Exactly, and thats why this topic is BIGOTED.

"It's getting really annoying, retreating when you are losing. " is logical, and its insane to fight to the death.

retreating when you are winning is closer to cowardice.

retreating when your team is losing is not fair to the other team because it denies them the opportunity to sink your ship and gain more attack, hence experience. If they have fought better and have come out on top, why cheat them out of their rewards? I feel that is unsportsman like.

I don't understand why is it insane to "fight to the death". What can you gain by retreating from battle when losing, besides repair cost? I guess if you really want to save every penny, it's your choice. But I stand by my statement that retreating denies experience to the other team and is unfair.

I also don't understand why you sound so angry in your posts. If you don't agree with my suggestion, just say so. There's no need to use such strong language.

in·san·i·ty

extreme foolishness or irrationality.

"Shooting yourself is insane"

---------------------------

Strong language? I havent cursed at all, so you have a pretty loose definition.

Youre going every which way except fair. Youre trying to make the game worse for some players and better for yourself.

Youre actually saying the winning team should get more rewards in a roundabout way? As far as this thread is going, you dont like that people can retreat from you, so you want them to be punished.

Do you know what Im not doing? Im not saying withdrawing should be easier or have less penalties because its is balanced and fair. There are plenty of penalties for withdrawing from battles as there is.

-----------------

Withdrawing is an option that should be unmolested. Use it or not, but dont harm others because of your personal bias.

Actually, I'm ok with leaving exp as is if you retreat. I use exp penalty as an example, but after thinking more about it, especially pertaining to subs, maybe exp penalty is not such good idea.

You say that retreating option should be left unmolested. If we keep the same exp, but making the ship count as sunk if you retreat, would you still object? This way, there is no punishment for retreating in terms of credit or exp earned, but there is also no reward for it, as you have to pay repair cost anyway. Would this be acceptable?

Of course, as people have pointed out, the easiest way is to make map unretreatable.

If you still don't like the scheme, we just have to agree to disagree.

I Object to unfair increased penalties, punishment, or altering maps to do so. The most common map, No Way Out already prevents quick-retreating from 75% of the map. Other maps often have inexplicable barriers of ice and rocks.

Withdrawing is a double-edged sword. You leave, maybe you save some money in repairs, ammunition, and planes. However you also get less experience and money from retreating early

----------------

How about thinking of a reason how to balance out withdrawing with fighting until the end? As it is currently its more profitable to fight, do alot of damage, maybe win.

Withdrawing is mainly about cutting down time, not saving money. Some battles in navyfield can be decided in only 3-5minutes. One side can lose its battleships, carriers, and submarines quickly.

Other times battles can drag on for 15minutes when a few persistant ships wont retreat.

Edit: i have an idea to counter yours. Penalize people who get sunk in the first 5minutes of the game. Or how about a penalty for carriers, battleships, and submarines sunk by destroyers and cruisers?