Is a unit able to fight after its retreat

[GeneralGrom]

Hello there,

i am playing Diplomacy face-to-face with some friends.
We always trip over one problem, which is not solved in the rulebook of our game.

Example:
(Austria) A Ser -> Gre

(Russia) A Rum -> Ser
(Russia) A Bul -> Gre

In this situation the austrian and the russian army repell themselves in GRE. What happens to the austrian army in SER after its reatreat?

We agreed to say, that the unit will be sent away by the second russian army, for example to ALB, because ALB is connected to GRE and SER aswell.
(No retreat to BUL because the first russian army came from there in the first place)

Do you guys have a different opinion on this?
I would like to read some useful ideas to copy them into our face-to-face game.

Sincerely yours,

GeneralGrom

[Restitution]

It's covered by the rules. All the units stay where they are. A Ser doesn't get displaced because it's not being attacked with 2 or more strength.

[Claesar]

Restitution is correct. It requires a strength of 2 to dislodge the Austrian army.

We don't have a Sandbox yet, but you can use jdip http://jdip.sourceforge.net/ to test these things yourself

[GeneralGrom]

Thank you guys.

I keep that in mind and inform my potential prey.

[Tugster]

you should not be using the word "retreat" in your question. Serbia tried to move to Greece, and it failed to move to Greece, so it is still in Serbia, but this is not a "retreat" at all, it's a failure to move, so it is still in Serbia, defending itself at strength 1. It would have be be attacked by strength 2 or more to be dislodged and then you would use the word "retreat". If you need to ask this question here about your face to face game, then all 7 of you do not fully understand the rules of the game and you should carefully reread them. Otherwise you might be making other mistakes. For example, in my face to face games long ago, if someone wrote a mis-order and attacked his own unit that was giving support for something else, we used to interpret this as "cutting your own support", but this is false, the rules state that units of the same nationality cannot cut support of their own pieces. [it's still a dumb useless move, but it does not cut the support].

[gimix]

You got a few useful and accurate answers. But there's one thing that excites my curiosity in your question: what do you mean by a unit being "able to fight after its retreat"?

Now we know, in your example the unit is not dislodged and so does not retreat. But if it needed to retreat it would be perfectly able to fight next move from its new location, unless:
a) it had no places to retreat to and so would be disbanded;
b) it tried to retreat to the same sector where another unit was retreating to, and again it would be disbanded;
c) the player directly ordered to disband it instead of retreating.

In all this cases the unit would be disbanded and no longer existed, so of course it would not be able to fight any more.

Hope this helps