geek
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
10 Posts
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe  | Bookmark
Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Geert VG
flag
Avatar
Wizard Kings » Forums » General
retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
We usually play WK with 4 players, two teams of two players each. At first, team 1 took place on one side of the table, team 2 on the other side, which usually resulted in a mindless move straight forward. After a while we decided to change places: every player has one opponent on his left or right side and one in front of him. This results in a lot more action, and a more careful strategy is needed.
However, we can't seem to figger out how we should retreat our units. For example: retreating back and left after a battle with the player in front of you can result in getting closer to the opponent on your left. And what to do when retreating after a battle with the player on your left? Moving away from him (to your right), obviously, but can one be allowed to move his units to the right and fórward? Or do the units have to retreat to the right and towards you? Sometimes even more complicated situations could occur when your units are way out in enemy territory, but I'm not gone bother you with it...
I hope you still understand what I'm trying to say ???
Any suggestions?
Chris Farrell
flag
Avatar
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
garion (#29930),

You're reading too much into the retreat rules, I think. There is no vague "locally to the rear" requirement for retreats, nor does hexiside "control" matter. You have great flexibility in how to retreat, limited only by enemy units or originally-friendly enemy cities.

The lack of restrictions on retreats can seem awkward or not right to new players, but it actually works quite well in the end. I tried a couple house rules early to limit retreats, but it ends up making little difference and the rules as they are are very easy to play.
Geert VG
flag
Avatar
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
cfarrell (#29947),

So even retreating forward and therefore into enemy territory would be possible? That way retreating would or could be a whole strategy of its own... It actually means an extra move.
This seems awkward indeed, and I'm not exactly a new player :-)
I don't know weather I can agree, although the rules indeed don't say much on this subject. Perhaps we could give it a try next time...
Chris Farrell
flag
Avatar
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
garion (#29954),

Well, there is no concept of "enemy territory" other than "hexes with actual enemy units in them".

Retreats are still affected by hexside limits, though, which is a big deal. Generally, between the typically constrained terrain and the need to keep forces together (both because you need flunkies to screen your valuable units, and because individual units can be easily "soaked off" with cheap pinning attacks by the first player), it's just not that big a deal.

And don't forget too that the winner can "regroup", which is both a reinforcement and virtually an exploit - and not bound by hex limits. You'll generally be much better off by winning battles and regrouping forward than by retreating from losing battles in an infiltration-type maneuver.

All these things help to make the game much more fluid than you might expect, which to me is a very good thing. The game has improved in my estimation greatly since I started playing the retreats/regroups properly, although they do take a bit to get your head around.
Geert VG
flag
Avatar
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
cfarrell (#29963),
Ok, I'll trust you on this one :-)
Christophe S
flag
04
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
Dear garion (#30002), as your faithfull co-player, I do know this game is really absorbing you to an unhealthy level, so it's time to bring you back to earth with your both feet :-) The rule to only allow direction of retreat to your "home countries" is a house rule to which you and the others of our group agreed, based on the fact that retreats were being abused to advance in enemy territory.

The problem we are confronted with is a non issue for other gamers.
Personally I do not see a solution for our problem. Maybe we should just drop this houserule when playing with the diagonal setup, and stick to it when playing heads-on. Alternatively, we could agree on allowing retreats into any direction from the hexes in the center of our 4 gamemaps.

Nitzrebb
Chris Farrell
flag
Avatar
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
Nitzrebb (#30054),

I gotta say, that I encourage you to play the game the way it was designed, i.e., without retreat/regroup restrictions. It really is a better game, more fluid and interesting. Retreating units "forward" is not abuse but just the way the game is played. Just check the rules carefully (for example, you can't retreat "forward" to take over an enemy city since originally-occupied cities are always friendly to the originally-owning player).

The game was designed to be fluid, not just big stacks wandering around.

Now, I should also add that I don't know how you are playing exactly. If you're doing a 4-way straight-up bash-fest, I'm not sure exactly how that plays out, so who knows. But in the two-player games I've played, using all the retreat/regroup rules properly makes for a much better game than making stuff up :)
Udu Tont
flag
Avatar
0708
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
cfarrell (#30058),

Do you think fliers should be able to 'retreat' their FULL move towards enemy rear? Given that many fliers are A units and defender can retreat before attacker can attack, the fliers seem to be too invulnerbale. For instnce, no one can ever catch an enemy wizard.
Geert VG
flag
Avatar
Re:retreat in a 'diagonal' 4 player game
Cruelsader (#31055),

After my discussion with Chris Farrell, we've played a few games without house rules concerning retreats. We feel retreating your flyers to the enemy's rear isn't a good thing... It feels like creating an extra, almost illegal move.
In reality, when a unit is panicing, he will normally retreat towards his own fellow soldiers (I have no military background, but that's what the coward inside me tells me). Only when there's no possibility for a ground unit to do this due to ongoing battles behind him, the unit could consider fleeing deeper into enemy territory. A panicing flyer does not have this problem, he can ignore battles and retreat behind his own frontline. So, in reality, he would never flee towards the enemy.
Adjusting the basic rules this way is easily done. Maybe our game isn't as fluid as could be, but the line between a fluid game and a (too) chaotic game is too thin to us...
Richard Smith
flag
garion wrote:
Cruelsader (#31055),
After my discussion with Chris Farrell, we've played a few games without house rules concerning retreats. We feel retreating your flyers to the enemy's rear isn't a good thing... It feels like creating an extra, almost illegal move.


Hi Garion, evenyone.
I suggest that you play with the retreat rules out of the box. (i.e. allow forward retreats.) Having said that, one house rule we do use is that all units can retreat / regroup only one hex. This makes it a bit easier to stomp flat those darn fliers that end up in your rear areas.

Warm regards, Rick.
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.