Unit retreats with 0 fuel

[timek28]

Is this valid behavior? I just noticed this. I think it is a bug...

[huertgenwald]

i guess, retreat is not considered as an ordinary move ...

[Razz1]

Yes, this is the way the game mechanics work.

[Egge]

But can the game mechanics be changed? This actually bothers me quite a bit.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

It normally costs fuel to retreat - probably a bug.

- BNC

[timek28]

But can the game mechanics be changed? This actually bothers me quite a bit.

Exactly. Some things seem to be unchangeable here, which is IMO kind of disregarding the community voice. These situations are rare, but still completely illogical. Having no ammo or fuel was the number one main reason for surrenders of German heavy tanks late in the war. And here it seems they can retreat without fuel with no problem.

Similar strange behavior IMO is rugged defense when unit has no ammo. Logically it could be explained as a fistfight only against weapons, but I don't know how to explain it. It blows my mind actually

Both are bugs if you ask me.

[carlisimo]

I'd prefer if units out of fuel simply didn't retreat, but I don't see the problem with an ammo-less rugged defense. It just means better digging in or hiding.

[Tarrak]

Exactly. Some things seem to be unchangeable here, which is IMO kind of disregarding the community voice.

Hmm as a side note: A few people no matter how vocal are not "the voice of the community". This said i don't mean this behaviour shouldn't be changed just trying to point out a little logic flaw.

[Horst]

Maybe Rudi is going to fix that too one day like once the retreat onto non-frozen sea tiles. I'm glad this was fixed which was even more absurd.

[timek28]

Hmm as a side note: A few people no matter how vocal are not "the voice of the community". This said i don't mean this behaviour shouldn't be changed just trying to point out a little logic flaw.

Tarrak, I understand what you say, but that is just a little nitpicking I wasn't saying I'm the voice of community, rather that Razz1 (who I understand is a developer of the game), should have maybe replied with something else then "yes that is mechanic of the game". That way he acknowledged that nothing will be changed per se. Also he didn't agree or disagree that that is a false behavior.

On the statement itself - yes I exaggerated a little with that statement, but I think I have my right to point out a flaw. I play the game very intensely, several hours a day, almost everyday and I absolutely love it. I bought PC, AC and DLCs. I played over 400 scenarios for almost 3 years now and I think my voice is at least a little significant, although I am by no means significant as some other people on this forum

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Something else odd - how do WW1 Gas Shells (and their V2 equivalent in WW2) get slowed by snow, moving like tanks (x2 fuel cost)? I don't really get how this works. A rocket goes the same speed with gravity and without - snow is weaker than gravity. Plus, a shell coming out of an artillery would be moving very fast.

Fixes on this would be nice - my WWI mod would make tons more sense!

- BNC

[ThvN]

That's odd, because V2's and other air units do not seem to get slowed down by bad weather? Are you sure your gas shell uses the 'air' movement type? Maybe you are using a modded movement file?