webdiplomacy.net

In a game I've played, we had these orders:

Country Alpha:
A->B
C support A->B
D->A

Country Beta:
B->A

These orders were resolved this way:
the Beta unit in B tries to go to A, but is standoffed by Alpha unit moving from D. Then, the Beta unit in B is dislodged by the attack from A, supported from C. So far, it's clear.

Now, that's my doubt: does Alpha unit in D succeed in moving to A? Shouldn't it be standoffed by the Beta unit, even if the latter is dislogded by other units?

Units D and B did not stand off in Province A. Unit B's move to Province A failed because Unit A moved to Province B with superior force. When two neighboring units move to each other's provinces via the same method* and one unit has greater force supporting it, the weaker unit's move effectively didn't occur, and thus does not prevent another unobstructed unit from moving to the same province.


*: I know this applies for movements occurring by land, but I'm not sure how convoys affect things. I know that neighboring units can "switch places" if one moves by convoy and one moves by land, but I've not seen this situation occur with supports and a backfill. I think you get the same mostly intuitive result (stronger unit wins, weaker unit's move doesn't affect things; if equal power, standoff) but I can't say for sure.

Thanks, Carl.
So, correct me if I am wrong:

B->A fails not because of a standoff, but because B is dislodged by an attack coming from A. So, even if there was no D->A, B couldn't go to A. (The famous rule "A dislodged unit has no effect on the province that dislodged it").

On the other hand, a dislodged unit CAN cause a standoff in a province different from the one it was dislodged from, so if the orders were:

Country Alpha:
A->B
C support A->B
D->E

Country Beta:
B->E

B would have been dislodged the same, of course, but would have created a standoff in E, and D->E wouldn't succeed.

Am I right?

This is covered in 6.E.1 in the DATC (found here).

And I believe 6.E.5 addresses your second scenario (although the example given is a bit more complicated).
D->E would not succeed.

Thanks Squigs!

marperra wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 10, 2019 8:25 am

Thanks, Carl.
So, correct me if I am wrong:

B->A fails not because of a standoff, but because B is dislodged by an attack coming from A. So, even if there was no D->A, B couldn't go to A. (The famous rule "A dislodged unit has no effect on the province that dislodged it").

On the other hand, a dislodged unit CAN cause a standoff in a province different from the one it was dislodged from, so if the orders were:

Country Alpha:
A->B
C support A->B
D->E

Country Beta:
B->E

B would have been dislodged the same, of course, but would have created a standoff in E, and D->E wouldn't succeed.

Am I right?

Correct! This situation comes up routinely; you'll want to remember that this situation resolves this way, because sometimes the difference between retaking a captured province and losing it permanently is your ability to stall a critical reinforcing unit on your way out of the province.

Last thing: in the second scenario, because of the standoff, B couldn't retire to E (and neither, of course, to A).

marperra wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 10, 2019 9:27 am

Last thing: in the second scenario, because of the standoff, B couldn't retire to E (and neither, of course, to A).

Exactly right. I think you're getting the hang of this.