Flank attacks are too good, and Prepared Attacks arn't very prepared. My Proposal.

For Glory is Fleeting, I understand the rules are pretty much done, but I was awake all night over thinking this and found my biggest issues:

The Problem:

Flank March is too powerful. This is going to be not liked much because everyone wants to take it and everyone needs to to block it. So it's very popular. It's too good. Because it allows the user of it to force their mission on everyone else.

And Prepared Attack is meaningless if you don't have 2 particular units which a lot of armies will lack one or the other (or both). And completely out  played in value by Flank attacks.

Solutions:

How do I would I fix flank attacks? Simple idea- force movement restriction on the first turn, much like the actual "planned" assault mission 5. This slows the main army advance down - which SHOULD be slow because they want to time their attack with the flank.  This also gives a reason NOT to show to have the flanking assault arrive immediately.  If the flanking attack started at the same time, it must delay the main army to arrive at the same time! And also remove the bonus for having a road on that side of the flanking attack too. The road itself will be placed for one reason only - to get the +1 dice and easy movement across any rivers/streams or terrain that would block the flank attack.  And it's not there for any natural reason. There is no reason a flanking attacker would not use it. I understand it being fluffy to have the road there, and roads have few other actual uses now, but it seems to be the ONLY reason to take it (along with a probe mission taking 2 for each side to move units from reinforcement quicker). I do think Probe should KEEP the road bonus as unlike Flanking attacks, they are much less likely to get lost. They only have to march towards the front from the line of the armies march, instead of try and find the correct place to come into the flank (eg- the Battle of Vittoria and to some extent New Orleans where they got delayed by the river crossing).

Prepared attacks are still...not very good compared to flank attacks, but at least allow redoubts and armies with artillery batteries something to use them for. If you have neither, there's no reason to take it instead of a flank attack, and it's activity worse as all units start on the table compared to the unknown of a flank attack. I would like prepared attack to be more appealing to take. I would suggest the ability to have 1 (maybe 2) divisions in reserve as a option. This allows the prepared attacker to actually hide some information (except of course to probe who would have intelligence on which table quadrant the reserves are coming on) and make a defending force try and guess if they have more units to come on after deployment, and be not sure if any are coming or not and if so where. Currently the defender against prepared attack knows whats going to happen as soon as the attacker has deployed. It also allows a more...prepared attack where the initial attack can be supported by units off table, kept in reserve until needed. They still lack the intelligence of probe, though I could understand limiting Prepared attack to only having a maximum of 1 unit in reserve.

Some small rule additions that stops flanking attacks dominating the discourse and makes prepared attacks more appealing. 

The current Flank March should be banished to the isle of Elba.

More explanation below on the flank attack and why it's too good and will always be wanted as a mission, or blocked if you can do it, above all other mission options: 

Of the 6 missions available vs flank attack, 2 stop you moving forward out of a defensive position on your side of the table. Probe gives you the opportunity to advance ONE division to face an entire enemy army. One is an "attack" but you're unable to actually move to an attack position on the first turn (only advance at a slow pace), and a frontal assault that is fast but eliminates all element of surprise and moves in one direction only.

And then there's then "flank" attack. Where in your entire army minus one division (perhaps 2 small brigades) can double or triple move across the entire table turn 1 before the enemy may be allowed to move (if defending), convert the enemy "flank attack" into a motionless defense (unable to react until you are on his doorstep), have 2-4 divisions arrive at 6 inch range to a single probing division attack, force the "defender" to choose all the available roads to prevent the flanker from using them instead of more interesting battlefield terrain (because they will), and have the added bonus of most probably arriving on turn 2 (needing only a skilled division commander, a skilled corps commander and a road to arrive on a 5+ on 4d6(!)) AND willing to arrive that turn with a morale test to completely discombobulate any defense, and neatly have time to move to engage a slower assault that can't move as fast it's first turn, and while being slower to move off than a frontal assault, have complete freedom of action to move to a better position AND still have a division to move into their flank.

Why take a frontal assault which negates any element of surprise when you can move all but 1 division just as fast (if moving as divisions) and lay your units out as you see fit instead, with the ability to maneuver or change formation instead?

The defender cannot possible move latterly fast enough to deal with both multiple enemy divisions double or triple move from the edge of their deployment zone across the entire table fast enough - there's too many 90 degree turns to do. Light cavalry can move 30 inches close to the enemy LOC plus their deployment zone - effectively across the table.

Now yes, you could take terrain to try and block all this. I hope you roll very well AND you opponent rolls poorly to move it. And unless you took all the roads as the defender, they WILL be coming down one of them. Because they will take them every time - there's no tactical choice in the matter.

There is little army context you would not want to take flank attack with a skilled commander. And a competent corps commander isn't needed if you have an exceptional division commander. Even armies with redoubts can only use them in 2 other missions and would only have 2-4% of their army spent on them.

In my conclusion, I should always take the Flank Attack, and I should always block it for the same reason. If you have a choice of blocking a flank attack, or any other mission, you'll choose flank-  the enemy can be upon you at 6 inch range before you can move much to react.