"Emergency" square in rough terrain

[richafricanus]

Infantry charged by mounted in rough don't need to test for being charged as they're not in the open. But can they still change into square? They might want to do this so as not to have to retire from the cavalry if they lose the fight.

[KendallB]

No reason why they shouldn't be able to.

[pugsville]

seems odd that you can get disordered forming an emergency square in the open, but you can't in a wood.

[Sarmaticus]

In the previous threads on cavalry versus infantry in woods, I posted a couple of instances of this interaction. In both, inability to form square in forests that would be Rough and Cover in FOGN terms meant disaster for the infantry. It was clear that military opinion of the day regarded placing infantry in such terrain with cavalry about was folly.

[Saxonian]

The convention appears to be that visibility is reduced to 2MU in cover, therefor a charge can only be declared from that distance, with the penalties that entails for inf charged by cav.
But the question here is about rough only - so a field, rocky or brush or even soft sand.
Infantry in cover would have the problem of seeing the charge coming from a far enough distance to have time to form square, whereas the definition for rough ground (p.96-97) specifically states that this does not block line of sight.

There is no penalty if an inf unit elects to form square in rough ground as a formation change in a regular move.
However the rules for Reaction Moves state that for inf to form square as a charge response requires a cohesion test -

All other actions require a cohesion test to be taken. (LH column just before the bullet points at the bottom.)

The wording of the rules seems to suggest that the cohesion test is caused by being charged in the open, not the formation change as -

Infantry in the open who are neither in square nor behind an obstacle must take a Cohesion Test if being assaulted by cavalry. The owning player must choose whether or not to form square and the infantry always ends in the formation chosen even if the test is failed.

It seems to be that the cohesion test is caused by being in the open, and the formation change is a choice, and free.
Therefor an inf unit assaulted by cav in the rough gets a free formation change into square, and the only cost is not having any defensive fire, which seems a little generous.

Perhaps if an inf unit in rough wants to change into square as a charge reaction it can choose to do so at the cost of the cohesion test, which means that if you elect to stand and shoot (as 1 cohesion level lower of course), there is no test required.

[BrettPT]

My view on this has always been that the rules don't allow infantry to form (emergency) square unless they are in the open. The rule allowing you to form square as a charge response is a follow on from the previous sentence about infantry in the open having to take a CMT - it's not a separate rule in its own right.

I don't have a problem with this, hastily forming a square in disordering terrain should be an issue, and I have never read of infantry forming squares in woods.
You need to have formed square in your preceeding movement phase if you want to be in a square when assaulted.

In general, the rules as written for cavalry assaulting into terrain cause problems. We've tried various local options to remedy this - the lastest being to simply say the cavalry may not launch assaults at infantry who are in difficult terrain.
This doesn't address issues of infantry in rough, however this is less of a problem as:

a) infantry don't need to test when charged.
b) the mounted have to close to 6MU to start their charge - so you can see it coming and form square in your movement phase if desired
c) a small infantry unit will get 3 dice to stand and shoot - normally enough to cause a CMT-to-close on the cavalry
d) the cavalry only get 3 dice (small unit) - same as the infantry - in rough and so are are unlikely to do much more than push the infantry back.

Bottom line, infantry in disordering terrain need to make a decision on formation early when threatened by cavalry. Don't wait until the enemy are charging at you to decide you want to be in a square.

[KeefM]

I agree with Brett. No test is required so there is no option to form square.

[terrys]

Brett is correct - Since the unit is not in the open it does not test and cannot form square.

[Trailape]

I and two mates just played a refight of Quatre Bras and had a situation where the French Guard Red Lancers charged Belgian Infantry partly in woods.
We decided that as they (the Belgians) were in the woods they couldn't form square and consequently they were destroyed.
Did we play it right?
Cheers

[terrys]

I and two mates just played a refight of Quatre Bras and had a situation where the French Guard Red Lancers charged Belgian Infantry partly in woods.
We decided that as they (the Belgians) were in the woods they couldn't form square and consequently they were destroyed.
Did we play it right?

Yes! - There is no value in being partly in cover. You should always try to be either completely in cover or not at all.

[Sarmaticus]

Yes! - There is no value in being partly in cover. You should always try to be either completely in cover or not at all.

That also handily deals with those instances I've cited in the past where infantry on the edge of a wood were run down by cavalry

[Trailape]

Yes! - There is no value in being partly in cover. You should always try to be either completely in cover or not at all.

That also handily deals with those instances I've cited in the past where infantry on the edge of a wood were run down by cavalry

My thoughts exactly.

[bahdahbum]

That also handily deals with those instances I've cited in the past where infantry on the edge of a wood were run down by cavalry

Except that at quatre bras, the dutch-belgian or nassau unit - can't remember - was on the edge of the woods and retired when the french cavalry came to them and the cavalry avoided the woods ( or forest ) . They did it more than once .

In our game, we decided that if charged, the unit would be able to retire in the woods ( CMT ) and the cavalry choose between entering the woods or not .

So one situation is not the other.

And beware, Napoleon did tell Ney not t use the guard cavalry, shame on Ney

[hazelbark]

I see that as the Nassauers are in the woods and their skirmishers are deployed so no need for cumbersome process.

[bahdahbum]

It was the 27th dutch-belgian jaeger regiment

Their deployement was highly unusuall.

The formed a very very dense SK line in order to make believe they were more numerous . The woods helped to deceive the french who could at first not see what was behind that very dense "line" .

In terms of rules, not an SK line, nor an extended line but in between . Our "home" rule worked very well and as was the historical case, the french had to sent in french light infantry from Jérôme's command and they expelled the jaegers as happened during the battle .