Buildings!!!!

[AndyClaxton]

Okay, so looking at the responses received so far, it looks as though the answers are as follows:

1. If you have a unit that is already "Occupying" a building* do you need to pass a CMT to change to "Defending" the building*?
No you don't need to pass a CMT in this situation.

2. If you are "Occupying" a building* and take hits from artillery and fail the CMT to advance, can you still change from "Occupying" to "Defending" or would that count as an advance?
You can change from Occupying to Defending as it doesn't count as an advance.

3. When "Defending" a building*, if you get an outcome of retire do you retire and if so where do you measure the retire distance from? (I know that you don't retire when in combat until you are routed.)
I'm not sure there's been a definitive answer as the rules only state that you don't retire when in combat!? I assume if you do retire that you measure from a point closest to the unit that makes you retire but I'm not sure that this is correct.

4. When "Occupying" a building* you can be shot at by artillery but what can you shoot at?
I think that the answer here is that you can't shoot.

5. If an enemy unit is "Occupying" a building* it can be forced out by artillery fire forcing it to retire but how else can you force it out? (Can it be assaulted? If it can't be seen to be shot how can it be assaulted? Also, only one unit is allowed in a building*!)
Not sure that I have a definitive answer to this one.

6. In the rules it defines "Buildings*" as being small sized terrain pieces, I assume that this actually means a normal sized terrain piece?
The phrase small terrain piece should be replaced by normal sized terrain piece.

As I'd like to consider entering competitions for this period it's important that the answers to the questions are accurate so that I know how these situations will be ruled.

Andy

[deadtorius]

3. You can only be forced out of a defended building if you break. You ignore any retire moves while defending.
Occupying it looks like its normal outcome moves.

4. You can not shoot if you are occupying.

5. You can assault enemy units occupying a building. The assaulting unit moves into contact with the edge of the terrain piece, but does not enter it unless the current occupants are forced out, then you can move into the building as a pursuit and occupy it yourself.

6. There are 2 sizes of terrain in the game, small and large. Buildings can only be small, this has been mentioned as an errata addition by an author so you can go with this one. Look at the terrain section for the size restrictions.

[AndyClaxton]

Many thanks for everyones answers to my questions, I think we're almost there but I still have issues with question 3.

I agree with donm in that the rules appear to distinguish between combat and firing in relationship to buildings under the headings "General Rules for Combat Against Defended Buildings" and "Firing to or from Buildings". Why have two headings if you can take the statement "Units defending a building will only leave it from an outcome move if they are Broken." from one and assume it should sit under both? From what I can see all of the bullet points under the two headings specifically relate to the heading so under the General Rules it only talks about close combat scenarios and under Firing it only covers firing. Therefore my view is that you do retire from firing the way the rules are currently written. Perhaps we could get a response from Terry?

Andy

[deadtorius]

Not sure what the problem is, page 77 last bullet right hand side under general rules for combat against defended buildings says: Units defending a building will only leave it from an outcome move if they are broken.

Seems pretty clear once you are defending the only way you are getting kicked out is by being broken.

[SirGarnet]

That issue is all about if and how the chapter heading and subheadings define and limit the scope of rules located within that portion. Rules touching on several different types of support (for firing, combat, and cohesion tests) were the cloudiest area for me. As to buildings I agree with Deadtorious, but largely on historical and common sense grounds.

[AndyClaxton]

MikeK you're absolutely right it's all about the headings, I don't disagree with your sentiment in terms of historical and common sense grounds as it's exactly what we thought, but when competing one has to do what's ruled by the umpire, so as far as I'm concerned it's still unclear.

[donm]

Both Andrew and I were beta play testers, all be it towards the end of the process.

Both of us would like to play the rules in competitions and so we need to get these things cleared up so that we know what we is going to be ruled.

I think it is pretty clear from the various interpretations on here, that these things need clearing up.

