Skirmishers

[deadtorius]

In the rules I noticed it says that skirmishers have to evade and can only attempt to stand if charged by other skirmishers.

In our last game I had my Grenzers, deployed in skirmish and stayed that way for the whole game even though the were poor drilled, standing on top of a nice steep hill. At the bottom of the hill was a unit of wavering Italian shock mounted that was just itching to chase me off the hill by charging me, if they could only rally (which they had failed to do by the time we ran out of time)

Looking at the combat, I would start with 4 dice, the cav would get 6. I get 2 dice for uphill they get nothing so 6 to 6. Heavy cav in difficult fights as wavering, so down to 3 dice and I stay at 6. I lose a POA for skirmish in combat.

From the looks of it I stand a pretty good chance of beating them in this case. Defending a hill top is similar to defending an obstacle so do the lights have to evade in this situation? Same would apply if I was facing line troops in tactical and I am in woods and they want to charge in after me. Can I stand if defending something that is like a field fortification or do they always have to run away?

So far Grenzers were not too bad as long as they got stuff to hide in, but can't imagine they would do well in the open skirmishing.

[BrettPT]

My reading is that infantry skirmishers will always automatically evade when charged by anything (except other infantry skirmishers) in any terrain (except buildings, when you cannot be in skirmish formation). So your skirmishers cannot stand against the cavalry.

Remember with your example that heavy cavalry only move 2MU in difficult terrain, so will really struggle to charge anyway.
If there is room, I would snap the skirmishers into extended skirmish line to double your close range shooting if the cavalry do try to close to 2MU in their turn. You then take a shot in your subsequent turn and pull back to 3MU.

Even if they did somehow manage to get into combat, the cuirassiers would get no combat dice at all. Spent cavalry fights as 1 cohesion level lower and heavy cavalry in difficult fight as 2 cohesion levels lower - so 3 cohesion drops altogether = fight as broken (ie no dice).

Cheers
Brett

[LeslieMitchell]

Even if they did somehow manage to get into combat, the cuirassiers would get no combat dice at all. Spent cavalry fights as 1 cohesion level lower and heavy cavalry in difficult fight as 2 cohesion levels lower - so 3 cohesion drops altogether = fight as broken (ie no dice).

Thats wrong there is no additional effect on disorded or waving unit. (Page 69) a steady unit Fights or Fires as if disorder, i.e., 1 choesion level lower.

[BrettPT]

Thats wrong there is no additional effect on disorded or waving unit. (Page 69) a steady unit Fights or Fires as if disorder, i.e., 1 choesion level lower

Not sure I agree because if the HC are steady (but spent) to start with then they are neither "disordered or wavering" - therefore they do fight as 1 cohesion level lower - then drop a further 2 levels for HC in difficult. If they are disordered to start with, same net result. If wavering they cannot charge...

[deadtorius]

Actually you just take the worst case, so in this case they would fight at 2 levels lower or as wavering since you can't go any lower in combat.

Likewise a spent unit that is disordered only loses 1 die per 3 once, not 1 per 3 for spent then another 1 per 3 for disordered or 1 die per 3 for spent and an additional 1 per 2 for wavering. You would only lose 1 die per 2 for wavering spent or not.

At least that is my understanding from the other FOG sets. You can't fight any worse than wavering regardless.

As for the extended line, that had occurred to me too, line up the middle with the Italians and let them take 8 dice of shooting. Only problem with falling back is that I would go over the top of the hill, so 1 turn where I can't shoot them since they are on the other side of the peak and after that they could possibly get an up hill bonus.

Going to keep grabbing trees and steep hills if we continue in Italy

[BrettPT]

Not sure about the other FoG sets, but in FoGN it specifies that a unit with 3 cohesion losses cannot fire or fight (see pages 51 & 58).
There is also an example provided on page 58 "A wavering non-skirmishing unit in rough terrain would lose all of its dice" which confirms that cohesion level drops are cumulative.

