Turning to expose rear in front of enemy

[Cunningcairn]

In the attached picture my opponents hoplite has charged my LF. The LF has fled and the hoplite has pursued and ending the pursuit by exposing its rear to my line of advancing hoplites effectively committing suicide. This was discussed quite a while ago and to the best of my knowledge changes had been made to prevent it happening. The hoplites start position is marked by the black square. The LF in question is circled in yellow. Is this a bug or is it still possible under the rules

exposing rear.jpg (907.04 KiB) Viewed 2791 times

?

[DanZanzibar]

If you are referring to a rule change from some time ago that you thought changed this behaviour, then I’m not sure which rule change that was as it was before my time. I can tell you this is certainly possible as I have seen it a number of times. There doesn’t seem to be any constraint on pursuers chasing the target of an attack.

If you’re referring to the newest rule change that affects attacking lights being able to turn non lights for flank charges, this clearly doesn’t apply... but I’m sure you knew that already.

[Cunningcairn]

If you are referring to a rule change from some time ago that you thought changed this behaviour, then I’m not sure which rule change that was as it was before my time. I can tell you this is certainly possible as I have seen it a number of times. There doesn’t seem to be any constraint on pursuers chasing the target of an attack.

If you’re referring to the newest rule change that affects attacking lights being able to turn non lights for flank charges, this clearly doesn’t apply... but I’m sure you knew that already.

Hi Dan. No this was a change made before you started playing. I'm not sure what was changed but I haven't experienced infantry doing this for a very long time. Congrats on your DL performance. What a start

[DanZanzibar]

If you are referring to a rule change from some time ago that you thought changed this behaviour, then I’m not sure which rule change that was as it was before my time. I can tell you this is certainly possible as I have seen it a number of times. There doesn’t seem to be any constraint on pursuers chasing the target of an attack.

If you’re referring to the newest rule change that affects attacking lights being able to turn non lights for flank charges, this clearly doesn’t apply... but I’m sure you knew that already.

Hi Dan. No this was a change made before you started playing. I'm not sure what was changed but I haven't experienced infantry doing this for a very long time. Congrats on your DL performance. What a start

Well whatever it was that changed I can at least confirm this behaviour isn’t out of the ordinary.

Thanks a bunch! You know, it’s you and Schweetness101 who took the time to play a newbie like me something like 15-20 matches each in the previous 2 months that set me up to do well. Nothing like playing good players to teach you hard lessons

[Ludendorf]

I've had a few situations turn out like that and it is infuriating. What happens is there is something behind the enemy's main line (in this case slingers) which stops the enemy skirmishers from falling back through the line. They run parallel to it instead,and if your troops pursue up to the enemy's main line, they turn to face the skirmishers. It is very hard to see coming.

[Cunningcairn]

I've had a few situations turn out like that and it is infuriating. What happens is there is something behind the enemy's main line (in this case slingers) which stops the enemy skirmishers from falling back through the line. They run parallel to it instead,and if your troops pursue up to the enemy's main line, they turn to face the skirmishers. It is very hard to see coming.

Yes. It was far worse a while back. Hopefully we'll get a response once the UK wakens.

[rbodleyscott]

All is WAD.

The change was that the pursuers would not turn to face the evaders at the end of their move if the evaders had achieved 1 or more squares of separation.

[Cunningcairn]

All is WAD.

The change was that the pursuers would not turn to face the evaders at the end of their move if the evaders had achieved 1 or more squares of separation.

Was the option of a pursuing unit not turning to expose its flank or rear if it ended its move in the ZOC of an enemy unit considered or was what happens now deemed acceptable?

[Athos1660]

To be precise, if I am not mistaken, in the case of the OP, the Foot is not pursuing, it is charging (trying to do so) and the LF (that is only disrupted, not broken) is evading the charge. Such foot (ie not warband, raw nor untrained) wouldn't pursue after close combat, except after having charged fragmented enemy who break before contact.

It is nice that making non-light troops charge light ones is always somewhat hazardous.

It is also nice to see sometimes in this turn-based game, some units carried by momentum and trapped.

[rbodleyscott]

All is WAD.

The change was that the pursuers would not turn to face the evaders at the end of their move if the evaders had achieved 1 or more squares of separation.

Was the option of a pursuing unit not turning to expose its flank or rear if it ended its move in the ZOC of an enemy unit considered or was what happens now deemed acceptable?

It is WAD.

[Cunningcairn]

All is WAD.

The change was that the pursuers would not turn to face the evaders at the end of their move if the evaders had achieved 1 or more squares of separation.

Was the option of a pursuing unit not turning to expose its flank or rear if it ended its move in the ZOC of an enemy unit considered or was what happens now deemed acceptable?

It is WAD.

And what might WAD be?

[SnuggleBunnies]

Working as designed, not a bug.

[76mm]

And what might WAD be?

Working As Designed.

Unless you are asking what the "design intent" is...you'll have to get that from RBS...

[Cunningcairn]

And what might WAD be?

Working As Designed.

Unless you are asking what the "design intent" is...you'll have to get that from RBS...

Thanks that is all I wanted to know.

[stockwellpete]

This thread is really funny. It shows in the last post space in the main forum as "Turning to expose rear in . . ." as if people were meant to fill in the blank bit - the paddling pool? the back garden? a car window?

Wargamers eh? What a bunch of weirdos!

[Ludendorf]

This thread is really funny. It shows in the last post space in the main forum as "Turning to expose rear in . . ." as if people were meant to fill in the blank bit - the paddling pool? the back garden? a car window?

Wargamers eh? What a bunch of weirdos!

Well, turning to expose rear in the Battle of Stirling, if Mel Gibson films are to be believed.

[Cunningcairn]

This thread is really funny. It shows in the last post space in the main forum as "Turning to expose rear in . . ." as if people were meant to fill in the blank bit - the paddling pool? the back garden? a car window?

Wargamers eh? What a bunch of weirdos!

Well, turning to expose rear in the Battle of Stirling, if Mel Gibson films are to be believed.

Now I understand. LOL!

[cromlechi]

This thread is really funny. It shows in the last post space in the main forum as "Turning to expose rear in . . ." as if people were meant to fill in the blank bit - the paddling pool? the back garden? a car window?

Wargamers eh? What a bunch of weirdos!

This happened regularly if I recall in Carry on up the Khyber. It involved lifting the kilt, but can't recall if it was facing or the rear.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/TornHairyBeetle-mobile.mp4

[PDiFolco]

/*rant on */
Imagine this in a movie : hoplites chasing enemy skirmishers along the enemy lines ... would be fun in a Benny Hill show, but else ??
Really I don't like the pursuit rules : the game design is primilarly giving full control to the player, with very simple C&C rules, troops always obeying orders (even if suicidal), never refusing to charge or do it on their own, and then some HI shock troops are playing athletics race vs slingers ? Not even talking about cav, which ends up mostly running around all over the map uncontrolled ...
At least in the case here, there would be simple solutions :
- Don't make MI/HI run after light inf or cav, they know they won't catch them..
- At least allow skirms to fallback/rout through friendlies, as they CAN move through usually. BTW allowing ALL units to rout through friendlies would make sense, that's how routing troops really behave, but then the passed through unit should have some CT or lose cohesion altogether.

[Athos1660]

/*rant on */
Imagine this in a movie : hoplites chasing enemy skirmishers along the enemy lines ... would be fun in a Benny Hill show, but else ??

Pursuing is historical.

Also another evidence that modern drama owes a lot to Ancient Greeks