Art De La Guerre

[KevinD]

I find it odd that impetuous troops don’t pursue opponents who break off (and that other troops don’t have the option to do so).

Was this done as a play balance mechanism to prevent impetuous troops from being too easily pulled apart?

[SteveR]

Well, I personally find it kind of strange that it is easier to disengage from combat and move back away from an enemy through their ZOC than it is to just move back out of a ZOC.

But things are what they are

[daveallen]

Breaking off, or disengaging as it's called in ADLG, has a long history in wargames rules.

In early editions of WRG Ancients it sometimes resulted from losing a melee (a bounce if you like), the victor might then test to see if they followed up or not depending on troop types and orders.

The current practice is pretty much an abstraction of that. It's a move mostly available to mounted (usually if they're not doing well) against foot (or slower mounted obvs) the opponent can then choose to raise the stakes by pushing forward or charging in their turn.

Why is it easier than getting out of a ZoC without fighting?

I think the answer lies in the question - if you can evade it's as easy as breaking off, but if you can't then you are melee troops and expect to fight once you have the enemy in your ZoC. The difficulty and disorder cost of getting out of that situation is the price you pay for not taking what is, presumably, a worse result if you stay where you are or charge home.

Dave
_________________
Putting the ink into incompetence

[ethan]