding, especially for the Turks in Anatolia. Assuming that retreating is possibly only the consequence of a fail and that you always and only aim at taking and staying with all your attacking forces in the territory you invaded is ahistorical. Of course, this adds the fact that TripleA doesn't allow you to represent booty, as the triggers giving you PUs for destroyed TUV are very basic, and anyways that is not taking into account the resources of the target territory itself.
nods noted! What do you think of the ability to retreat for both sides? Great kind of moves could be made! The attacker splits his forces in two, the defender attacks one of the stacks, the attacker retreats, the attacker next turn pushes up with the other stack, etc. It could break deadlocks!
This wouldn't work on small maps though where such a retreat gives the defender a serious extra move. But then this could easily be balanced with "if you retreated with your defending forces, you cant move next turn" or something like this. Forcing a kind of perpetual retreat, and pursuit! As was historic. Until you either decide to stand your ground, get enough reinforcements or die.
-
I just noticed that this mechanic was implemented in the Civil War map, I never quite got into that map due to the complicated economy but I always wanted to.
Anyone else played that map some more? How did you experience it?
Does someone want to play it with me?@Schulz It also has upkeep that you mentioned but it is divided on other resources than what is used for purchasing !
-
@Ondis I've played plenty of Civil War games and I really like that map. But it takes quite some time to get into it. And I never play it in lobby. Planning your moves needs way too much time, especially with the consumption of supplies for your movements. So if you want to give it a try, I'm up for a pbem.
-
I'd love for a map with the same rules as that map but without all the complexities of its production system and size. I've played the Eastern Campaign once in the lobby tho,that was fine.
But yeah, perfect map for PBEM due to only being two large sides.
I'll send you an email later during the weekend or friday.Dibs on the confederates!
-
-
Have you ever beaten the Union militarily?
So who made the map?
Also wondering if there is any negative consequence for having negative manpower?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login