Question after first game

[PZSkovgaard]

Just had the first game of FoG:N. Two quick questions:

1. Unit sizes where do the rule book define the unit sizes, small inf. unit four bases, large six bases - right? what about artillery units? please give me a page number I can not find the definition.

2. A wavering inf. unit is charged and fails the cohesion test and becomes broken - will it still recive the charge and not strike back? why can a wavering unit reform when charged as described on page 30?

Christian

[SirGarnet]

1. Artillery have 2 or 3 bases, as provided in lists. They add a 4th if they have an Artillery Attachment. See circa p87 for discussion of arty and other troops.

2. The wavering unit failed the mandatory CT for being charged with the result being Cohesion Loss to Broken (p69).
If they had passed the test, they could take a second test to reform if they Stand and wish to reform (meaning change facing or formation, if otherwise eligible). I don't see any penalty for failure on page 30 or in the Cohesion Test tables so I think it just means you can't.
The assaulting unit is moved to contact (p24 col 2).
In combat, there is combat for every non-broken unit (p55co;2). It says Broken units have zero dice (p58). The attacker allocates his dice, but against the already Broken unit the only relevance of hits I can think of at the moment is that 3 hits force a Commander Casualty roll on a commander attached to the broken unit (p66), so otherwise why bother?
Broken unit retires per Combat Resolution table (p61).
Attacker may pursue (Pursuit Table p65), and contact.
Broken units are destroyed when contacted in pursuit (p86).
Attacker may contact other units and fight a second immediate combat phase (p66).

[BrettPT]

2. The wavering unit failed the mandatory CT for being charged with the result being Cohesion Loss to Broken (p69).
If they had passed the test, they could take a second test to reform if they Stand and wish to reform (meaning change facing or formation, if otherwise eligible). I don't see any penalty for failure on page 30 or in the Cohesion Test tables so I think it just means you can't.

The only reforming I think they can do is form square if charged by cavalry, or change to tactical if in square and charged by infantry. Either way the troops are placed in the desired formation and then a CT is taken, with the unit dropping a cohesion level if this CT is failed. (see page 30 "Any failure of this test results in the testing unit dropping one level")

The assaulting unit is moved to contact (p24 col 2).

We have always played that if the defending unit breaks before contact as a result of a failed CT, then it routs immediately. The assaulting unit moves it's charge move to where the target used to be, and may 'convert charge' to a new target that is within 2MU of where the original defender stood (page 31).

I cannot see anything in the rules that says that a unit broken unit in these circumstances either makes an outcome move (ie runs away), or stands their broken. However running away seems the right thing to do.

If the intention is actually that the broken unit does not run away, but stands there broken, there would be no combat as the broken unit would be destroyed on contact - page 72 "If a broken unit is conatcted by an enemy assault or pursuit they are immediately destroyed."

[deadtorius]

Broken units always run away, if they get caught by the unit that charged them then they are destroyed. Since a broken unit can not pass through friends but could shift to get by, there is a chance that a routing unit might get stuck in front of the blocking friends and get caught by the chargers (who make their normal charge move) and if this happens the broken unit is destroyed.

[SirGarnet]

The only reforming I think they can do is form square if charged by cavalry, or change to tactical if in square and charged by infantry. Either way the troops are placed in the desired formation and then a CT is taken, with the unit dropping a cohesion level if this CT is failed. (see page 30 "Any failure of this test results in the testing unit dropping one level")

"This test" refers to the test for being charged. The consequences of passing and failing are then discussed. The paragraph says that if the unit stands, it may test again to reform. I supposed this would be a CT. Since this is not "this test" for wavering being charged but a different second test only if the first is passed, I would expect cohesion loss to be a result. I can't find any provision in the CT sections for that second test or its outcome; howeer, reforming is a CMT item it would make sense for that to be the type of test that is left unspecified.

Terry & Mike, could we get clarification of which test is intended?

page 72 "If a broken unit is conatcted by an enemy assault or pursuit they are immediately destroyed."

Thanks - I missed that - the similar language starting on p65-66 made express reference only to pursuit.

I understand the logic of a rout move, but an outcome move requires combat, and Broken troops may rout in the Movement phase. Unless there is a special rule providing for a rout move during the assault phase itself, I think the broken unit must stay in place, milling about in confusion, and be destroyed when contacted. The converted charge language on p31 only covers units that move out of range. I don't yet see other rules that allow the attacker to do more than clean up the broken troops, and do combat with any other enemies contacted in the assault.

[terrys]

"This test" refers to the test for being charged. The consequences of passing and failing are then discussed. The paragraph says that if the unit stands, it may test again to reform. I supposed this would be a CT. Since this is not "this test" for wavering being charged but a different second test only if the first is passed, I would expect cohesion loss to be a result. I can't find any provision in the CT sections for that second test or its outcome; howeer, reforming is a CMT item it would make sense for that to be the type of test that is left unspecified.

The most relevent information on this if found on page 69 in the "Responding to an assault table".
It was a difficult choice of whether or not to put this table in the assault phase section or here. We decided that is should go with the rest of the CT's because otherwise we'd have to repeat most of the other CT notes.

