I am sure my need to understand evade rules must have something to do with my penchant for Mongol cavalry armies. They need to do a fair bit of evading to be effective.
In my experience implementing simple tabletop rules to allow troops to retire in the face of an enemy is a real challenge for rules writers. So much can happen that the rules have to cover lots of eventualities. Inevitably some outcomes get missed. Sometimes the complexity defeats the author and the rules end up badly written.
Evade rules are such a perennial problem (for me?) that I've already written posts covering fleeing and evading in
DBMM and
Field of Glory respectively. Now it's the turn of Art de la Guerre (ADLG) but before I do I'd like to mention something from an earlier post.
In 2009 John Garvey made the point that, at a conceptual level the [DBMM flee] process is simple:
- Start the flee move by turning the fleeing element; usually to point away from the threat.
- Check to see if the flee move places the element in further jeopardy; such as reaching impassable terrain. If not then flee.
- If there are problems with the original flee move, check if they can be avoided. If so turn the element a second time and then flee.
- If the problems can’t be avoided flee in the original direction and face the consequences.
Although written nearly ten years ago, and specifically about DBMM, it's a surprisingly good description of the ADLG evade process:
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose? As always the real complexity comes from the implementation and the application of various limiting conditions.
If you don't like flow charts look away now.
