There's a lot of complaining about a game you're not ever going to play again.

Except the counter charge move isn't some panicked move. It's deliberate move made by defenders as shown by the fact they have choice there. So why would they move away from fighting and then shoot? Can you imagine any real world officer giving following orders?

"We are under assault from north! Move to south because there's enemy 5 meters closer but don't shoot them as they aren't directly assaulting us!"

Totally insane. No officer would ever forbid troops to shoot enemy that are shooting them while moving troops in good order toward them. That's just illogical.

Ah well. Can't convince WAAC kids otherwise. They would lose crutch they feel they need to win games rather than rely on just good strategy and tactics.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Find a historical board, post problem there, see what they say.

_________________
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

Apparently you have played E:A longer than I - so why did you wait until now to complain about this rule? Did you see or kknow about Rpr's views?

And you still have not explained what should happen instead. Are you saying that there should be no counter-charges, or that 'supports' should not take part at all? If they should, how should the supports rules actually work? What do you think are 'Logical' rules here?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Why fight for change when WAAC kids don't want to have clean logical rules? They wouldn't approve changes anyway so why waste effort...

And plenty of easy obvious ways. Howabout free counter charge provided units don't end outside engagement. Would stop that and also would provide BIT control for defender rather than simply having to obey attacker. Attacker already has insane amount of advantages(like starting at +2 for assault resolution before anything happens and dictating which units will fight specifically) so bit of control back. Also remove premeasuring since it only delays game and leads to abuse(and I can 100% quarantee myself draws in tournament games with it if I want). Or if players really can't be bothered to learn game without that crutch add some limitations like at the start of activation measure shortest distance between formation and 1 enemy unit. That will allow all reasonable use for premeasuring that is needed. This would have 90% of how it works except stupid abuse like this one wouldn't exists and defenders would have little bit of things to do eventhough attackers still have enough advantages they require major blunder or horrible luck to not win assault.

But no chance of rules getting fixed while WAAC kids have control over them. Thank god epic isn't only wargame available.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Cool can I buy your minis if you don't need them?    

So you agree that a defender's flanks can and do get pinned by supporting attacks? In real life? You can take it on my word that this is a major consideration in planning operations.

Now, we want Epic to somehow represent this RL tactical concept. We now use the rule that limits countercharges to represent it. If we lose that rule, we can no longer pin enemy flanks and Epic has stopped making sense to people who know something about attempting to direct combat ops. They'll feel that Epic is "illogical".

The fact that countercharge moves are explicitly limited is important. Clearly, the defenders' movement is limited. If it were only up to what the defending commander wanted, of course he'd direct his troops to do whatever works best. But it's not all up to what he wants or says. The enemy is in there, too, in cover, just waiting to put a bullet in the head of everyone who so much as twitches. Or maybe the enemy is not there... we really should go help that northern flank -- it sounds like the boys are catching hell! Perhaps I can dare take a quick look-see... you do it, Tneva! Take a look, then take that MG up by the hillock, where you can support the north flank!

Sure. Provide me with suitable 5-figure sum and let's talk.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Again, if it's so easy, do it.  So far the lone idea you've put forth was blatantly broken after about 30 seconds of thought.

Howabout try a test. Ask how people who don't know about rules of epic would do it. I bet they wouldn't counter charge so that units wouldn't be able to participiate in assault.

_________________
Neal

Except this rule doesn't represent pinning at all. If it did defenders wouldn't be able to move at all.

Still not one logical connection to real world tactics for this rule. Which isn't surprising since it's illogical rule with no basis to reality. It's only crutch for people who can't be bothered to win with real tactics and strategy.

_________________
www.tneva.net

And in epic they now do neither of those 2. So how it's realistic? They neither duck and cover nor attack clearest threat. Nor do they lose control as is evidence by the fact defenders still have choice in the movement.

Silly, broken, unbalanced and illogical rule. But WAAC kids can't live without it since they can't be bothered to try to win with real tactics and strategy. Maybe WAAC kids are simply too lazy to think up good tactics and strategy.

And I have btw now provided 2. One which is bullet proof since it's just current except with this abuse removed. Hell simply removing premeasuring which is unneccessary crutch to begin with would be 95% enough for it. But lazy people can't be bothered to learn to win by tactics so want all the crutches possible so they don't have to face the horror of losing game.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Really? Do RL supporting attacks with the objective of isolating a target or pinning an enemy flank result in the defender not being able to do anything about it? -- No, they don't. The defender can do *something* about supporting attacks. In Epic, we use the countercharge + drag-in mechanism to depict this something. Try a loaded-up Chimera sometime, you'll be surprised.

In epic defenders CAN'T do anything about supporting attacks so it's still not related to RL.

These rules represent NOTHING about real warfare. It's just silly crutch invented by WAAC players to ensure they can win easily.

_________________
www.tneva.net

How so? Defenders do get to countercharge, right? And the range of supporting fire is 15 cm, right? And the countercharge range of a loaded-up APC is 15 cm, right? And countercharging into contact results in the supporting formation getting dragged in, right? And that means the defenders get to shoot at everyone, right?

Actually you can do a lot about support attacks, given a somewhat favorable situation (and if the attacker worked hard enough to absolutely screw you up, then you damn well SHOULD get screwed up). You can either drag them into assault by getting into base contact (which, as was explained, isn't always all that hard if you have a loaded transport in the formation), or in some cases you can countercharge towards the original attacker and out of range of the support formation. That's probably not very feasible with larger formations though.

Also I can't help but chuckle every time you refer to Ropecon participants as to "kids", WAAC or otherwise. Because, well, seriously.