Fight to the bitter end...

[Kraxis]

Last night I got surprised... I got really surprised.

I had just fought a very good 3v3 battle with CBR against Louis. It all boiled down to a fight where CBR had a few depleted units left (3 or 4), I had 7-8 rather tired depleted units and Louis had 6 units (after I ambushed his arbs, or did I?).

Well he did all he could, and did very well for what he had left. He even managed to get one of my strongest units to flee and charged into my rear with some Gendarmes. Now my men were tired and depleted and it was a 5k game. In such times troops certainly don't like cav in the rear and I feared a complete rout, but instead it was his forces that broke.

After what I thought to have been a great way to go down, he told me he thought about withdrawing and giving us the victory (I will not state his reasons as I believe he is much better at that than me ). I was shocked to know he was serious.
I would have been, perhaps not insulted, but at least very disapointed had he done it.

My oppinion is that you honour your enemy if you fight back, from even an impossible position. You show you are willing to fight him at any terms. That you have come to the game to play it to the fullest and to have fun.
I fail to find the fun in withdrawing, but I can find great fun in a wellplayed last stand. My own or the enemy's, it doesn't matter, it is equally admirable and fun.

That said, I won't hide units (that is highly insulting) and I will always try to move my units together to form an army to give the most of what I have. If I only have one unit of 2 men that are wavering from across the map, well then there is little point in fighting on. But in general I fight to the last man.

Naturally I hope Louis will drop his oppinion here. Our discussion was too good for you not to Louis.

[Alrowan]

to be perfectly honest, i hate hitting that rout button, or the withdraw button, even if i have 1 unit left i fight to the end. I was really dissapointed one game though, in a 5k 2v2 Chiz and I played Yuuki and CBR, CBR faced chiz, and lost, with mine and yuukis cav getting involved somewhat. Then all the sudden i saw Yuuki withdrawing his armies, need less to say, i hadnt faed any combat, and felt let down. I always enjoy a fight, and to have an army withdraw on me leaves me feeling cheated

[Kongamato]

In one game, I fought against Ichi and Hasty in a 2v2. My ally brought around 8 Italian Infantry and deployed them in a half-circle. He was double-teamed and lost easily before I even joined the battle. I now faced one full-strength army and one that had taken few losses. I thought about withdrawing, but instead I lined myself up and prepared to fight a 2 on 1. They attacked me, and I was able to use some flanking and chasing to rout a great deal of their forces. At the bitter end, I wound up facing about 70 enemy cavalry with around 40 infantry. I lost, but I have no regrets about fighting on after the odds fell out of my favor.

Would you like the replay?

[Puzz3D]

Alrowan,

I withdrew because the battle was lost. It's similar to resigning in a chess game, although, routing would be closer to resigning. As I recall, you did kill my rear guard.

[Alrowan]

lol, well yuuki, i still would have liked to have fought you

[Puzz3D]

Alrowan,

You wanted to continue the game for what purpose? To me it's pointless to continue a lost game.

[Kas]

I always fight till the last man dies (or figures out it's wiser not to listen to his cruel incompetent boss anymore and runs for his life )

I will rout if the other players ask me to though...

Kas

[Mithrandir]

I think it's very lame to withdraw unless it's after a long battle and you have just 1 or 2 wavering&depleted units left.

I seriously hate it when people do it just cause they cant win.
No offense but I think of it as immature. If you can still make a stand do so to please your enemy. even if I'm left 1 vs 3 I'll still do the best I can because I know how frustrating it is to see the enemy withdrawing . There's not that good feeling of victory when the enemy has withdrawn.

[LittleGrizzly]

i always fight to the last man and get suprisingly good results sometimes even this one 3v1 i had

[The Wizard]

I always fight to the last man... or to the last man before he decides to follow his friends into dishounorable routing.

Once, my entire Turkish army routed after a destructive battle, save for my JHI's... of which two of the four were cut in half. Vik swung his chasing cav around, but they ran themselves into death on the sharp tips of my JHI's polearms... the inf that came from the side threatened to be my doom but as Vik's knights routed they gave up their hope for victory.

[Kongamato]

I'll usually fight to the end, but there are some times where it is unnecessary. If you've got the last two units left and your allies are routing, the enemy is going to run up the score by killing all of your team's routers so they can raise their kill counts. This makes an embarassment out of your whole team. You do not gain any honor this way.

[Alrowan]

well yuuki, to be honest, i just wanted blood, i wanted sacrifice, and i wanted to beat you hence why i gave chase, i like to see sacrifice on the feild, i like to see someone give me all theyve got. Afterall, thats what this game is about

[Dionysus9]

Well its too bad that so many here are "against" strategic withdrawals, because I think they are tactically important and honorable.

First of all, any bonehead can charge and get lucky-- but it takes a real general to execute a fighting withdrawal.

Second, I hear a lot of people complaining that they dont get enough blood when the enemy withdraws. If its blood you want, then go get it-- dont let your enemy have enough room to withdraw. The only reason he was able to slip away is because you let him.

Third,I think it is insulting NOT to rout or withdraw if the game is clearly over-- it is insulting to both the enemy general AND your own men. Let me tell you why.

Anyone who plays with me regularly has heard me say "I resign" before I hit the rout button. Yuuki is correct, it is like a chess game. When the battle is lost, I resign. It is a show of respect for the opposing general. When I resign I am saying "I recognize your skill and your victory. Given my position and material it is pointless for me to resist against such a skilled general." Thus failing to resign is a show of disrespect-- it is as if you believe the enemy general is so stupid you can actually beat him with your 2 depleted peasant units. Its a slap in the face.

It is also insulting to my own army. I love every man in my army as if he was my own son. I do not send them to die lightly. If victory is impossible, I will save my men to fight another day. If I must sacrifice a unit or two to cover my withdrawal, it was out of necessity. Sending good men to die a futile death with no hope of victory is bad generalship imho.

Fourth, if all hope of victory is lost then LETS MOVE ON TO THE NEXT GAME. Yes, I might be able to kill 3 or 4 more of your men-- or maybe your general if I was lucky-- but the game is over. Please rout.

Pointless last stands annoy me, especially when they drag on... and on... and on....

[TosaInu]

Konnichiwa,

MP games are just skirmishes, not a war. Saving armies to fight later is not an issue.

I want my sprites to fight till the last pixel.

[tootee]

there is no right or wrong, honourable or dishonourable about withdrawing/resigning from battle.

i disagree with Kraxis that by withdrawing, its disrespecting the opponent, and with Bach that by not withdrawing given the lousy situation, its disrespecting the opponent.

i empathise with those who feel angry or disappointed if the opponent withdraw the whole army without a fight.. because its a just natural feeling.. after waiting 1/2hr in the lobby for a game, 5min setting up and blah blah, you dont even have a chance to draw serious blood especially when things look good for you. on the other hand i also can understand that given 1v2 situation, resigning and giving victory to the opponent when you dont feel confident or find much meaning in carrynig on.

if in MP campagin, it make strategic sense by keeping the full army intact to fight on a better day. players like Bach, and me, sort of tie in some role playing in the sense that we 'care' for our men.. i.e. we dont sacrifice a unit meaninglessly.. its fun and feel good.

personally its seldom for me to be in such situation whereby my ally was completely routed while i'm still 100%. i dont remember me withdrawing under such situations, but i cannot guarantee i will not in the future.. so i hope my friends will not get offended.

[Balamir]

I usually fight to see what i can do, but sometimes there simply is no point to fight that one on and waste the time. I do this only when i am outpowered about 4 times my strenght considering my fatigue unit number unit size and morale.

[Rob The Bastard]

I seem to recall something in Sun Tzu's Art of war about leaving an avenue of escape for the enemy army... if escape is impossible then your enemy will fight with more determination... creating more casulties on your own side... something to be avoided.

Just as the victor wants a more complete victory, the losing general has the right to salvage something out of his loss by withdrawing his army. All of us have tasted defeat... it is not pleasant. Why not lessen that by allowing a small part of a defeated army to escape??

