If a player attack a territory X but decide of repply for Y reason, the player be attacked have the option of counterattack whit the unit survived in the territory aimed. The counterattack is before the non combat move of the original aggressor. This unit dont attack at the players turn, that he take the territory or not.
The only territory the counterattack have the option to attack is the territory of the original attck go on. If a mutiple unit attack one territory, but go on different territory the counterattack have to choose one.
No one, have a comment on this house rules???
It is a bit too abstract.
Need at least an example or two to fully understand the principles and what flavor it can add to games.
Its not abstract… English is not my 1 langage…
Its not abstract… English is not my 1 langage…
That is why I ask for a few examples.
This will help us fully understand your thoughts on this matter.
Explanation, The German attack the Soviet at Rostov. the German start is attack by Ukraine. The german have 4 Infantry, 2 tanks and 1 fighter. The Soviet have 3 infantry, 1 artillery and 1 tank. The German score 2 hits, the soviet chose 2 infantry. But the Soviet score 4 hits. The german chose 4 infantry. The German retreat on the territory the attack start (Ukraine). The Soviet have to chose if i counterattack or not. In this case counterattack is a good move. The counterattack reverse role. In this special move the defender give the attack and the attacker on defence Stats. The soviet have a chance to capture the territory the attack is start in this case (Ukraine). The counterattack is resolve before the non-combat move of German player. If the counterattack is successful and Soviet capture the territory, in the next Soviet turn, is troops has no possibility of attack in this turn. This special move is just for ground battle not naval. If the attack start on multi territory the defender chose on who territory, the counterattack is launch. Is less abstract??
So long as the counter-attack can only occur from the territory attacked, and back into one of the attacking territories, I’m not opposed to this concept.
Would make some of the smaller battles in places like Africa interesting.
I suppose this would also mean… that if ALL attackers died trying to capture the territory, that the defender could then take the territory it was attacked from.
Really interesting!
Why couldn’t you just counterattack when your regular turn comes around? What’s the difference?
No is not just if the attacker all die. If the attack retreat exemple 2 unit in the territorry the attack is start (in the exemple Ukraine) The soviet take all of is unit to counter attack the german survived unit in Ukraine. Soviet Unit make a counterattack dont attack on this next turn. the diference is, the counterattack is place before de non-combat move of the attacker (german) in me explanation.
@MidnightExpress:
I’m understanding it like this. If you attack a territory but retreat from the battle then your opponent has the option of using their forces (from the territory they were defending) to launch a counterattack into the territory you originally attacked from. This would allow your opponent to launch their counterattack before you could reinforce the territory. This might or might not leave them exposed as well though they could still reinforce their defenses on their turn. It’s an interesting concept. Â
Exactly.
And the counter attack is limited to using units from the territory that was attacked.
The premise is that if your counter attack wins, not only did you expose your enemies failure - and make gains against them on their turn. you are also poised for further assaults on your own turn.
Of course… people could also combat move units up, instead of non-coming them, in anticipation of possible counters.
This makes naval engagements interesting as well.
Raid - Retreat - bait counter
MidnightExpress your right, is the idea.
I’m in favour of this for naval battles, not on land.
In the 1914 game I allow fleets to attack, retreat or “pursue” retreating ships as many times as they like, until both sides decide to pass on a turn; allowing for ships to chase each other into the safety of a “home” port, or even zig-zag all over the map.
I don’t see the same thing being realistic for ground forces, where the logistical problems meant that major attacks needed months of planning and preparation.
Yea but one turn is not 1 day… and one battle is not one battle in a territory, but many battle. For me is the opposite, with the big distance on the ocean and the search for the ennemy navy, I dont allows the conterattack on naval battle, For ground many of exemple in history (ww2). But in naval, i dont have any exemple i use the counterattack…
Its partly a response to the minefields in 1914; to tempt fleets into attacking navy sheltering behind mines, allow them to hit-and-run (back to their own home port). But allow the navy attacked to “pursue” the attacker in turn, and so on. With relatively few naval units, battles don’t go on for too long; and its better than evey ship just sitting safely at home.
Hmm… I like this idea. You could capture an opposing territory on their turn, before they can reinforce! And it sets you up with a friendly territory to strike from on your next turn! This gives defending players a possible major bonus for repelling enemy attacks.
Flashman’s idea of naval battles zig-zagging across the map is also nice, since you could theoretically have a Japanese fleet chase a retreating American fleet all the way to San Francisco. Naval Battles that went bad for the attacker would then become a race to get to another friendly fleet before they are completely destroyed.