Hopefully we won't have to wait too long for the official errata & clarifications.

Don

[donm]

One of the points that was not discussed within this threat was the size of this terrain piece.

Although it says buildings can only be small pieces and we know that really means 'Normal', this size can vary from a minimum of 4" x 6" to a maximum of just under 12" x 12".

If the battle is being fought in 'France & Central Europe', then it is possible for 4 - 12" x 12" buildings to be placed. As we are not totally sure how buildings will be ruled, I think that the size of the terrain piece needs to be taken into consideration.

Should there have been a clarification of a 'small terrain piece', and should it maybe have read a 'minimum' sized piece?

Just trying to avoid the need for another clarification.

Don

[panda2]

A 12" x 12" square cannot fit inside a 12" diameter circle and so wouldn't be a legal normal feature. The largest square that can fit inside a 12" diameter circle is 8.48" x 8.48". However, in practice, I doubt many players would want to place a feature much larger than the minimum size required to accomodate a large unit. This can be achived in a 6" x 4" minimum size piece. Anything bigger just allows more units to assault or fire at the defender.

[SirGarnet]

Good observation. A small BUA is the most easily defended from attack in a single direction (a maximum of 3 opponents in tactical formations might conceivably contact a single side of a 6" x 4" BUA) so makes a good strongpoint for incorporation in a line of battle. If isolated so that attackers can engage more than one face, however, even a small BUA can be hit by a half dozen units on just a couple of faces, which is enough to make 6 or more hits (a Break) more likely than not. Or the enemy fire can just shoot the garrison to pieces.

An isolated large BUA is easier to get at but really no more vulnerable, and offers a better obstacle to obstruct and harass enemy movements with fire and a sponge to soak off enemy attention.

I noted that large units defending a BUA still reduce hits by one but don't provide their own rear support in Combat - an external source of rear support is required (and attackers don't count support at all). This suggests using supported BUAs a little forward of the line of battle as breakwaters and sponges - like La Haye Sainte or Hougoumont.

BTW, to allow a large unit to be placed inside facing at any angle would require a minimum size closer to 6" x 5." For defenders, this is just for visual effect.

[donm]

The largest square that can fit inside a 12" diameter circle is 8.48" x 8.48".

Sorry, didn't write what I meant. It does not have to be a rectangle it can be any shape along as it fits inside a 12" diameter circle. So an irregular shape just under 12" across at it widest point. Still seems a very large piece when considering you can place them next to each other.

I am not sure it is easy to get them to rout. Bear in mind that you only drop 1 level at medium range and so you will have to move into close range (2"). This means that the defender will fire first with 4 dice against each and very enemy shooting at it (artillery attachments can add one dice to one target). It is possible some of the attackers will drop a level and others may retire out of 2". The defender will then get a chance to recover their unit, before the attacker has a chance to fire again or recover any of their units. Bear in mind that you can only drop two levels from shooting in any move.

A good quallty large unit in a building with rear support does appear to be looking a good idea. Put a couple of buildings together to stop the attacker flanking them and they will make a very good refused flank.

Don

[deadtorius]

so far our experience of defending a building has not been that great. I managed to shoot enemy occupiers to disrupted with artillery, then brought 2 foot units, one of them in extended line, into close range and with the artillery adding its own dice again managed to break the defenders. I then moved in and defended them myself and also got shot to broke while defending from adjacent artillery. So far buildings are not looking too good for us at least.

[Philip]

That seems like a reasonable result. If you commit a couple of units with artillery support you ought to take a town. The defenders need just one unit in the buildings to tie up far more enemy resources for several turns, and that seems like a useful thing to do.

The effect of the buildings is that you can defend a position for a while against larger numbers. If you have high quality defenders it may be a tough fight, but even low quality foot can hold out much longer in buildings than in the open. If the defenders have further support they may even bundle out a successful assault in a counterattack the following turn.

