My word, the clipping assault change didn't get this much vitriol.

Anyway I'm with Rug - if you have to make a change any enemy formations within 15cm's of the defender get a bm if their side loses the assault, regardless of whether or not they could support. Largely because this is what I was doing for a while due to a misunderstanding anyway.

But I'm still in the camp of no change. Its happened to me a lot and I've accepted, though I understand this position aggravates Mr T no end.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

There seems to be two distinct discussions taking place. The first is what to do when the counter-charge move causes the defender to move out of engagement with the assaulting formation. The second is a change to the counter-charge rules to limit this from happening. I think only one solution to either problem would be required.

For the first problem I've seen 3 potential solutions
1) No assault happens so a wasted attacker activation. Slight defender benefit
2) Go straight to assault resolution with no attacks made. Winner by luck and static resolution alone, still favours the attacker.
3) Attacker has messed up and is punished accordingly (Receives BMs or is outright broken). Strong defender benefit

I favour 1 or 3 with the attacker taking a single BM.

For the second problem altering the counter-charge rules I've seen 2 solutions I like but its complex and very easy to overlook causing more problems.
1) Allow counter-charging units getting within a certain distance (5cm instead of base contact) of a support formation to drag them into the assault. (Potential balance issues with long counter-chargers)
2) Allow counter-chargers a choice of direction to move. Specifically this must be limited to some combination of Assaulter and Support formations. (Something along the lines of may counter-charge towards the closest enemy formation or the assaulting formation)

I would favour 2

On changing the counter-charge and making its direction optional, I have a feeling that will possibly cause further problems (and I am sure it was discussed during the original development if anyone can still remember the details.) This would significantly change the assault capabilities of fast (>25cm) troops.

For example, it would mean that these troops could never be pinned as they can always avoid support fire (the supports cannot be less than 5cm away). Equally it also presents the possibility for these troops to avoid any assault over 5cm distant for the same reasons, and renders them virtually impossible to 'clip'.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt