In the first screenshot, Clinton has laid siege to Charleston. Moultrie is order to sortie if support arrives. Lee is that support and will arrive this turn.
In the second screenshot, we see that Lee arrived and that both Lee and Moultrie decided retreat yielding ground to Clinton.
Now, what I find odd about this is should Moultrie sortie at all if his determination is that he cannot confront the enemy?
There are a number of interpretations of Moultrie's orders to consider here:
Possibility #1: Attempt to confront Clinton if the chance arrises, and if this is not feasible, then preserve your force.
Possibility #2: Hold the region until such time that the enemy forces the issues or a relief force permits the possibility of counter-attack.
So, did Moultrie do the right thing? Should he have remained in the besieged fort? Did Moultrie do the historical thing? Does the game need more finesse for specifying orders in this situation?
Here is one other question somewhat related: Why do retreating units in a region which you control withdraw to a neighboring region, shouldn't there also be a possibility that they decide to take refuge in the region's fort or structure? Why does the player need to decide this (retreat or resist a siege) before the player's commander onsite has a chance to see the opposing force?
