Is only the defender able to perform a tactical retreat? Or also the attacker? I'm thinking only the defender since there is a distinction between retreat (defender) and withdraw (attacker). Not sure though.

The difference in retreat options is fairly annoying. I wish there was 1 unified rule for retreating. I wonder if allowing tactical retreats for the attacker would cause problems? That'd make the rules simpler, which is good.

I think it would, because it's much easier to abuse it as the attacker. For one thing, you could activate a system, move ships in to battle, immediately announce a "tactical withdrawal", and then withdraw an extra space. The defender would have very little way to defend against this if caught off guard.

With the rules as written, the attacker COULD do this, but only if he spent an activation first activating his desired "withdrawal" system, which would give the Defender enough time to prevent it.

Again, the main reason for this rule, I believe, is because the attacker has all the advantage of knowing where attacks will be. Especially if the attacker goes first in the initiative sequence, he could launch an attack which the defender would have absolutely no possible way to retreat, having not even had a chance to prepare for one, all because he happened to go second in the turn order. Tactical Retreat was meant to eliminate this by giving the defender the opportunity to retreat in situations like this. The attacker doesn't need it, as he already knows where his attacks will be, and can plan accordingly.


But really, the rules for retreating and withdrawing are identical. The only place it really matters is with Tactical Retreat, and even the rule does specifically mention "defender".

It happens a lot if the attacker has a lower initiative number in the round, and attacks before the defender even gets a chance to do anything.

It may not be a "surprise", but it certainly disadvantages the defender unfairly.

Yeah, for the attacker it's a little more rare, but if there is empty space behind the place they want to go, they could use it to get an extra space on movement. I've seen it attempted once, before we pointed out it was an illegal move. (I don't know if he was deliberately trying to do it, or just realized he had made a bad attack; it's been awhile).

Couldn't an attacker with the Fleet Logistics tech pull off a "leapfrog" retreat of this type, using standard withdrawal rules? Just activate the true destination system as the first Tactical Action, then invade/withdraw with the second. No time for a defender to defend, in that case. It's an expensive tech to get to, but if you're playing as L1Z1X and have Inheritance Systems in play ...

I could see situations where a Skilled Retreat card or (for defender only, and with more risk) a standard tactical retreat could be used to move deeper into enemy territory for free, too. The latter case would be a gambit predicated on drawing an attack to the defender's fleet, though.