Stacked Combat: Attacker/Defender Retreat

[Alexander's Horse]

One feature of stacked combat in most board wargames is that players usually don't lose their whole stack when defeated in battle. They also choose which units take any losses from each round of combat. Also, the player forced to retreat chooses where the units retreat to.

The exceptions to these rules are where the stack is completely destroyed by the first round of combat, or the loser's retreat is blocked by zones of control, therefore the stack is encircled and must surrender.

I hope civ 3 stacked combat is like this. Its much more realistic - stops every battle becoming a zero sum game.


------------------
Founder of the People's Republic of Topics (PROT)
Convenor, Threadjacking Appreciation Society (TAS)
Proprietor, Apolyton Tea Shop http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum19/H...tml?date=00:06
[This message has been edited by Alexander's Horse (edited September 19, 2000).]

[UltraSonix]

Scream at me if I'm wrong, but I thought in SMAC, when a unit in a stack looses a battle, not all the units die anyway (or maybe that was just the non-combat units in the stack).

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...

[Urban Ranger]

Dunno about that, Horse. Most boardgames don't have the kind of scales that Civ has. Sure, we can fix the combat system so a battle between opposing stacks of units is resolved in Tactical Rounds. An interesting example can be found in AH's (not you, Avolon Hill )Titan. Then you can have retreats and exchanges and all sorts of results.
[This message has been edited by Urban Ranger (edited September 19, 2000).]