Slitherine

when shooting at unprotected cav unless entirely 1 base deep there is a ++ modifyer.

if the target is light horse - is that unprotected cav?

if 2 lines are BGs of cav adjacent to each other - in 2 lines - 1 directly behind the other -
moving forward together in base to base contact - does this count as
a. 2 deep target i.e. ++
b. 1 deep target i.e. tough luck for shooter

torbenlouis wrote:when shooting at unprotected cav unless entirely 1 base deep there is a ++ modifyer.

if the target is light horse - is that unprotected cav?

if 2 lines are BGs of cav adjacent to each other - in 2 lines - 1 directly behind the other -
moving forward together in base to base contact - does this count as
a. 2 deep target i.e. ++
b. 1 deep target i.e. tough luck for shooter

No to both
LH are not counted as unprotected cav as they are LH
the two BGs are seperate and in one line therefore not unprotected cavalry in two ranks.

ok - thanks.

how about 2 unprot. cav units.
situation 1 - 1 behind the other - base to base - both in one rank
situation 2 - beside each other - both in 2 ranks

situation 2 would give the ++
situation 1 would not? is that logical?

torbenlouis wrote:ok - thanks.

how about 2 unprot. cav units.
situation 1 - 1 behind the other - base to base - both in one rank
situation 2 - beside each other - both in 2 ranks

situation 2 would give the ++
situation 1 would not? is that logical?

Correct.

Cavalry (not light horse) in 2 ranks are assumed to be in close formation. Cavalry in 1 rank are in a looser almost light horse like formation so non shock can evade and missiles are less effective.

There are other things than receiving fire for which situation 1 and 2 produce different results. Ability to evade already mentioned, ability to shoot is also affected, as is ability to fight in a melee. Is any of that logical? Well, yes...you just have to assume that although the 8 bases cover the same area, how they are split between two BGs represents a fundamentally different situation in real life. The rules do specifically say that non-shock cavalry in one rank represent a different formation and that is why they behave significantly differently.

Also, base depths are much greater than the actual depth of the formation. Even though the two battle groups are in base to base contact when lined up behind each other there would in reality be a space between the two units.

The question about the 2 BG smack against each other counting as deep is an intriguing one. i realize the answer is no, and no question. But to benefit to move as a battleline they would need to be 'mobbed up', hence in reality a dense target.

once again the bases are misleading, the units would actually have some space in between them so not bunched up as a solid mass of horse and man flesh, there is space that the figures does not accurately represent between them.
Not a good idea though as if the front unit decides to flee, the rear unit gets burst through and drops cohesion.
Light horse can not be inter penetrated so it is a risky tactic to say the least. Now if you go 2 deep with light foot to your front thats a whole different thing as personally my LH rarely buggers off from the LF, they save their running away energy for the more dangerous stuff out there.

>But to benefit to move as a battleline they would need to be 'mobbed up', hence in reality a dense target.

What makes you think that?

Battlelines are game mechanics, if they reflect anything concrete in real life it is that a number of units formed up in some sort of order and paying attention to the control of a senior commander can move together and (here's the bit for which them being in a "battleline" is actually important) move further than normal - forced march, if you like...or at least not piss away time fiddling about.

No requirement for them to be formed up in each others back pockets to do that. If anything, being formed to closely would tend to make rapid movement without losing order harder.

Again, don't get too hung up on exactly what the troops look like on the wargames table

Sorry.

Forgiven.