I have to say that I really like the chess-like aspect of Melee's movement system. Returning to TFT after all these years, it initially seemed to me that people should be able to adjust facing after everyone moved, in reverse DX order if sequencing is important.
After reading JK and others extoll the chess-like aspects of Melee, I realized that committing to facing at the end of your movement adds a lot to the game:
- It makes going first and second have different advantages
- It increases tension
- It makes high MA remain useful in close combat
- It makes combat more cinematic (something I really like)
- It increases tactical options
After thinking about it, I'm very impressed with Steve's
original Melee design! I never really paid much attention to these things in the 80's because I was all into playing a wizard and what magic could do (still am). When D&D 4e came out, I ignored the snobbery and looked for the gems in it and found that push/pull/shift/phalanx created cooperative opportunities in combat that just weren't there in 3.5.
Looking at TFT now, I realize that Steve had battlefield tactics like these THIRTY YEARS before 4e was published!
Maybe allowing facing changes after everyone has moved may seems more realistic but, really, is THAT what strains peoples' suspension of disbelief? There's plenty more you can do within the scope of TFT to try to push more towards "realistic", like acting in reverse order of DX with higher DX being able to pre-empt.
I see facing adjustment after everyone has moved as something that eliminates a major tactical trade off so I will most definitely be keeping Melee's current facing commitment at the end of your movement.