Rear Support With Mixed BGs

[stevoid]

If you have a BG that is say 8 Average HF legionaries and 4 LF support archers and you have a BG of 4 average MF auxilia and 2 LF support archers behind it, is it supported?

From a strict interpretation of the rules I'd say not; however, it seems a little harsh that adding supporting LF to a BG makes it harder to claim rear support!

Cheers,

Steve

[stenic]

If you have a BG that is say 8 Average HF legionaries and 4 LF support archers and you have a BG of 4 average MF auxilia and 2 LF support archers behind it, is it supported?

From a strict interpretation of the rules I'd say not; however, it seems a little harsh that adding supporting LF to a BG makes it harder to claim rear support!

Cheers,

Steve

Two different things, Supporting Archers are part of the same battle group and only support in shooting in impact (and increase the break point).

Rear Support must be by different BGs, a BG cannot support itself and supporting archer are not seperaet but integral to the BG.


Steve

[carlos]

Why not? Isn't 6 (4+2) half of 12 (8+4)???

[stenic]

Ah. I missed the point of the question. Doh !! Sorry.

So long as the BG to the rear has Average LF, otherwise there would not be enough of the right quality troops.

[philqw78]

But LF and LH don't count for support, not even for LF and LH

[carlos]

But LF and LH don't count for support, not even for LF and LH

Even so there's 4 MF behind the 8 HF.

[philqw78]

But you need to support a unit of 12 bases, not 8. If it was a unit of 12 bases of LF it would not be supported by 4 MF and 2 LF

[IanB3406]

Even so there's 4 MF behind the 8 HF.

No, there is 8FH +4LF = 12 with only 4MF that count as supporters behind them. Seems a quirk of the rules. LF can't provide support but can be supported, and the problems seems that if they are a part of a group of non-lights they add to the size required..............

[Ghaznavid]

Actually the rules do not say that LF can't give rear support. They just require non-skirmishers for rear support. LF in a mixed BG are non-skirmishers (as the whole BG is non-skirmisher), hence I see nothing against them counting for rear support purpose.

[terrys]

The rule states that:

A battle group can claim rear support if it has
steady friendly non-skirmishers of equal or
better quality to its rear, but only if all of the
following apply:
• The number of such bases at least partly
directly to the battle group’s rear must be at
least half the original total number of bases
in the supported battle group.

So....
1) The supporting troops must be: a) Steady, b) Non-skirmishers, c) Equal quality
2) The number of such (i.e. all of the above) bases must be at least half.

.....2 things to note:
A) Skirmishers don't count for support, but do count for calculating the supported unit size. So the supporting unit of 4MF + 2 LF cannot support a unit of 8MF + 4LF. You need to have at least 6 bases of non-skirmishers.
B) It's the original size of the unit that counts - NOT the CURRENT size. I'm sure I quoted current size to an opponent recently - to whom I humbly appologise.

[rbodleyscott]

A) Skirmishers don't count for support, but do count for calculating the supported unit size. So the supporting unit of 4MF + 2 LF cannot support a unit of 8MF + 4LF. You need to have at least 6 bases of non-skirmishers.

But LF only count as skirmishers if in BGs entirely of LF. Mixed BGs count as non-skirmishers. (See P.18 ).

So the BG of 4 MF and 2 LF can support the BG of 8 HF + 4 LF.

[philqw78]

terrys wrote:

rbs wrote: something else

Who were these rules written by??

[rbodleyscott]

terrys wrote:

rbs wrote: something else

Who were these rules written by??

Memories are fallible. We don't always have the rules in front of us when we answer.

[stevoid]

Thanks guys - I had overlooked the page 18 rule and focused on the 'such bases' clause in the reference section.

It seems that things work sensibly which is refreshing (and giving me ideas for my 28mm Principates...).

Steve