To answer the question:
Both the "Wavering unit having an assault declared on it" and "infantry assaulted by cava;ry in the open and not in square" entries are in this table and both state that there is a cohesion loss if the test is failed. The note stating that infantry tale an additional cohesion loss if assaulted by cavalry within 2MU is also here.

I understand the logic of a rout move, but an outcome move requires combat, and Broken troops may rout in the Movement phase. Unless there is a special rule providing for a rout move during the assault phase itself, I think the broken unit must stay in place, milling about in confusion, and be destroyed when contacted. The converted charge language on p31 only covers units that move out of range. I don't yet see other rules that allow the attacker to do more than clean up the broken troops, and do combat with any other enemies contacted in the assault.

Units broken for any reason retire according to the instructions in the outcome table.
Sorry if that's not as obvious as it could be.
If they break because of being charged they will start running before the enemy get to them. If they run far enough to outdistance the chargers they will get chance to recover in their own recovery phase.

[SirGarnet]

Both the "Wavering unit having an assault declared on it" and "infantry assaulted by cava;ry in the open and not in square" entries are in this table and both state that there is a cohesion loss if the test is failed. The note stating that infantry tale an additional cohesion loss if assaulted by cavalry within 2MU is also here.

Thanks for the clarifications. Two aspects seem still unanswered:

Q1: Additional in that the extra cohesion loss only applies after the test is failed (so the unit does not succeed in forming a timely square) and the cavalry's attempt to assault succeeds (i.e, not stopped by defensive fire) and becomes an actual assault?

Q2: If the wavering CT is passed, is the test that they take if they wish to reform a CT or CMT (as described on p30col1 second to last bullet)?

[BrettPT]

Q1: Additional in that the extra cohesion loss only applies after the test is failed (so the unit does not succeed in forming a timely square) and the cavalry's attempt to assault succeeds (i.e, not stopped by defensive fire) and becomes an actual assault?

The wording on the page 69 table is "Infantry not in square take an additional automatic loss if assaulted by cavalry starting from within 2MU" [bold added].

So if cavalry within 2MU declare an assault on infantry (who are not in square) then the infantry automatically drop a cohesion level. This drop is regardless of whether they decide to form square or instead to rely on firepower to stop the charge, and is in addition to any other drop the unit may take.

The infantry would then go on to take the normal CT for infantry being charged by mounted while not in square.

This 'automatic drop' rule was introduced in the playtest process to make it risky for an individual infantry unit to simply advance full speed straight at an enemy cavalry unit, which had been was an unrealistic tactic that had been developing in playtest games, especially with veteran infantry units.

Q2: If the wavering CT is passed, is the test that they take if they wish to reform a CT or CMT (as described on p30col1 second to last bullet)?

the test to reform is a CT, as descibed on pg30 . The test is also listed on the CT table but not the CMT table.

Cheers
Brett

[SirGarnet]

So if cavalry within 2MU declare an assault on infantry (who are not in square) then the infantry automatically drop a cohesion level. This drop is regardless of whether they decide to form square or instead to rely on firepower to stop the charge, and is in addition to any other drop the unit may take.

OK. The key point is what "assault" means. I understand now that it is the declaration itself that constitutes the "assault" - whether or not followed later by contact preceding combat, interception {edit:}(even if that cancels the assault with a flank/rear intercept? - or wait until Reaction before doing the Cohesion Loss?), or whatever else may occur. Clear, as is the playtest explanation,

The automatic drop deprecates the ability of veteran unreformed troops in line to deter or see off cavalry (in the 18th C), but admittedly along with reforms squares became prudent and expected practice and troops would have been uneased without them. One might think interception would sustained the infantry's confidence, but I assume that was found problematic in testing as well?

the test to reform is a CT, as descibed on pg30 . The test is also listed on the CT table but not the CMT table.

I don't see on the CT table on p 69-70 any test that seems connected to "test a second time if they stand and also wish to reform". They already passsed a test to stand despite wavering. I am looking for a test relating to "Reforming" as broadly defined in the Glossary (p107), to change facing, for example. So does this refer only to reforming to square in the circumstance "Infantry assaulted by Cavalry in the open & not in Square" where they desire to form square?

[terrys]

I don't see on the CT table on p 69-70 any test that seems connected to "test a second time if they stand and also wish to reform". They already passsed a test to stand despite wavering. I am looking for a test relating to "Reforming" as broadly defined in the Glossary (p107), to change facing, for example. So does this refer only to reforming to square in the circumstance "Infantry assaulted by Cavalry in the open & not in Square" where they desire to form square?

The entry "test a second time if they stand and also wish to reform" refers to forming square when charged by cavalry and forming tactical when charged by infantry. No other formation changes are allowed. We didn't (at the time) think that repeating this information was required.

[SirGarnet]

So the intent of the language is just to follow up "If they pass, they will stand or evade as normal." with a reminder that the normal assault reactions and cohesion tests still apply?

[terrys]

So the intent of the language is just to follow up "If they pass, they will stand or evade as normal." with a reminder that the normal assault reactions and cohesion tests still apply?

Yes