HonorforONEFilms said:

What doesn't seem right about it? Good faith question, not trying to engage you in argument for argument's sake. I really feel that the rules are well designed and consistent in this game, but am certainly open to dissenting opinion.

I fully agree that the rules say that they get to battle back. I just don't think it is realistic.

HonorforONEFilms said:

But why would "1 flag rolled okay to battle back" be any more realistic than "2 flags rolled, held ground, okay to battle back"?

Imagine this

One flag = The soldiers stand shouldar to shouldar knowing there are units behind them to protect them. The enemy charges down on them crashing into there ranks. They shrug off the onslaught and battle back fighting there way into the renemys ranks.

Two flags but no retreat space = The sloidlers stand shouldar to shuoldar reading to withstand the charge assurd that there are troops behind them. The enemy charges. They crash into the lines forceing them to lose ground. The men start to panic. They start to lose ground. A trickle turns into a stream as every one starts to scream and run for there life. They crash into the battalion behind them unable to force there way into there ranks. Just then the enemy caths them and crashs into there paniced and dissorganized rear.

Now what would they do. Suddendly group together form ranks and fight back, or run to the sides and run for there life again.

That's one possible interpretation of the roll. But I believe the rules support this interpretation:

toddrew said:

Which I don't feel is any less realistic of an outcome.

Realism.. hmm, not entirely sure we should use that word in a game with a fantasy theme, but hey.. maybe thats just my take

So to the rules bit.

If a unit is busy running away, not much time to be battleing back, or counter attacking/defending themselves, take your choice of word. Take away the chance to run away cos the ground is already occupied and it seems to me there isnt much choice but to attack back .. the alternative is to meekly let yourself be killed. Doesnt sound like its likely even in a fantasy themed game. These guys dont need to stand shoulder to shoulder and organise to fight back, they just need to realise its fight or dig your own grave time. The question of spirit gets raised here, but i dont think its incosistent with the spirit. Most wargames assume a round is a set amount of time in which you are allowed to do a certain amount of actions/attacks/moves etc. If these units arent running away then they certainly have the time to do something in that time they would have spent running away but were not able.

Next, its a game, doesnt need to be realistic, just consistent so everyone plays by the same rules throughout the game. The strategy of the game is to best use whatever rules are there so that you are ahead at the end of the game.

Its all interperatation of the what the rule might be trying to do in game terms. Its subjective as to what it might actually represent in real life terms.

Flags are a measure of the amount of fear/self preservation instinct overcoming the units discipline and desire to stand and fight. The more flags they are subject to represents the fact they were in greater danger and thus the amount of fear that generated in them took longer to overcome and for them to calm down and rally. You could say they felt the need to run further away before they felt they were then safe enough to stop.

Indygnome said:

I was attempting to tack on a rider such as this to my last post, but it ended up being worded very clumsily and didn't make the cut Very subjective as to what each roll (or any other game mechanic for that matter) signifies. For the instance at hand I don't think too much stretching is required to have the mechanics reflect what may occur on a medieval battlefield (goblin-mounted ostriches present or not ).