Defenders being able to retreat?

part of the attackers roll. There is no separate roll.
Example
attacker has force of 2 ftrs 2 tanks 2 arty and 2 inf.
Defender has force of 5 infantry

Attacker
4 x D3 result is 1,3,2,6
4 x D2 with combined arms in this case result is 3,5,6,1

Defender
5 x 2 result is 1,6,4,2,3

Defender assesses the 3 hits from attacker first. Attacker rolled 2 (6’s) so the remaining infantry that lived have option to retreat one space or continue to fight.

Defender opts to retreat the 2 remaining units.

Attacker assesses 2 hits on infantry and wins the battle.

This is how we envisioned a retreat mechanism would work.

I gave this some serious thought, even though I really love the idea, I feel it will make this very long game even longer. Prolonging attacks, chasing around, etc. You, as the defender should already see the writing on the wall, and should had moved your units already on your non combat. The attacker shouldn’t be penalized if the defender forgot to move them, or didn’t see the attack.

Good luck with this rule, like I said I really do like the idea, just for me I don’t want to increase game time.

A successful defenders retreat, that is half a victory. The attacker has wasted a lot of resources and time to set up the decisive battle that would catch and crush the enemy, yet they are deprived of the glory and have even lost the initiative to the defender. But, and I cant stress this enough, the quintessence of a successful defenders retreat is to move your men and gear out of the mice trap before the attacker start the attack. If you wait too long it turn into defenders panic escape with huge casualties and loss of gear.

The way I see it is like, lets say Germany move a huge stack into Poland, and Russia have a stack in Eastern Poland, and it is obvious that Germany want to attack the Russian stack in next turn, then a successful defenders retreat will be if Russia non/combat move their stack into Belorussia in their turn, and leave a lone inf as blocker in Eastern Poland. This is already covered by the OOB rules. What you dudes want is the option to let Germany attack that Russian stack for a few rounds, and then suddenly the surviving Russians escape to an adjacent territory. It is extremely difficult for the defender to support and supply this kind of escape, usually all heavy equipment are lost. To keep it A&A style simple too is even more difficult, without getting too gamey where one step infantry can double move both in own and opponents turns. I figure the best is to just let it be. If the Russian inf stack can retreat back to Belo when Germany attack them, and then non combat move again in the Russian turn, that is not a punishment, its a gamey reward.

Naval battles on the other hand, should be treated different than land battles. Naval war is true maneuver warfare with all mobile units. Nothing would stop a defending ship from sailing away. But then it would not be A&A any more.

When it comes to attacker can retreat, I would change even that. If your assault get bugged down in the mud, your Tanks are out of gas and your men exhausted, its not like this units suddenly retreat to another territory just like a piece of cake,. man. In this case we should use the A&A 1914 rules with contested territories. The attacker in a land battle should never be able to retreat to another territory, but he could press to stop the attack and just contest the territory. Then the defender get the option to combat move out of that contested territory in his turn. The rule of thumb should IMHO be that you can only move your units during your turn. During other players turns your units are pretty much stuck. No more duble dipping.

But, like I said, naval warfare should be threatened different from land warfare, but that’s another topic

After reviews scrapping the idea.

IL you have any thoughts ?

@Ichabod:

Retreat by transport makes me think of the British and Common Wealth forces evacuating from Dunkirk…then evacuating from Norway, then more training by evacuating from Greece to Crete…followed by one more evacuation from Crete to Egypt. No Army at that point in time had that kind of expertise on how to retreat from port or the shore line.

I would like to comment this, man.

Defenders retreat from Dunkirk by sea. How was it possible ? In the real war Hitler suddenly, and surprisingly, pressed a stop to the German attack, because Goering wanted to take a shot at the Brits with his Luftwaffe. Now the Brits got a break and choose to embark their men on boats and sail home. In a game of A&A it would be like Germany attack the British stack in Belgium for a few rounds of combat, then suddenly press to stop the combat and contest the territory as with the 1914 rules. Playing by G40 rules the Germans would have to retreat back to Western Germany. Now on the UK turn, the surviving units jump on a tranny and move back to UK. Simple as that. No special rules.

The UK retreat from Narvik was not a defenders retreat. UK made a Dieppe raid on Narvik. First UK battleships shore bombarded Narvik, the naval battle where the German fleet got sunk was the turn before, then UK infantry made an amphibious assault on Narvik and killed a lot of Germans. Luckily a German unit survived, letting UK press for an attackers retreat and sail the men home to UK. Now if all German units were killed, then UK would have been stuck in Narvik, even in the real world. Sadly, and most historically not correct, the OOB rules dont allow attackers retreat after an amphibious assault, even if it was in fact done in the real war. This is because the game designer dont got enough knowledge of the real war, and maybe a bit for playability too.

Well most of the violations of historical example in AnA is usually done due to balance rather than history. I personally like the idea I had where defense can retreat after the attacker attacks.

Narvik,

I don’t understand your comment, “Defenders retreat from Dunkirk by sea. How was it possible?” Well, it was possible because it did happen. And the UK did retreat by sea several times in the early part of the war as Germany repeatedly booted UK led forces from the continent over and over. As noted in the other historical instances as written in my post…Norway (UK), Greece (UK and Commonwealth), and lastly Crete (mostly Commonwealth forces). I don’t think you read my post in entirety. I demonstrated several examples of retreating by sea in history to show (if adopting my HR suggestion) that there could be an argument made for this board game HR to permit defenders retreating by sea.

