Leader Orders A Fallback after a "First Strike" or similar

My reading of the Tactician Card "Leader Orders a Fallback" might be that it could be played by the Active player in response to a First Strike type card, as that would comply with the phasing restriction stated on the card: "After a melee combat is declared but before the dice roll..."

However, there is further down the card a lot of references to the "attacking unit" and not taking ground. Yet, the attacking unit is not necessarily equated to the active player - e.g. see the FAQ for "Battlefield Smoke".

Thematically, it seems like it would be a good thing to be able to play the card in response to First Strike - like the leader spots the trap and hastily cancels the attack.

Have players come across this situation or have a view either way ?

My table etiquette is the attacking player first announces a Tactician Card and then asks the defender if he wants to play one before any die rolls are completed.

It's how we've handled Combined Arms involving cavalry to handle 'bounces' caused by squares.

So, you'd announce an attack and wait to see if the defender plays a card before you play yours as the attacker? That wouldn't fly at our table.

“ So, you'd announce an attack and wait to see if the defender plays a card before you play yours as the attacker?”

If the rules - in this case the card wording (plus an FAQ) - allow it, I might. Conversely, I wouldn’t complain if my opponent did the same. That seems fair. Some other games do define card play procedure in the way you like to play; Here I Stand comes to mind. C&C does not define TC play as attacker then defender, at least for those cards that can be played at precisely the same point. In that regard, I respect each designer’s decision as to what makes for a better game.

Where sequence is defined, as it is for the squaring procedure, it is not an issue. So, I am not sure if I understand the example you gave there and wonder if you read more into my original question than I intended.

I like to play to standard rules, one reason I value the FAQ on this site to resolve anomalies.

Still interested to hear views on my original question but for now I think it can be played by either player.

Didn't mean to sound harsh, no offense intended.

We've simply gotten into a rhythm where the attacker announces his attack, Tactician card and number of dice. The defender then announces square, retire & reform, stand and Tactician card when it affects the attackers roll.

After the attacker roll is applied to the defender - a battle back or breakthrough may ensue. Defender may play an appropriate Tactician card. Rinse and repeat.

Not a lot of time is spent discussing timing and perhaps this is wrong.

I agree with your first interpretation. The fact that the unit "first striking" cannot advance is irrelevant.