I hope so!
L.

Hello there,
If you have odd numbers attending I am able to make them even.
Lance.

Indeed. As the Kiel bit is more of an exception then that works for me.

Lance.

" An UG may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and also has enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim, or could do if it was not a Keil".

Or break the reference to a Keil off into a different sentence for clarity?

Lance.

I just knew there would be something!
Do we want a Keil to break off anyway, did they do that?

" A unit may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and other enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim, or that could so unless it was a Keil".

Trying to keep it simples....
Lance.

Or maybe:
" A unit may not break off if it is fighting enemy to its front and other enemy files fighting with a flank or rear combat claim".

Is that any clearer?
Lance.

Well, it does go a long way to reduce the effects of this problem without wiping out those lovely, but rubbish units, from the game?
You are quite right to say that certain armies will not use this `tactic`, either because of the nature of the army, or that of the player.
We are trying to do simple and more streamlined where possible, without any detriment to the game system.
Lance.

That is another, but very valid topic.
I also believe that shield cover cannot be speeded/sped? up by playing the requisite card, But you could speed up if you were slowed by fire, as per normal.
Its a long standing gripe, but life  moves on.
Lance.

I feel the need to contribute.
The essence behind this proposal is that the game system allows a player to lose all his leaders, nobles, aristocracy and elite fighting units whilst all the levies, horde, conscripts and peasants sit back and fight on denying  worthy opponent the laurels of victory, which they deserve.
Now, not all players do this, indeed very few do, but those who do exploit the simplicity of the scoring system to their advantage and to the detriment of the game.
That is why this has been suggested.
Lance.

An alternative option could be that instead of a shooting dice upgrade you force a KaB test on the unit being shot at?
Lance.

Dave, to refresh your vague memory you could do worse than visit your ladybird collection?
Lance.

Interesting, as we have found the slowing effects in Pacto to be very significant as written!
Lance.

Happy with the slight change about movement distances, bring it on.
I also think it will encourage the use of more elephants, which due to their cost is only a good thing.
Lance.

That seems fine.
Would it prevent them from fighting with cavalry?
I wouldnt bother with the speed restriction. Loads of what should be pedestrian generals seem to zip about the battlefield.
L.

That is not a totally unreasonable suggestion.
Another might be that rather than having separate units of superior barbarian nobles then these could form the front rank of mere average warband types? This would give them more of a threat at impact and also a bit more clout in the ongoing melee.
Lance.