[SirGarnet]

I am not sure it is easy to get them to rout. Bear in mind that you only drop 1 level at medium range and so you will have to move into close range (2"). This means that the defender will fire first with 4 dice against each and very enemy shooting at it (artillery attachments can add one dice to one target). It is possible some of the attackers will drop a level and others may retire out of 2". The defender will then get a chance to recover their unit, before the attacker has a chance to fire again or recover any of their units. Bear in mind that you can only drop two levels from shooting in any move.
Don

Yes, the first turn we want to get two units (1 Large might do) in close range so the odds are favorable there will be some shooting in at close range that with 4+ hits knocks the defender to Wavering, which would force the defenders out unless the defender must be broken to be forced out (open question). It might recover to Disordered, but the next turn 2 drops would take it to Broken. It is likely that some of the attacking units are dented or banged up and require a regroup and recovery.

[AndyClaxton]

Okay, knowing that Terry is busy with the number of posts on the forum I sent him a PM related to my questions on this post and I've received the following answers:

Q1. When "Defending" a building and getting hit from firing, if you get an outcome of retire do you retire? (Or do you only retire when broken?)
A1. You do retire.

Q2. If you do retire where do you measure the retire distance from? (I know that you don't retire when in combat until you are routed.)
A2. Your unit ends in tactical formation with its rear edge in contact with the building (direction is away from the firers). This means that it has a chance to immediately re-enter on the following turn.- with a CMT - or 2 CMTs if your unit is disrupted and the enemy is within 2MU of the building.

So, there we have it.

Andy

[deadtorius]

Sorry to stir the pot again but page 77 last bullet states "Units defending a building will only leave it from an outcome move if they are broken"

Perhaps he misread and thought you were referring to occupying, which you do normal outcome moves for being shot at.

[Chasseur]

Hi,

Thanks for the follow-up to clarify Andy, but

DEFENDING
I would rather see that units defending a building only retire from firing if Broken. Our group has (perhaps mistakenly) been playing it this way and it works very well. Historically you need to go into a building and extract defenders with the bayonet (or very close shooting) street to street and house to house. Allowing people to move several units up and shoot at you without "getting their hands dirty" does not give the right feel. Currently it means that buildings could be cleared by skirmish fire by units sitting back at medium range.
I think this makes it easier than it should be to remove defenders if you can do it just by fire without the defenders becoming Broken. Defenders regard the buildings as providing protection and are very unwilling to leave this protection. The men are dispersed throughout the structures and would be very unwilling to leave the protection of the houses/walls/barns because it may involve them running the gauntlet of enemy fire in an open street as they retire from the enemy.

OCCUPYING
Units that are just occupying a building should be able to be forced to retire by Artillery as a normal outcome (even when not Broken). After all, they are generally still grouped in plazas, courtyards and roadways and the firing (which can be from artillery only) and the shooting may just speed them on their way.

OTHER
If howitzers set a town on fire, then defending or occupying units are likely to want to leave.

Cheers,
John Shaw

[Chasseur]

Hi deadtorius,

The problem comes that the last dot point on p.77 is in the section "GENERAL RULES FOR COMBAT AGAINST DEFENDED BUILDINGS" and not also on p.78 "FIRING TO OR FROM BUILDINGS". Hence at the moment it only appears that the "not retiring unless Broken" p.77 only applies to assaults and not to firing.
I would rather it applied to both as per explanation above.

Cheers,
John Shaw

[deadtorius]

Keep in mind you can only shoot a unit to broken from close range, so you kind of have to get close and dirty to get them out. Skirmishers can only ever knock them to wavering so they can stay and maybe recover to disrupted or steady.

I don't think I saw any mention of buildings set on fire in the rules, but perhaps it was something I missed. I recall WRG covered it with howitzers in their rules.

[deadtorius]

I agree with you on that. We have always played it that way too, you can't shoot or assault them out until they are broken, which has not really been an overly difficult task for either of us so far.