The "fallback" order is executed unsatisfactorily.
It is not conceivable that in an action to push back the position of the unit, that unit is turning its back on the enemy when carrying it out.
These days its action of fallback (backpedal) and retreat (rout) is exactly the same; and it should not be like that.
As I understand it (maybe other users share other opinions) this order must perform going back in block so that unit never turn it back on a potential enemy, making use of the backpedal all members of the group.
On the other hand, the retreat itself establishes an escape from the action to carry out a real escape or pretend a "tactical" feigned retreat.
We should be able to retrieve the procedure (my opinion) of the classic order "fall back 10 paces" for this occasion.
It is not conceivable that in an action to push back the position of the unit, that unit is turning its back on the enemy when carrying it out.
These days its action of fallback (backpedal) and retreat (rout) is exactly the same; and it should not be like that.
As I understand it (maybe other users share other opinions) this order must perform going back in block so that unit never turn it back on a potential enemy, making use of the backpedal all members of the group.
On the other hand, the retreat itself establishes an escape from the action to carry out a real escape or pretend a "tactical" feigned retreat.
We should be able to retrieve the procedure (my opinion) of the classic order "fall back 10 paces" for this occasion.
Last edited by a moderator: