Cossack question
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Blathergut, Slitherine Core
-
KendallB
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL

- Posts: 416
- Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:01 pm
- Location: North Shore, New Zealand
Re: Cossack question
I believe Jimi is right. I got pinged with this when I was trying to get rear support from my Cossacks in one game. I got a little carried away in my previous post because I love the rear support rule so much!
-
shadowdragon
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier

- Posts: 2048
- Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:29 pm
- Location: Manotick, Ontario, Canada
Re: Cossack question
Explain the reasoning....KendallB wrote:I believe Jimi is right. I got pinged with this when I was trying to get rear support from my Cossacks in one game. I got a little carried away in my previous post because I love the rear support rule so much!
There is a bullet that says only infantry may support infantry and artillery. Followed by a sentence (same bullet) that says the supporting unit must not be in skirmish formation. Then there is a second bullet that says that only cavalry can support cavalry. By any common understanding of paragraph structure, the second sentence of the first bullet can only be understood as applying to the context of the statement of the first sentence of that bullet (i.e., that a supporting "infantry" unit must not be in skirmish formation). If it is to be a general condition that all supporting units must not be in skirmish formation it should be in a separate bullet. You got "pinged" with it....okay, but by whom? One of the authors? If not, perhaps the "pinging" person got it wrong. It can happen.
-
BrettPT
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D

- Posts: 1266
- Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Cossack question
There is an intenal inconsistancy in the rules.
- Page 57 - under Rear Support - cavalry can provide rear support to other cavalry. It is only infantry that cannot be supported by skirmishers
-page 108 definition of supporting unit - a cavalry unit can support other cavalry. Skirmishing infantry however cannot provide rear support to anyone
however:
- page 107, definition of rear support - the supporting unit has to be non-skirmishers (so cossacks cannot provide rear support) - although inconsistantly a large self-supported cossack unit counts as supported.
My view is to go with the majority - and what is written in the body of the rules rather than in the glossary. Therefore cossacks can provide rear support to cavalry. Page 107 should probably be errata'd into line.
Is this correct Terry?
Cheers
Brett
- Page 57 - under Rear Support - cavalry can provide rear support to other cavalry. It is only infantry that cannot be supported by skirmishers
-page 108 definition of supporting unit - a cavalry unit can support other cavalry. Skirmishing infantry however cannot provide rear support to anyone
however:
- page 107, definition of rear support - the supporting unit has to be non-skirmishers (so cossacks cannot provide rear support) - although inconsistantly a large self-supported cossack unit counts as supported.
My view is to go with the majority - and what is written in the body of the rules rather than in the glossary. Therefore cossacks can provide rear support to cavalry. Page 107 should probably be errata'd into line.
Is this correct Terry?
Cheers
Brett
Last edited by BrettPT on Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
KendallB
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL

- Posts: 416
- Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:01 pm
- Location: North Shore, New Zealand
Re: Cossack question
This is good because it was Brett that pinged me! Followed by Philip.
I would have routed that enemy cav unit and won the game. Learning experience...
I would have routed that enemy cav unit and won the game. Learning experience...
-
shadowdragon
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier

- Posts: 2048
- Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:29 pm
- Location: Manotick, Ontario, Canada
Re: Cossack question
Something else to check on is that the Glossary on page 108, for the "Supporting Unit" entry says that:BrettPT wrote:There is an intenal consistancy in the rules.
- Page 57 - under Rear Support - cavalry can provide rear support to other cavalry. It is only infantry that cannot be supported by skirmishers
-page 108 definition of supporting unit - a cavalry unit can support other cavalry. Skirmishing infantry however cannot provide rear support to anyone
however:
- page 107, definition of rear support - the supporting unit has to be non-skirmishers (so cossacks cannot provide rear support) - although inconsistantly a large self-supported cossack unit counts as supported.
My view is to go with the majority - and what is written in the body of the rules rather than in the glossary. Therefore cossacks can provide rear support to cavalry. Page 107 should probably be errata'd into line.
Is this correct Terry?
Cheers
Brett
"A unit can provide support if it is:
- Non-skirmishing infantry - if the unit to be supported is infantry or artillery
- Cavalry - if the unit to be supported is cavalry
- Steady or disordered
- Average or superior if the supported unit is superior or guard."
Presumably this applies to both Flank and Rear support, but on page 56 for Flank support the only one of the above conditions is that only cavalry can support cavalry. The Flank support on page 56 reads:
"A unit can only gain additional dice for flank support if all of the following apply:
- Infantry and artillery cannot support cavalry
- The supporting unit is not in combat itself
- The supporting unit is not wavering
- The supporting unit is within a base width of the supported unit
- The enemy is within the support area of the supporting unit"
So, presumably, according to page 56, skirmishers (of any type) can provide flank support to non-skirmishers (of any type) and artillery can provide flank support to infantry. This is very different from the Glossary entry for "Supporting Unit" which only seems to be consistent with "Rear Support".
"Flank Support" is not in the glossary.
Definitely for the errata.
Last edited by shadowdragon on Fri Apr 20, 2012 2:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
shadowdragon
- Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier

- Posts: 2048
- Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:29 pm
- Location: Manotick, Ontario, Canada
Re: Cossack question
I would say he owes you a beer.KendallB wrote:This is good because it was Brett that pinged me! Followed by Philip.
I would have routed that enemy cav unit and won the game. Learning experience...
Re: Cossack question
Speaking of beer, I have composed these lyrics in honor of the FOGN Cossack (to a little dance tune people might recall from Taras Bulba, starting slow and increasing in tempo)
Oh - we dance,
- and we drink
and we ride, and we fight
with support from behind
and support from the right.
The foe's fire is fierce,
so we seek to attack,
not their front but their rear,
with a lance in their back.
While the arms of the Czar
may put flight to the foe
all the loot from the field
to our homeland will go.
So we dance, and we drink
and we ride, and we fight
we love battle by day,
and our women by night.
Oh - we dance,
- and we drink
and we ride, and we fight
with support from behind
and support from the right.
The foe's fire is fierce,
so we seek to attack,
not their front but their rear,
with a lance in their back.
While the arms of the Czar
may put flight to the foe
all the loot from the field
to our homeland will go.
So we dance, and we drink
and we ride, and we fight
we love battle by day,
and our women by night.
-
BrettPT
- Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D

- Posts: 1266
- Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Cossack question
OopsThis is good because it was Brett that pinged me! Followed by Philip.
I would have routed that enemy cav unit and won the game. Learning experience...
Sorry
Brett
-
KendallB
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL

- Posts: 416
- Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:01 pm
- Location: North Shore, New Zealand
Re: Cossack question
Just another episode in a weekend of Murphy's Law.