Ships are permitted to retreat forward?

[Astyaro]

Hi, I was playing a game and notice that during a combat the other player was able to retreat its ships to a hex further away from their colonies. So he was able to move one space almost for free toward my colonies. I checked the rule book and it clearly specifies that the retreat must be done towards its closest colony. He could have retreated back perfectly.
Has anyone experienced this issue ?

5.9.2 Retreat Location: A retreating spaceship must be shifted to
an adjacent hex. The hex may not contain any enemy units (includ-
ing colonies or non-combat units). A retreating ship may not be
shifted into an unexplored system. It must retreat into a hex that is
equally distant or closer to one of its colonies than the hex that it
is retreating from (discounting any colony in the battle hex). If no
legal retreat exists, the ship may not retreat.

[Lunalol]

Hi.

This sentence : "it clearly specifies that the retreat must be done towards its closest colony" is wrong.
Please read rules again and again. You make a common mistake.

Thanks for playing.

[Jellby]

To be fair, he also said "the other player was able to retreat its ships to a hex further away from their colonies". According to the quoted fragment, the rules say that "it must retreat into a hex that is equally distant or closer to one of its colonies". If both are correct, there seems to be a contradiction. Of course, without a table and move number, that is difficult to check.

[Lunalol]

To be fair, he also said "the other player was able to retreat its ships to a hex further away from their colonies". According to the quoted fragment, the rules say that "it must retreat into a hex that is equally distant or closer to one of its colonies". If both are correct, there seems to be a contradiction. Of course, without a table and move number, that is difficult to check.

It is NOT contradiction : "closer to ONE of its colonies" is NOT "closer to the CLOSEST one".
It is why some players are wrong.

[Jellby]

Well, I interpret "further away from their colonies" as "further away from ALL their colonies".

If it means "further away from SOME of their colonies, and equally distant (or closer) to SOME other colonies", then indeed it overlaps with "equally distant to one of its colonies".

[Lunalol]

Sorry again but "further away from their colonies" is NOT in rules., it is only in player minds.

[Jellby]

No, it's not in the rules, it's what the OP says it happened. My point is that according to the OP, there is a contradiction between what happened and what the rules say. I'm not saying there's a bug, it's more likely that the OP missed something and their statement (as I interpret it) is not true.

[devin_lin_bhs]

I would say, about a year ago you can completely retreat to any empty or friendly hexes... Then they changed to any empty or friendly hexes that are closer or equal to any ONE of your colonies.

But it doesn't matter, because a good player should know you MUST block your opponent from retreating into surprising places. A year ago it was nearly impossible to kill BB and DN without completely trapping them, but that was quite fun and I miss that lol...

[Lunalol]

"I would say, about a year ago you can completely retreat to any empty or friendly hexes... Then they changed to any empty or friendly hexes that are closer or equal to any ONE of your colonies."

This rule has never changed on BGA !

[Astyaro]

After doing some research I finally understand this rule and the implementation is correct. I think the problem is the word retreat that implies going back but it depends on all the colonies, Not only the closest one.
Thanks Lunalol for all your hard work to bring this great game to the BGA for our enjoyment.