Flank Attacks

Having inadvertently posted this question on the wrong forum, I bring it here where it was supposed to be.

This refers to flank attacks but also rear and side attacks - it seems clear that units sit in the current configuration until someone retreats or is removed. This is the same regardless of how marginal or odd the contact is.

However once the melee is won, pursuit is an option and this allows a preliminary pivot to line up on the retreating enemy. I'm perfectly happy that this is a mechanic not an actual footprint traced manoeuvre. A unit can pivot 180 to the rear on the spot, it doesn't interpenetrate anything in the process, same with turning to the side or flank.

However is this pivot absolutely part of the pursuit move or is it something that a surviving unit can do regardless of its desire (or ability) to pursue. My foot caught in the flank by horse, probably don't want to pursue but they really, really would like to pivot.

The Rules wrote:
The pursuing Unit moves into a position that is perpendicular to this line thanks to a free pivot around the middle of the Unit's front, after which it moves the number of BU determined by the roll on a d6 according to the table above.

This could be read to indicate that the roll is made after the pivot.

So can any unit that wins a flank/side/rear combat pivot or only ones that successfully pursue?

I have taken it to mean that the pivot is part and parcel of the pursuit move and would not occur if a zero showed up on the Pursuit Table. Even if it is allowed it would seem that the free pivot would have to be made relative to the retreating unit which would likely be fairly limited.

I wouldn't mind being able to do what you suggest, however, and maybe it should be an option for a unit winning a melee', perhaps with a DT? I've had winning units caught in the flank more than once and some option for the unit having situational awareness would have been useful.

Hi D - yes it's the whole get slammed once, get slammed again without turning. It seems very odd.

The pivot is fairly generous, so don't follow you there, you end up facing the retreating unit essentially which is what most units would like having fended off a flank attack.

Sorry, I was thinking limited in that you could not pivot away from the line of retreat of the defeated unit. The situation I had in mind was wanting to pivot to meet a probable attack from the opposite flank.

Since you have to take a DT to check for disorder on a 180 pivot move, perhaps the same test to allow you to pivot to any facing if you win the melee' and decide not to pursue?

Ah Ok - no you can't use the free 'pursuit' pivot to do that, you have to end on a line perpendicular to a line joining the two centre front points of the units and facing the retreated unit.

You don't need to take a DT to realign and pursue, so I don't see why you would need to just to realign, it's not like you take a DT to avoid pursuing.

I just think that having performed the heroic deed of fighting off the flank (or rear) attack the unit should have the option to realign facing that threat.

I think a pivot only should be an option available if you so choose. Doesn't actually say that though does it ? Makes sense especially with Infantry fighting off Cavalry. You can't pursue ... but a pivot seems reasonable. Perhaps the pivot and the pursuit should be seen as seperate things?

yes, pivot is an option, to avoid to pass by the retreating Unit exposing a flank

Could that be added to the English errata please Lorenzo

why errata? I think the rules are clear to say that it is an option:
... or, if the player controlling the pursuing unit wishes...

Because we were asking (and thought you had just agreed) if a unit that does not wish to pursue could choose to pivot.

Such a unit would not be a "pursuing unit" so as it stands it can't pivot. Thus a line of errata is necessary to indicate that the pivot is available whether a unit chooses to pursue or not.

ok, got it. No, probably I didn't understand the real question, sorry.
The pivot is PART of the pursuing, so no pursue no pivot. It is only pursuing that you can expose your flank to the retiring enemy if you go straight ahead. This is the only reason for this rule.

Sorry but if you've just been charged in the flank and the enemy has fallen back - you're flank is very much exposed to a repeat performance unless you pivot.

You won, you beat them off, glory is yours - why would you not be facing the threat you just defeated?

you can do that, but with the pursue. If you fail to pursue you fail to move and to face the enemy.
Of course you can try to face it in the future, but it will depend on initiative.

So Foot who beat off a mounted attack just have to sit there with their flank hanging?

Same with any I=0 troop?

I really would think that one of the outcomes of winning a melee against all the odds would be the ability to pivot to face the threat. Irrespective of any pursuit.

Doesn't feel quiet right I agree.  I suppose what Lorenzo's saying is the option to turn and face is incorporated in that pursuit roll.
So let me get this right then to be able to 'pivot' at all you have to move the full pursuit move rolled or can you cut the move short ?....if you so choose.

I could live with that Tarty except foot can't even make the attempt against mounted.

It's implicit in the theory of pursuit that you can't hold it short, so I can't see how you could pass the test, pivot and not move forward - pursuit is, as they say, pursuit.

I'd be happy if foot v mounted and I=0 troops got to roll and rather than pursue, success meant they could pivot.

Zippee wrote: foot can't even make the attempt against mounted.

Yes there is that problem

If foot wins initiative, then can turn (and fire etc).
Taking on the flank it is not easy but can be very dangerous. This means that the flank was exposed due to the defeat of your own cavalry or due to a bad deployment.
Still Foot can resist and win the melee (as happened in this case) and if it wins it means that Horse took losses and will be less strong in the next melee, still if Horse wins initiative, otherwise Foot will turn and fire. I don't see Foot as sitting duck.