Length-ways or width-ways

[henjed]

Hello, just a quickie query.  I've played about six games now - the last two were pursuits and the next is encirclement.  For pursuit we read the scenario as being played so that the force being pursued had to make off on a short side with the attacker coming in from the opposite short side (attacker to choose which).  Is that how everyone else plays it? It's clearly harder for the one pursued if it's played that way (as I know to my cost) but seems too easy to be played so that the pursued has only a short distance to go to get units off (on a 6' by 4' table he would need to go only 16" (40 cm) - rather than 24" (60 cm) if played down the length of the table). 

And I'm planning to convince my son that encirclement should be played so that he comes in on two short sides and I need to break out/escape to a long side (making it easier for me, I hope)... is that a reasonable interpretation? or is it always for the pursuer to decide orientation as well as side?

Mike

[fred.]

I've just looked at the this scenario in BKC2 book (as it was to hand). And I would think it is played up the length of the table - with defender deploying on one short edge (1/3 in). The attacker is then deployed along both long edges.

Reading pursuit - it is similarly unclear, but I would assume it was length ways.

Had a look in BKC4 PDF too, and can't see any material differences

[henjed]

Thanks, Fred. Well, I'm clearly going to be facing a bloody ordeal - but that's my fault for losing two pursuit games. It *is* 1940 and my Italians are on the run!

[Steve J]

Up the length of the table from memory, but don't have the book to hand.