Portable Defences

This forum is for any questions about the rules. Post here is you need feedback from the design team.

Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators

Post Reply
RPHUey
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2008 1:59 am

Portable Defences

Post by RPHUey »

Understand that PD give no POA advantages versus foot, but do the PD at least negate the -1 in the Cohesion Test for "MF losing close combat .vs. HF in the open". Another way of asking the question, are MF behind PD not considered in the open?
petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3111
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby »

A short and sweet - no - PDs only count vs mounted so have no benefit when fighting HF.
Pete
kal5056
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 11:35 pm

Re: Portable Defences

Post by kal5056 »

RPHUey wrote:Understand that PD give no POA advantages versus foot, but do the PD at least negate the -1 in the Cohesion Test for "MF losing close combat .vs. HF in the open". Another way of asking the question, are MF behind PD not considered in the open?
Could someone kindly point me to where the rules say that Medium foot defending fortifications are not considered in the open? I have eheard it said many times but cannot find it. Also the portable defenses definition refers to field fortification but PD's are not referenced in the QRS at back of book.
I know the "-" does not apply to shooting but how about the other references to FF's in the QRS? Do any of these also apply to PD's?
Thank You
Gino
SMAC.......ABB
madcam2us
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:54 am
Location: Searching for the meaning of "Authors Intent"

Post by madcam2us »

Glossary page 135 under Open Terrain.

and under that I believe the esteemed P. Dalbry is incorrect....

Madcam.
There goes another crossing the Rubicon!
W/D/L
2008
CoA - 3/0/0
C.I. - 1/1/1
2009
Ottoman - 6/0/1
Khurasian - 3/5/2
2010
Catalan - 4/0/0
madcam2us
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:54 am
Location: Searching for the meaning of "Authors Intent"

Post by madcam2us »

.... :oops: :oops: :oops:

The esteemed and quite correct Mr. Dalby must have carefully read page 121 and fully understands PDs

95% and falling....

Madcam.
There goes another crossing the Rubicon!
W/D/L
2008
CoA - 3/0/0
C.I. - 1/1/1
2009
Ottoman - 6/0/1
Khurasian - 3/5/2
2010
Catalan - 4/0/0
petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3111
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby »

A retraction in less than 5 minutes Scott - I'm most impressed! :D

But we all make mistakes....I'm not sure I'd rank myself as high as 95% though.
Pete
Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”