Dear all,
For the second time in my Epic career, I came across the issue of an assault going weird.
Firstly, I want to point out for clarity that this had no effect on the game, and my opponent was noble and gregarious in accepting whatever decision continued the game. - He really is a pleasant sole, whom sadly wins too much.
So what happened was that the assaulting unit was not the closest unit, so the assaulted unit used its counter charge to move towards what was the nearest unit. Resulting in no units from the assaulter being within 15cm. We played at the time that this meant that the attack didn’t stall, but simply ended with no casualties and nobody breaking.
I see there has been some chat with regards this in 2009, but no clear solution.
The pertinent part of the rules are 1.12.15
“If all of the attacking units directly engaged in the assault are killed then the assault
has stalled and the defender wins (go straight to 1.12.

.
'Directly engaged' means being within 15cm of a defending
unit after charge and counter-charge moves have been
completed.”
Of the 2009 chat comments, I am convinced the most by Gavin’s wisdom in which he points out the absurdity of the attacker losing units [and one would also assume breaking] when not in the assault.
So anyway, to construct this into a question, 1) does the assault simply stop without the traditional resolution. This isn’t covered in the rules, but seems logical, and 2) would it then be smart (though snide) to use a counter charge in such a situation to put the defending unit just inside range of one of the attackers (i.e so that killing that attacker would meet the remit of stalled attack)?
I apologies in advance for re-opening old discussions, but when your regular opponent is Jon Cole with feral orks, you need every option explored.
Thanks kindly