So:

1. page 69, "A Spent, but otherwise Steady unit fires and fights as if 1 cohesion level lower. - ie fight as disordered (1 'drop').
2. page 69, dark purple part of table: "Unit [HC in difficult] fires and fights as if 2 cohesion levels lower".

- so three drops all up = no dice.

I haven't seen anywhere in the rules specifying you take the worst 'cohesion drop' that applies, ignoring lesser penalties. Given the pg 58 example, it seems clear to me that you add them up ...

A related point that some may not appreciate is that terrain penalties apply on top of the reduced combat dice for "All other troops or situations". For instance, a small infantry unit in tactical, fighting in the rough, only gets 3 dice in hand to hand (4 for "..other situations", and then drop a cohesion level for fighting in rough).

Cheers
Brett

[Blathergut]

I agree.

Page 51 (top left column, 2nd bullet point): "...a unit with 3 cohesion losses...cannot fire..." "...a wavering non-skirmisher in rough could not fire..."

Page 58 states the same as applied to combat.

So a unit can suffer 3 drops and not be able to shoot or fight.

[deadtorius]

missed that whole part, thanks for pointing it out. so much FOG on the brain it sometimes gets kind of mushed together. One more interesting aspect of the rules that keeps you out of silly situations. Still I would have liked to see the spent Italians come prancing up the hill to drive off my skirmishers, even if they could not fight when they got there.

[deadtorius]

Actually from page 58 it looks like you lose your dice for being in terrain, then you do lose more dice for cohesion losses... egads! the hills and forests look better all the time now.

Thanks for pointing that out Brett, something I had forgotten since read the rules. perhaps I should try to run a second Grenze unit and more trees after all.....

[LeslieMitchell]

1. page 69, "A Spent, but otherwise Steady unit fires and fights as if 1 cohesion level lower. - ie fight as disordered (1 'drop').
2. page 69, dark purple part of table: "Unit [HC in difficult] fires and fights as if 2 cohesion levels lower".

But if you apply the spend penalty cohesion lose after the terrain i.e. step 2 then step 1, the unit is no longer steady and therefore no addition cohesion lose.

[BrettPT]

I don't think it matters which way you apply them. The unit remains "steady" even with the drop for terrain, it simply fights (ie rolls dice) as if it was 3 levels lower.
If the HC went on to take 2 hits in the ensuing combat, it would not break but would drop to disordered.

[panda2]

How does this tie in with the statement on p.58 that "Non-Skirmishers in unfavourable terrrain fight as 1 cohesion level lower"?

Is this in addition or instead of the 2 level drop for being in difficult terrain? I had always assumed the later, so that non-skisrmshers fight at reduced dice for being "All other troops or situations" (p.56) and fight as 1 cohesion level lower for unfavourable terrain (p.58). If you add in a futher 2 level reduction for being in difficult terrain (although no such reduction is mentioned in the combat mechanism section) then even a non-spent steady unit of non-skirmishers fights with zero dice in difficult terrain.

Andy D

[Blathergut]

It seems that the statement on p. 58 "non-skirmishers in unfavourable terrain fight as one cohesion level lower" is at odds with the Movement Chart which has units dropping one or two levels depending on the severity of the terrain. Perhaps Terry could clarify?

[deadtorius]

I had noticed that last night, conflict in the rules. The examples given would imply that the intent was to only drop one level and the charts might be wrong being a direct copy from the other FOG rules. Clarification would certainly help.

[BrettPT]

Nice spot Mr Panda
An errata to clarify whether the chart on page 36 (and the newly released QRS), or the text on page 58, is correct would be good.

- one for your list Terry?

[terrys]

An errata to clarify whether the chart on page 36 (and the newly released QRS), or the text on page 58, is correct would be good.

Page 58 should read "Non-Skirmishers in unfavourable terrain fight as 1 or 2 levels of cohesion lower."