[Orda Khan]

Quote[/b] (Rob The Bastard @ Nov. 02 2003,17:00)]I seem to recall something in Sun Tzu's Art of war about leaving an avenue of escape for the enemy army... if escape is impossible then your enemy will fight with more determination... creating more casulties on your own side... something to be avoided.

Just as the victor wants a more complete victory, the losing general has the right to salvage something out of his loss by withdrawing his army. All of us have tasted defeat... it is not pleasant. Why not lessen that by allowing a small part of a defeated army to escape??

Very well put Mr Bastard

Last stands are all very well, the odd depleted unit hidden in trees is just a pain

If I have a few units left I generally toss them to the lions but I have no objection to the General who makes an honourable withdrawal

.......Orda

[Mithrandir]

Aye, depleted and exhausted units which would rout after 1 sec anyway. No objections to those routing, and annoying if people hide them. But I hate to see entire armies rout just cause they cant win.

if I've got at least 3 viable units left I'll make a stand. If my allies are still alive I'll always toss everything I have at the enemy to slow him down ,distract him or weaken him...

[Lord Rom]

I will rout or withdraw only when asked and I am clearly defeated. If I can be any threat at all, or more importantly any help to an ally I will fight to the death. I feel it is dishonorable to desert an ally.

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

I am surprised by a few statements.... 'Immature'? 'wanting blood'?

I strongly recommand to the peoples who made those statements to avoid any serious game (chess, go...) at a decent level . You'll be in for a lot of frustration, and a lot of relational problems.

Many 'old' strategy games include mechanism for draw and surrender.

There is no draw mechanism in MTW (well, not that I know of), but there is an equivalent to surrender; "withdrawal" (or "routing").

Why was withdrawing included? Why is that always been an option in venerable strategy game? Why 80% of chess games and with surrender and not actual chessmate (if we put aside draw)?
You might also wonder why, in chess, you never actually take the king....
A comment one sees pretty often in chess book, or commented games is; 'At this point, the player shall have stopped the game and surrender'.

There is a point in the game when you know you have lost, and your opponent knows he has won (one can argue about what is needed to know that). Then the game is over. What's the point if you keep playing after that?

Why do most people surrender in chess?
Out of respect for their opponent, actually telling them "given your skill, I have no doubt you will win over me in this position".
There are also some good reason to stop playing which are less 'honorable'
Because time is precious (if you play in a chess cafe or on the net, or in club... well pretty much everywhere ... you bet someone else wants to play... so leave the place for the next player.).
Because playing is an effort, it's tiring (all the more so when you lose), and to keep playing may actually be detrimental for your next game.

Some of the (if not all) of those reason do apply to MTW.

Yes, time is precious. In the game I played vs Tarrak (and some remnant beyond the grave of CBR army), I had no chance whatsoever to win. Both armies were exhausted. So, both side kind of seat on their butt and wait for their units to recover to quite/ very tired. Easily 5 minutes lost (yes, Mithrandir, it took only 10 sec for Tarrak to rout them all on contact... but more than 5 minutes to get to that).
At this point, I remembered that CBR was the host... Had it been any of the 3 already routed players, I would have found it EXTREMLY RUDE to keep the host locked in game in a pointless situation, just because I would have liked 'to make a last stand'.
We all live in different timezones; you might be playing with someone who is playing at 4am when it's only 10 pm for you. How nice do you think it is to keep them up, just because you want to spill some last blood?

When a game is clearly over, well, then it's over. Get over it, and move to the next game.

Now, also as Bachus stated, withdrawing in good order can be fun manoeveuring.
I'll start to withdraw, and state that the game is lost. If someone is in a hurry, or if it'll take too long to withdraw, and nobody is interested in the chase, then I'll rout myself so that we can start playing the next game faster.

Now, regarding the condition when you feel a game is lost; it's pretty much up to anybody... 1 very tired unit... outnumbered 4 to 1... I've seen a whole army routing itself due to a 4v1 coming. It's the loser choice to tell when he ackowledge his defeat.
All the winner got to do is accept victory gracefully.

