Commanded Shot, artillery and fortiifications

[spotteddog]

Can Commanded Shot move to contact the rear edge of friendly artillery if enemy are in contact with the front edge of the artillery? We thought no because it kinda looked like charging the enemy.

Do friendlies behind portable fortifications get a plus 2 when in overlap against mounted fighting a BG to the friendlies side. We thought yes because they were protected by having the fortifications and plus one for being behind fortifications even though the mounted werent in edge to edge - just corner to corner.

Hunter

[marshalney2000]

Hunter, as no one has respondd here goes.
Re the overlapping element of protected shot behind fortifications I think we got this right as the rules refer to the POA factors affecting the element fighting. There is no change in the rules even for an element fighting as an overlap. It is still fighting an enemy element albeit as an overlap.
Re the artillery I am still bemused by this whole area but you need to refer to the voluminous postings already on the forum re captured artillery but you will still probably still end up confused. My feeling is that as a charge is required to move into contact with enemy other than as an overlap then this would exclude commanded shot who the amendments say cannot charge capturing the guns. I suppose it boils down to where the capturing troops are. Are they in the middle of the guns, on the other side or indeed have they already moved away? Indeed if they have moved away does this change the situation?
Well God knows. If God does not know then does RBS? If RBS knows and God does not then does this fundamentally change the Christian religion? Well God knows.
John

[spotteddog]

stepping back to the rules I think we got both correct. your shot are poking over the fortifications into my bg in contact so it seems right you get a double plus. the artillery are just a line of guns represented by the bases so your dragoons could not fail to be contacted by the commanded shot - something i dont think they can do.
hh

[MatteoPasi]

Can Commanded Shot move to contact the rear edge of friendly artillery if enemy are in contact with the front edge of the artillery? We thought no because it kinda looked like charging the enemy.

Do friendlies behind portable fortifications get a plus 2 when in overlap against mounted fighting a BG to the friendlies side. We thought yes because they were protected by having the fortifications and plus one for being behind fortifications even though the mounted werent in edge to edge - just corner to corner.

Hunter

1. no they can't any more (HIMO, not so simple to ask)
2. no, the -1 is when fighting vs FF so this effect the horse not the overlapping infantry

[marshalney2000]

Sorry but I disagree with your conclusion on point 2. There is no mention in the charts of the wording you use the actual wording refers to "foot defending field fortications, an obstacle or a riverbank." In essence therefore the charts refers to the tactical situation of the troops who are fighting and not the tactical position of the troops they are fighting against. In the situation outlined the foot are fighting as an overlap and count their poas as outlined in the chart. No where does it say in the rules ( as far as I can see) that these factors do not apply if you are fighting only as an overlap.
I think you need to think of the overlapped cavalry battle group not as one entity but as a number of squadrons within that whole. Being overlapped in the melee causes certain sub units within that unit have to react to the fact that they are being overlapped and suffer the negative effects of the overlapping troops.
If I have missed something in the rules then I would be pleased if you could point out what I missed.
John

[gibby]

I think they definately get the plus for defending fortifications if the overlap base is behind the fortification.

What's the second plus for.....is it because they are a pike and shot unit and count protected ?

cheers
Jim

[marshalney2000]

Jim, yes it is for being protected shot for being behind fortifications. A nice double whammy.
John

[gibby]

Either way protected shot only or a P&S....yes I agree, I don't see any other way to read the poa chart.

[MatteoPasi]

Sorry but I disagree with your conclusion on point 2. There is no mention in the charts of the wording you use the actual wording refers to "foot defending field fortications, an obstacle or a riverbank." .
John

Checked , You are right