Charging from behind - ooer missus :)

[markm]

From last nights game.

My LH were facing my table edge. To their rear and approx 45 degrees angle were the enemy cavalry. As the rules stand I only have one choice for direction of flee - directly away from the charge. It seems odd that I can't flee to my 'front' as I'm facing that way anyway?

With a normal charge you get 2 direction options, why only 1 in this situation?

Prior to the above the LH had rear charged spear who were frontally charged by Cataphracts. Eventually the spear broke. We read it that they rout 'sideways' as this splits the angle between the two enemy units. Is this correct? Do the pursuers turn 90 degrees to pursue? If not how as a wheel will simply hit the opposite friendly unit?

Enemy sandwiches for the win

[shall]

We did this for 2 reasons

1. to have a penalty for being chqrged in the reqr or flqnk - we figured this is much less comfortqble than being charged forntally and being prepared to turn and run. We therefore conlcuded there should be a less considered reaction to simply run directly away from the threat

2. Allowing a flee to front can create some cheese as you can position troopps so that they can flee behind enemy trooops at times and then get to move them thereafter. It doesn't seem reasonable for troops who can scare you by charging you in flank or rear to fail to push you away and instead get their colleagues in a mess.

e.g.


XXXX (facing down) ZZZZ (facing up)

Y
Y
Y
Y

XXX charges to get rid of YYY. If Y can evade forwards it can do so to end up behind ZZZ which XXX is trying to protect rather well. By making it flee directly away from the threat we avoid this.