Louis,

[Brutal DLX]

I have to disagree in parts here, Louis. I don't think it's rude or disrespectful if one player chooses to fight on. It always depends on the overall situation. Also the argument about different timezones doesn't hold much value, whoever started a game at 10 pm should know it could drag on... Same goes for peeps still online at 4am, their choice...
I don't think you can liken MTW to chess, for various reasons (most of all the random nature of encounters, you cannot really make a move and take the enemy's piece like in chess, because just against the odds, the enemy unit might win. As such, you cannot plan several moves ahead with certainty as you would do in a chess game), MTW battles aren't turn based and not necessarily the best strategist wins, but also a cheap rusher or a person who just can click faster than you.
But anyway, about routing, it's up to oneself, really, but if the majority of the other players (even your allies)involved in the game start telling you to give it up, it's worth to reconsider. I don't want to see whole armies rout, but as said before, if you have just two or three depleted units left, you can safely rout them and don't fear to lose honour by denying your opponents the pleasure of routing them by themselves.

For those who rout whole armies, at least make it a challenge by choosing to withdraw instead and trying to cover it with part of your forces. This would be a challenge for both sides. If you manage to escape with a large percentage of your forces, you might feel a sense of accomplishment.

[Dionysus9]

Tootee is right, there is no honor or dishonor in playing to the last or withdrawing early-- and I truly dont feel offended if someone wants to make a last stand... but it is perhaps a bit discourteous if you have 0% chance of victory.

In any case, there are two sides to the coin and no reason for anyone to freak out about it.

Edit: If there is any hope for victory, no matter how small, I will continue to fight. But once victory is impossible it is time to rout or at least withdraw.

When I withdraw I try to execute a "fighting withdrawal", where I end up killing more than I lose. I've achieved this maybe once or twice, but it is a great goal. Instead of throwing my men to their deaths, I try to get them home safe with a few kills too. Not easy when outnumbered, but far more challenging than making an unwinnable last stand.

[Alrowan]

o know what you are talking about louis, and i agree to some extent, yet in the example i presented of yuuki and i, we both had all but our cavalry intanct, and were both fresh troops. After seeing CBR beaten, he too withdrew from the feild. I would have happily asked my ally to step aside and wait out the result before getting involved, but yuuki ended up leaving the field. Yes it was a victory, and yes it was hollow, i came to play, and what i got was a few skirmishes of my 4 units of cav, and watching my ally beat his enemy, to me it was almost a waste of time.

[Orda Khan]

Alrowan, it appears this has upset you quite a bit so I would suggest you take it up with the people involved. There are things that happen to upset or annoy but it does no good trying to rubbish players on the forum in this way.
I could mention a certain 4v4 Viking game where a certain person joined and began issuing orders to his allies. Well knowing the attackers and the map I knew my spot was insecure and prepared for manoeuvre but this certain person kept on and on about how good he was and how he knew the 'best' defence for the map. Against my better judgement I deployed where he ordered....asked me to.

Battle started, I was immediately 2 teamed and then 3....game over, I think I may have lasted possibly 2 minutes. Help received from certain person......NONE.
I then sat through the entire game waiting for the innevitable defeat.
I suppose you think that is ok? If you don't like the way people play, don't play with them and remember....NOBODY is perfect

......Orda

[Puzz3D]

Alrowan,

To play on in that game would have been a waste of time. You had the high ground, CBR was routed, I had lost 3 of my 4 most expensive units (one of them trying unsuccessfully to kill your gen) and Chi was coming to flank me. It was a strategic loss at that point, and my best move was to withdraw.

[shingenmitch2]

I like to fight it out to the near last.

Only exception is if I have like 2-3 depleated units left and one is my general. I will always try to withdraw him as I don't want to give the victor the evil satisfaction of having my Gen's head.

Other than that I'll slog away.

[Puzz3D]

Mitch,

"Retreat? Hell, we're just attacking in a different direction..."

[Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe]

Probably the most interesting answer so far

Quote[/b] ]I have to disagree in parts here, Louis. I don't think it's rude or disrespectful if one player chooses to fight on. It always depends on the overall situation.

