Later Tercio casualties

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Thu May 19, 2011 4:23 am

If a 9 base Later Tercio has lost 3 bases it is now a 4 pike and 2 shot unit.

Does it still count as a Later Tercio for flank and support purposes? In reading the rules i could find nothing saying it doesn't stay an LT.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Thu May 19, 2011 6:13 am

IIRC it always remains a tercio.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu May 19, 2011 7:40 am

nikgaukroger wrote:IIRC it always remains a tercio.

Yup. We decided not to complicate the rules by doing otherwise.

Scrumpy · Post by **Scrumpy** » Thu May 19, 2011 10:17 am

Do Tercios count as self-supporting even if fragged ?

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu May 19, 2011 10:51 am

Scrumpy wrote:Do Tercios count as self-supporting even if fragged ?

It would appear so.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:16 pm

Its what I figured, but was found by omission, not clearly stated.

Scrumpy · Post by **Scrumpy** » Thu May 19, 2011 6:23 pm

So in theory a LT that is routing can count as self-supporting if it has no enemy within range of its own rear edge to stop the support ?

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu May 19, 2011 7:16 pm

hazelbark wrote:Its what I figured, but was found by omission, not clearly stated.

The general rule is - if it isn't in the rules, it isn't in the rules.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu May 19, 2011 7:17 pm

Scrumpy wrote:So in theory a LT that is routing can count as self-supporting if it has no enemy within range of its own rear edge to stop the support ?

Sad, but true. We probably would have put in an exception for this if we had thought of it, but think how much simpler the rules are for not having the exception.

I don't think I will lose any sleep over this one. They have to be at least 12 MUs away from their defeaters before they can count it.

"Good enough for government work" as the saying goes.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Fri May 20, 2011 2:50 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
hazelbark wrote:Its what I figured, but was found by omission, not clearly stated.
The general rule is - if it isn't in the rules, it isn't in the rules.

That's what I thought. But it was suggested elsewhere I might be wrong.

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Sat May 21, 2011 10:05 am

Dan, I did not know dave was on this forum...

shadowdragon · Post by **shadowdragon** » Sat May 21, 2011 2:58 pm

timmy1 wrote:Dan, I did not know dave was on this forum...

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sun May 22, 2011 3:27 am

timmy1 wrote:Dan, I did not know dave was on this forum...

Dave's avoided me since he was so catastrophically defeated.

viperofmilan · Post by **viperofmilan** » Mon May 23, 2011 4:51 pm

If I remember my POAs correctly, artillery gets a + for shooting at tercios. Since LTs continue to be treated as tercios, would artillery firing on a reduced LT still get the + shooting POA? I assume it would given the tenor of this thread.

Kevin

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Mon May 23, 2011 5:36 pm

They sure do

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Tue May 24, 2011 7:41 am

Think of it as the later tercio attempting to maintain a deeper formation than normal pike and shot units by bunching up after casualties.

(This may or may not be what actually happened, but it at least gives a rationale for the LT retaining its LT properties after losses).

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Tue May 24, 2011 6:34 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:Think of it as the later tercio attempting to maintain a deeper formation than normal pike and shot units by bunching up after casualties.

(This may or may not be what actually happened, but it at least gives a rationale for the LT retaining its LT properties after losses).

A small price to pay for not having flanks and getting self support.

viperofmilan · Post by **viperofmilan** » Thu Jun 16, 2011 2:28 pm

Are tercios and kiels exempt then from the requirment that supporting BGs must be steady? I would have thought they must be steady in order to self-support.

Kevin

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Thu Jun 16, 2011 3:49 pm

viperofmilan wrote:Are tercios and kiels exempt then from the requirment that supporting BGs must be steady?

That rule only applies to support by other BGs. So yes, they are exempt.