[RERomine]

I can't honestly say I've paid attention to whether or not I've spotted units on second and subsequent facing changes, so I don't know if you spot new units after the first turn. Even if I have, I can't say that there isn't a penalty on searches after the first facing change in a turn.

Given the nature of the game, there are certain aspects that are unrealistic with respect to searching/sighting. Being a turn based game, unless a unit ends its turn out in the open or a move triggers op-fire, it could duck from cover to cover and remain unseen until it is on top of a unit. Even if a tank were to approach via a completely covered or concealed route until it was 2 hexes away, in reality, you would probably know it was there unless the battle is raging in its full glory. Tanks make a lot of noise, so even if unseen, you would know something is there. Given those two examples of deviations from reality, it is possible to think multiple turn searching as compensation. This, in conjunction with the everyone knows all from the top down view.

In general, I agree with you francois. Units will primarily focus their attention in the direction they are looking and any rubber necking that occurs will be more of a cursory check of a sector than the thorough monitoring of the area they are facing. I don't make a point of turning all my units until they are in the thick of battle when they would be searching for targets to engage. Before this occurs, I depend on my original deployment to cover all sectors and logical avenues of approach. Once the fighting starts, I will turn and search with units near the point of contact because I have seen enemy units once I've turned. As mentioned, I don't recall if these are turns/searches after the first one or not.

I think we've all said, including myself, that changes in direction of leg units should be free. Giving it more thought, if the code is changed, maybe it should apply to them as well. If an infantry squad turns to their rear quadrant and spots a threat, more than likely, they are going to redeploy to meet that threat. Basically, they have figured out they are on the wrong side of the tree, rock, house, etc. In their original position, they have sought out the best cover and concealment available for a single direction. What covers and/or conceals you from one direction and allows line of sight, may provide none from another. One spot in a 50m hex isn't likely to provide cover, concealment and LOS from all directions at the same time, even a house. The soldier would have to quickly find suitable position facing in another direction. In a house, it would be going to a different window. Given infantry only moves so fast, a movement penalty should apply here as well.

Given all that and what I found out about neutral steering, if a movement penalty is applied for changing directions (hull direction with turreted vehicles) in the same hex, I would apply it to all units except possibly size 0 infantry. I would consider excluding size 0 infantry because it they are small and simply turning around may be adequate. A squad would have to redeploy facing the new direction. During op-fire vehicles with fast turrets or 360 mount weapons engage with without turning their hull. Some distinction would have to be made between fast and slow turrets, but the M-10 GMC would fall into the latter category.

Movement penalty could be taken from unused movement points from the previous turn during op-fire and current movement points if player movement phase. This is just my preference. It would force the player to decide between covering maximum distance or leaving maneuver points for op-fire turns if needed. Taking points from the next movement phase requires no tactical thought. If a unit physically changes hexes, no additional movement penalties apply for direction changes made in the player movement phase. Since the unit has physically moved, it might just be a matter of deciding how you want it faced once it gets to its final hex. Turning/searching before the move would incur a movement penalty. A lot of people want to make sure the coast is clear before they move, but this would take time, thus the movement penalty.

This is just my opinion at the moment of how I would code changes, based on about an hour of thought. More thought or more knowledge about the code might change my opinion. From the coding perspective, some things might sound good, but not be practical. I honestly don't know how Don and Andy have financially supported this product as long as they have, but not really any of my business.