In my opinion, and I'm, sorry if I was not clear, it's only rude if the HOST is already routed and had no unit left. Everybody else can quit whenever they want. But the host can't. It's a loss of the host valuable time to keep playing a lost battle.

Quote[/b] ] Also the argument about different timezones doesn't hold much value, whoever started a game at 10 pm should know it could drag on... Same goes for peeps still online at 4am, their choice...

Sometimes, I catch some of my euroclanmates online (not to mention Annie needing a 'quickie' )... Usually it's early morning for them, and they might go for 'one last game', just because we might not have played together for some times.
And this last game for them might be long and enjoyable, and all for the better. But it might also drag on for nothing... Sometimes, there is better thing to do than chasing a couple of units on the other side of the map... that's wehn I would appreciate a decent withdrawal rather than a 'i'll stand until I die'.

Quote[/b] ]I don't think you can liken MTW to chess, for various reasons (most of all the random nature of encounters, you cannot really make a move and take the enemy's piece like in chess, because just against the odds, the enemy unit might win. As such, you cannot plan several moves ahead with certainty as you would do in a chess game), MTW battles aren't turn based and not necessarily the best strategist wins, but also a cheap rusher or a person who just can click faster than you.

Thats a very good argument. MTW is not as clear cut as chess. In both games there are 16 units; it is fairly common to stop in chess if there is, for example, a bishop material difference without compensation (positionnal or otherwise).
The randomness and more dynamic nature of MTW increase the threshold a lot... Noone (well, not me) is going to give up just because there is a unit difference between the two armies (or two teams). I personnally need much more than a unit difference to consider that I don't have a chance... But seriously, when you have 6 units of half depleted guys all very tired against twice that number of units, of better quality and some at full strenght, chance that you are going to win are pretty damn close to 0. You know it, your opponent knows it. It's time to recognize who the winner is.

Quote[/b] ]But anyway, about routing, it's up to oneself, really, but if the majority of the other players (even your allies)involved in the game start telling you to give it up, it's worth to reconsider. I don't want to see whole armies rout, but as said before, if you have just two or three depleted units left, you can safely rout them and don't fear to lose honour by denying your opponents the pleasure of routing them by themselves.

Denying my opponent the pleasure of routing them by themselves.... Interesting choice of word Hilde...
I must be a very specific kind of pervert... I'm the kind of guy who stop chasing when I read the 'rout out of field' message (then I regroup and move to the next target). I find pleasure in winning the game, but I can't care less about overkilling my opponent. Kills are the last of my concern. Sometimes winning manoeuvers are not rewarded by high kills, and high kills are just the result of router chasing.
I am also a very specific kind of pervert for another reason;

There is an important notion in 'withdrawing'; that's the notion of acknowldegement. You may have pleasure in killing a few half depleted guys... I have a lot of pleasure when someone acknowldege that I/we (as a team) are better and see no way to win. The withdrawer guy recognize your value in a way that no 'stander till I die' can.
The 'stander till I die' does not acknowledge he has been defeated by you...

Quote[/b] ]For those who rout whole armies, at least make it a challenge by choosing to withdraw instead and trying to cover it with part of your forces. This would be a challenge for both sides. If you manage to escape with a large percentage of your forces, you might feel a sense of accomplishment.

I don't think I'll ever withdraw a whole fresh army (even severly outnumbered... a fresh army can do wonder vs tired opponent... Those kind of game has been won before...). In any case, yes, if nobody is in a hurry, it's more fun to withdraw than to rout.
If you want to start a rematch soon; then just rout yourself, and move on to the next game.

Louis,

[Cheetah]

Fight to the bitter end After all, the fun part of MP is the fight itself. I fight not in order to win but in order to fight (of course, this does not mean that I dont care about winning ). I really dont care whether I lost the game "theoretically" or not. If I can fight I will fight. It is about having fun. Just give your best. Besides, the real challenge is to turn the tables and win from a desperate situation. Such a victory is much more satisfying and more memorable than any of your standard 1v1 victories.

Well, having said this I am really not offended if someone withdraws just a bit dissapointed. For me it is like when a football team does not comes out to play the second half just beacuse the opposing team got a 5-0 lead in the first half