Pursue effectiveness should depend on terrain

[Denkt]

Once the battle is won, the victorious army get to pursue the enemy, but I think how effective this is should vary greatly depending on terrain.

In rough terrain such as forest and Mountains it should be very hard to do if you was the attacker but probably quite easy for the defender to purse the attacker due to better knowing the terrain, this mean attacking in such terrain is super risky. In plains and farmland it should be effective for both sides due to open terrain with Little risk for ambush and easier to orient.

So basically:

• Open terrain: pursue is effective for both sides
• Rough terrain: pursue is only effective for the defender

This mean in rough terrain the defender can wage guerilla warfare without much issue but that can't be done effectively in open terrain.

Defender and attacker here mean attacker and defender in battle, but for sieges the besieger is automatically the attacker.

 

[Arko]

If the terrain is rough, it is for both sides.
However what could change the odds can be :

• Men At Arms types (heavy cavalry would be slower anywhere else than plains f.e. )
  
• if it is familiar land for the defender (home provinces/lands)

 

[Denkt]

In rough terrain the defender would probably had time to secure line of retreat and maybe also set up so the attacker would have a hard time to retreat. In open terrain that would be much harder to do.