There were several more factors that permitted the miracle of Dunkirk. More source documents now available show it’s not just the Hitler decided to let the British live and it was Goering’s turn narrative. That was partly to play for the halt in German attacks. There was a national effort to evacuate the Royal Army with every boat and ship available. Also, many of the German tanks were spent from mechanical breakdowns after several weeks of non-stop operation. The German High Command didn’t want to take too many risks as their success was way beyond their expectations. Tanks breakdown…and the ability to repair them, replace complete engines…ect. is an important logistics requirements of a modern Army. Germany was good at this…but the turn around was probably not fast enough to maintain the Operational Readiness Rate (OR %) that would make the High Command feel comfortable. Â

Source Documents for Dunkirk:

1: � West Point US Military Academy Text Book series for WW2 history classes located at Amazon for public sale: �

https://www.amazon.com/Second-World-War-Mediterrean-Military/dp/0757001610/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1481308984&sr=1-3&keywords=the+west+point+history+of+world+war+ii

2: � Dr. Robert Citino’s…current US leading professor for studies on German Operations. Professor at NW Texas Univ. and frequent guest speaker at the Army War College at Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/death-of-the-wehrmacht-robert-m-citino/1117654815?ean=9780700617913

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-german-way-of-war-robert-m-citino/1112140764?ean=9780700616244

I’m kind of on the fence with this but I think its probably a dead issue. Maybe only in naval engagements should there be a retreat type mechanism. Same concept as my original idea. This would probably have a decent chance of making the naval battles a bit more fun. Land battles probably shouldn’t have a retreat option. Fight to the last man and last bullet.

Drop a retreat by sea then…this is all forum talk anyways and probably won’t get played at all.

Keep it simple. House rules ideas often don’t make it into a “next edition” or your next friendly table top game because they’re too complicated…if the attacker rolls a 6 then an option can occur, but only the defender can do this…That idea does make sense to me…but I raise you simplicity.

If retreat is a permitted HR then think:

1. 2 complete rounds of combat must occur first. 2 complete rounds usually settles most combat anyways.
2. Retreating unit must leave behind 1 unit to represent the “rear guard unit.” All other units (or defenders’ choice on how many if players want that) may retreat if on land.
3. Retreat by sea (if permitted) loading must occur in non enemy-occupied sea zone or non-occupied battle zone to a non enemy-occupied debarkation zone. Normal transport loading rules apply (1 infantry and 1 tank per transport, ect.).

Adding a rule for naval retreats AND PURSUITS…

Defending naval forces have the option to retreat at the beginning of any round of combat.
Procedure:  All defending ships except subs retreat together to any adjacent friendly or neutral sea zone.  Subs can retreat to any SZ. THEY do this by expending future movement points in their next turn.  The attacker gets a free parting shot before the retreat occurs.  The attacker, except subs, can also choose to pursue.  The pursuit allows additional rounds of combat from any units that have unused movement points.  Attacking units act as a group and occurs in the original sea zone until all desired movement points have been consumed.  REMEMBER, attacking aircraft will need movement points to return to a territory or carrier.  SO NOTE: FOR the pursuit no sea zones are traveled, it all occurs in the original sea zone.  ALSO, the retreating ships get 1 less movement point per retreat in their next turn.

There is a lot to watch and remember in this game.
Your last idea is too complex to be funny.
I try something here:
  After at least 2 combat rounds, defender may elect to retreat.
All Naval units remains in same SZ but must submit to one last attack phase rolls with no defense rolls.

For land retreat, all ground units must submit to a last attack roll without retaliate.
All units must retreat in a single TTy.

Another possibility for ground retreat is, after two full combat round, to loose 1 unit and move all units in an one adjacent TTy and to convert all units above 3 IPCs into Infantry units. Planes may retreat in a different adjacent TTy and remains as they are.

@baron-Münchhausen and others.

Old thread, but still interesting element.
What do you think about this (credits to all previous posts):

1. Defenders can retreat after 2 rounds (maybe 1) of combat and are subject to an attack roll. 1 unit must stay as “rear guard.”
2. Defender must retreat to same TT.
3. Retreating units cannot do combat next turn and can only non-combat with leftover movement points (so infantry cannot move).

Idea to balance:

4. If defender retreats, attacker can retreat as well. To conquer TT, rear guard must be destroyed. OOB Retreat rules apply.

I like the idea of defensive retreat, though it should not make you able to move units further than you could on your own turn.

Note: My reference is G40.

@MGregersen

Certainly worth a try.
One issue to solve is somewhat a kind of specific markers to know which unit can do a combat move and which cannot, because it might be possible that units retreat into an adjacent TT already containing units.

I like where defenders can retreat but must go through another round of attack with the retreating pieces not getting a defense shot. Survivors can move on next turn with any addition pieces in territory they retreated too. One reason why they retreat is based on we gettin slaughter here and we need reinforcements so back we go to or for help.

@SS-GEN unless they’re soviets in stalingrad. Then they just get slaughtered by their own guys lol

Sorry I’ll go away : )

@barnee said in Defenders being able to retreat?:

@SS-GEN unless they’re soviets in stalingrad. Then they just get slaughtered by their own guys lol

Sorry I’ll go away : )

Ha ha funny I got a event card for ussr. No retreat this turn.

Also I seen a NA for ussr based on your reply for every ussr inf you sacrifice 2 inf can attack +1 d6 +2 d12 I believe

@SS-GEN

heh heh. I watched “Enemy at the Gates” the other day.

@zombiemaster22 If you just Google advanced axis and allies rules. You can find a million sets of house rules that allow retreating. And from personal experience it doesn’t change strategy all that much, it just means that you get to call your friends horrible monsters for allowing their units to die when they easily could have lived.