Infantry firing with cavalry nearby

[martinvantol]

On page 50 of the rules ("Effects of enemy cavalry") it explains that cavalry would force skirmishers to operate closer to their parent unit, reducing the firepower of the infantry unit. This implies that cavalry affect infantry firing at 2-6 MUs.
The rule beneath the explanation implies that cavalry within 6 MUs of an infantry unit reduce its firepower, i.e. at 0-6 MUs.
The table on page 49 has the cavalry factor listed in the medium range fire table, again implying that the effect is only at 2-6 MUs.

So my questions are:
(a) Do cavalry reduce infantry firepower at at 0-6 MUs, or at 2-6 MUs?
(b) Would they still limit the unit's firepower if all it consisted of was an artillery attachment?

I think I know the answer to both questions, but I have had opponents apply a ruling to me that I think is illogical (although could be inferred from some of the wording in some places).

Many thanks
Martin

[BrettPT]

Hi Martin

I haven't got my rules with me, however cavalry reduce medium range shooting, 2-6 MU. They do not affect close range shooting or artillery (either artillery attachments or units).

It is also worth noting that under the latest errata, a cavalry unit does not affect shooting if the cavalry are wavering, broken or in combat themselves.

Cheers
Brett

[martinvantol]

Hi Martin

I haven't got my rules with me, however cavalry reduce medium range shooting, 2-6 MU. They do not affect close range shooting or artillery (either artillery attachments or units).

It is also worth noting that under the latest errata, a cavalry unit does not affect shooting if the cavalry are wavering, broken or in combat themselves.

Cheers
Brett

Thanks, Brett
That certainly makes sense.

Martin

[hazelbark]

Also remember that is for cavalry. For Cavalry attachments it only applies if the attachment unit is being shot.

[martinvantol]

Also remember that is for cavalry. For Cavalry attachments it only applies if the attachment unit is being shot.

Thanks, that's useful. I've been caught on that one too.

Martin