Colunela Foot

[ravenflight]

Hey all,

WTF are these?

3 pike, 1 swordsman, 2 arquebus in a small 6 base BG... wtf

What do they actually DO?

Still haven't got my head around the rules, so please accept that, but the unit looks pretty much useless.

Do the swordsmen act as a fourth rank of pike? I think I've read somewhere that heavy weapon in a column of pike act as pike, but I'm still not sure. If that's the case, I can understand - they kinda look a bit like a mini tercio... If that's the case, what's the point of making a special base of 'swordsmen'? For 'history' or is there a purpose?

Another thing - in (for example) the Caroline Imperialist list it states (in Germany et al) that you must have as many Landsknects as Colunela foot. If I had 1 Landsknect Grand Battle Group for every 2 Colunela foot BG's have I met the requirements? Conversely, if I ran Tercios of 16 bases and Lansknect Keils of 10 bases would I need to run 2 Landsknects for every Tercio?

Sorry guys, this 'going from FoG:A to FoG:R' isn't easy for my little brain.

[jefritrout]

Let's start with the swordsmen. Yes they do act like a fourth rank of pike when deployed in that column. As to looking like a mini-tercio they are the begining of the evolution to the tercio. It was an early form of mixing pike and shot in the same unit. The swordmen are also nice if you can get them as an overlap. Any foot swordsmen (or warriors) fighting as an overlap get an automatic ++ POA. That can tip the balance.

Now as to how effective they are, there is a difference of opinion. I like them, but most people don't.
I have beaten the Swiss and the early Italians with them. They are an effective unit to get a bit of shooting while still combining the shock of 4 deep pike. The problem is that they are small. When their typical opponent is a 14 stand GBG of pikemen they obviously need help. However for 38 points a pop, you can get 2 or 3 of them to combine up against the GBG. For your shooting to be effective you really need to have at least two of them shooting at one opponent. The drawback is that in melee a general only gets to help one unit whereas a contemporary GBG has only general covering 14 stands.

I haven't really looked at the Caroline Imperialist list so I can't help you there.

[puster]

Another thing - in (for example) the Caroline Imperialist list it states (in Germany et al) that you must have as many Landsknects as Colunela foot.

Note that (for armies in Flanders or Germany) you need to have at least as many BATTLEGROUPS, not bases. That means that 4 Landsknecht arquebusiers weight up a Colunela.

If I had 1 Landsknect Grand Battle Group for every 2 Colunela foot BG's have I met the requirements? Conversely, if I ran Tercios of 16 bases and Lansknect Keils of 10 bases would I need to run 2 Landsknects for every Tercio?

No to the first (you need more BGs) and
No to the second, the size of the Keil is irrelevant

[ravenflight]

Hmm,

So even though a Grand Battle Group counts as two BG's it doesn't count as two BG's.

Interesting.

[Vespasian28]

I must admit I made the same assumption that you simply need one Landsknect etc for one Colunela/Tercio. Grand Battle Groups counting as 2 BG did not enter my thinking and still doesn't as I think this just applies to army size, breakpoint and deployment etc.

But I have been wrong many times before

[panda2]

I think Vespasian is probably correct as far as the rules are currently written. As far as I can see, all the instances where GBGs are said to count as 2 BGs contain the phrase "for this purpose" or something similar. This suggests it not intended as a general rule, but only applies to the specific instances under discussion, i.e. deployment etc... No doubt this is important, otherwise it might be arguable that BG seeing a GBG rout should count as having two reaons to test, for example.

Nevertheless, I do think that the Caroline Imperialist list would work better if each GBG counted double for the BG limits. Unless, of course, there is evidence that the number of spanish troops available to the army of flanders did double around the same time the new formation was adopted. It would be interesting to know what the list author intended. Similarly, it would be interesting to know if this is the same for other lists that can field GBGs and have BG limits, such as the French Wars of Religion lists.

Andy

[ravenflight]

I think Vespasian is probably correct as far as the rules are currently written. As far as I can see, all the instances where GBGs are said to count as 2 BGs contain the phrase "for this purpose" or something similar. This suggests it not intended as a general rule, but only applies to the specific instances under discussion, i.e. deployment etc... No doubt this is important, otherwise it might be arguable that BG seeing a GBG rout should count as having two reaons to test, for example.

Nevertheless, I do think that the Caroline Imperialist list would work better if each GBG counted double for the BG limits. Unless, of course, there is evidence that the number of spanish troops available to the army of flanders did double around the same time the new formation was adopted. It would be interesting to know what the list author intended. Similarly, it would be interesting to know if this is the same for other lists that can field GBGs and have BG limits, such as the French Wars of Religion lists.

Andy

I think that the way the list is written that this wasn't taken into account. It's a very arbitrary list limitation.

For instance, after 1534 you can have a list that has (basic example):

A non GBG Tercio of 12 bases; and,
A non GBG Keil of 10 bases.

Thats 1 BG for 1 BG.

You could also have:

A GBG Tercio of 16 bases; and,
A non GBG Keil of 10 bases.

You could also have:

A non GBG Tersio of 12 bases; and,
A GBG Keil of 16 bases.

I think the list is trying to make you have at least as many Germans in your German Caroline Imperialist, so IMHO should be on bases, not on BG's.

But, I'm ok either which way - I'm not likely to build the army, just trying to get my head around the nuances of the lists.

I do like the Caroline Imperial army tho.

[Vespasian28]

I have been looking at the Caroline Imperialists with the intent of morphing up my Trastmaran Spanish when they are finished.
So, just to clarify what exactly is a Caroline army in Germany?

As far as I can make out from the list the only thing that makes your Carolines specifically in Germany or Flanders, and liable to the 1 Landsknecht/1 Colunela formula, is if you have Hungarian Hussars in your army?

[timmy1]

Probably worth adding to the FAQ request thread

[davbenbak]

May be silly questions but I'll give it a go anyways. So if the swordsmen are lined up behind the shot they move forward when contact is made during impact? If the swordsmen are lined up behind the pikes how and when do they get an overlap/

[Vespasian28]

Hi,

Only used Colunelas once so far but as far as I know the swordsman can be behind the shot but can only move into an overlap position(assuming there is one) during the manoeuvre phase prior to melee. If behind the pike they can contribute to the pike 4 rank POA and even the 3 rank POA denying, for instance, the heavy Weapon POA to the enemy. If contributing or denying a POA they cannot move out into an overlap. This is one advantage of the deeper keils where they have enough pike to maintain POA leaving swordsmen/heavy weapons free to pop out where convenient.

When I used Colunelas last Saturday against the Ming(I know, wrong geographically but right time period) the ones that got in were facing four wide units of 8 so no chance of overlapping so the swordsmen stayed where they were helping the pike chop their way through as a third or fourth rank.