Should a retreating unit be able to invade?

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
Smilies
:points: :-D :eyeroll: :neutral: :nmr: :razz: :raging: :-) ;) :( :sick: :o :? 8-) :x :shock: :lol: :cry: :evil: :?: :smirk: :!:
View more smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is OFF
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Expand view Topic review: Should a retreating unit be able to invade?

Re: Should a retreating unit be able to invade?

by Jamiet99uk » Thu May 19, 2022 7:58 pm

This has been a standard rule since the very early days of the game. If you leave a supply centre un-defended, a displaced unit can retreat there. This mechanic is integral to the way the game is played. Remember, this is a fairly abstract strategy game, not an accurate tactical warfare simulation.

It's counter-intuitive that convoying an army from London to Picardy takes the same amount of time as convoying an army from North Africa to Norway, but there it is, that's the game - it's not a simulation.

Re: Should a retreating unit be able to invade?

by Doug7878 » Thu May 19, 2022 7:56 pm

The game mechanics have been kept as simple as possible on purpose, and are not designed to be realistic. We have no supply or communication problems with our units, so they go anywhere they can go per the rules.

Should a retreating unit be able to invade?

by Gwyn » Thu May 19, 2022 7:32 pm

I am new to this game, so this could perhaps be a decided question already.

I was recently surprised by the fact that an enemy unit that was forced to retreat was able to invade and take over a territory that was held by me and unoccupied.

Worse yet, this territory was a supply centre.

It seems counter-intuitive that a retreating unit can invade. On the flip side, it does make some sense if the destination territory is unoccupied, but... this still feels like something that shouldn't be.

Thoughts?

Top