Why Surrender?

[AEWHistory]

Well, that's it.... why use the surrender function? I had a British army surrender to me after it starved south of Ticonderoga (about 15 regiments were holed up in the fort just south of Ticonderoga over winter with only the supply available in that town and I was able to siege them come spring). This got me thinking what advantage--in game terms--is there in using this strategy? Does it deprive me of capturing units or getting more victory points? Prevent me from accruing easy experience and victories? I feel like I saw something in the manual, but I can't find it now.

[Ebbingford]

You should get victory points for any surrendering troops.

[AEWHistory]

Yea, I think I remember that. I guess what I really was wondering was why the human player would surrender? Since the PC would get VPs whether you surrendered or if you lost the force, why not just fight it out and make eir life miserable for another turn or two? Do they get more victory points for a military victory?

Thanx

......

I just realized that I might be misunderstanding you here. Are you saying that you get VPs if you surrender your own troops? I assume not as that would be silliness, but if you did I suppose that would give incentive to using the surrender function.

[AEWHistory]

I just realized that I might be misunderstanding you here. Are you saying that you get VPs if you surrender your own troops? I assume not as that would be silliness, but if you did I suppose that would give incentive to using the surrender function.

[lordhoff]

Yea, I think I remember that. I guess what I really was wondering was why the human player would surrender? Since the PC would get VPs whether you surrendered or if you lost the force, why not just fight it out and make eir life miserable for another turn or two? Do they get more victory points for a military victory?

Thanx

......

I just realized that I might be misunderstanding you here. Are you saying that you get VPs if you surrender your own troops? I assume not as that would be silliness, but if you did I suppose that would give incentive to using the surrender function.

Some past games I played allowed reuse of surrendered troops after a while. Otherwise, there really doesn't appear to be any reason unless it deletes the number of VPs the opponent gets in return for a quicker victory and no further losses.

[Narwhal]

I sometimes surrendered supply wagons or bateaux, and maybe a gun or two, to avoid capture, though.

As for soldiers, no, I don't see the point.

[Durk]

Surrender is never a good option. If you are artillery alone, then destroy your unit. Otherwise, hanging on maximizes points.