Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've been thinking about how AoS models advantages for rear attacking, because on the face of it, it doesn't (especially if you measure distances base-to-base).

Flank attack has clear advantages if you play the pile-in rule as it's written - you'll be able to get more models in range to attack than your target (for a round or two).

For rear attacks it's not as clear, but think about the restriction on movement in a pile-in. The pile-in lets you move up to 3", but when you move no part of the model can move more than 3". So if you hit your opponent in the rear, he either needs to pile-in backwards, or turn to face you and use the remainder of his move to get to you. Say he has some swordsmen whose weapons stick out over the base by 1/2". On a 1" base, he spins on the spot (for 2" of movement) and can pile-in only 1" further. If he decides to do a pile-in in reverse, he can move 3", but doesn't get the advantage of his sword sticking out in front (it is still facing away from your troops). Either way, his threat radius is reduced for at least the first round of combat, which is hopefully decisive for you.

I guess if your group is choosing to ignore the model-to-model measuring rule in favour of base-to-base, this is irrelevant.