Simple, Reasonable Disengage/Retreat Rule

[dmm]

Here is a suggestion for a simple, reasonable disengage/retreat rule:

When one player chooses to retreat, the other player is given the option to pursue. It he says no, then retreat is successful, obviously. If he says yes, then the chase is on, but only via equations. The chase is figured by the computer based on initial distance, relative speed, and amount of supplies remaining to each fleet. (One complication: when a player's supplies get low, he should be given a warning and the opportunity to stop retreating (or stop chasing).) If retreat is unsuccessful, then combat ensues, with appropriately reduced supplies for both fleets. (So if the retreating fleet runs out of supplies, then it's a sitting duck. No movement, no weapons.)

The nice thing about this system is that it is fairly realistic but puts little extra programming burden on MM. It will work for both strategic and tactical combat. It doesn't require a scrolling battle map.

The other nice thing is that this system doesn't guarantee successful retreats to inferior fleets. It doesn't allow an invading fleet to avoid decisive fights with a defending fleet, unless it is both faster and better supplied. And even if the invader succeeds in retreating, it will have used up a lot of its supplies doing so.

What do you think?

[Seawolf]

This had been proposed a long time ago. Don't know why not put in but I guess it not as simple as we think


------------------
Seawolf on the prowl

[dmm]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Seawolf:
This had been proposed a long time ago. Don't know why not put in but I guess it not as simple as we think

---

I know that retreating was proposed but there were a lot of fears that it would either require a scrolling battle map or would be too easy (and hence unbalancing).

I haven't seen any Posts along the lines of my proposal. I think it is a new idea. And it is definitely very simple to implement.

[LintMan]

What if retreating was made to work somewhat like MOO did (I think)...

Basically, to retreat, you've move your ship to an edge of the sector, and then select retreat. At that point, your ship would be vulnerable for, say, 3 turns where it couldn't move or fire, before it left the map. That would give an opportunity to maybe get some pot shots at it before it fled.

The other part of this would be that fleeing the sector during battle would leave your ship in another sector (the one it entered from?) at the end of the battle.

[dmm]

Lintman's suggestion is very simple (and is similar to some previous ones). But the problem with it, is that it is arbitrary and illogical. If the number of paralyzation turns is set low, it allows totally outclassed fleets to run away from your fleets and go attack your planets, with not much penalty. If you try to fix this problem by making the number of turns being paralyzed quite high, then you've unduly penalized fast, well-supplied fleets, which realistically SHOULD be able to retreat successfully.

OK, now that I've cruelly bashed Lintman's (old) idea, somebody tell me what's wrong with my (new) idea. (Of course, no one will, because it is a great idea! )

[God Emperor]

dmm,
Just trying to figure out what your proposal means;
1) Can retreat be selected at any time? Or does the player have to be at map edge?
2) What are the consequences of the computer calculating that a retreat doesnt occur? Does the retreating player incur damage?
3) Is the calculation performed every combat round?

My main concern with any system is that the combat must Last long enough for some kind of exchange of fire to occur, otherwise the strategic level of the game will be adversely affected.....
Personally, I'm prepared to live with the existing system, despite its oddities...

(I dont mind pounding away at someone trapped in the map corner, he he he....).

Having said that, if supply levels and relative speeds could be incorporated such that had a low influence on the combat outcome, it would be a nice improvement..