Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSam
Well, at least B doesn't now the plan, that would be using knowledge out of character ;)
But of course with a good knowledge of general tactics, B could decide to avoid that potential situation - for instance using an All-out-Attack would help, because of the greater movement capability (though AoA is risky).
|
If B is thinking about the possibilities, they should recognize the likelihood of this sequence of events as soon as A declares their Wait.
Quote:
Originally Posted by polydac
I agree. My first inclination was to not allow the "retreat" counterattack from player B as I like the idea of a smart player being able to keep a closing attacker at bay. What nagged at me was the fact that player A could get 2 back-to-back attacks before B could effectively respond (unless the step back is treated as a retreat). Didn't seem realistic....
|
There are lots of ways that can happen. In this case, it's only able to happen because B is making an obvious mistake. Making an Attack maneuver in that situation is just a very bad decision.
I wouldn't have a problem with B switching their maneuver to something equivalent, but equivalency is a problem. Move and Attack or Committed Attack (let alone All Out Attack) include penalties to your defenses. If you've already defended without those penalties a substitution would be unfair.