Slitherine

We had a couple of issues regarding regimental guns today which I think are fairly fundemental. Firstly, we had a situation where an 8 stand Korean unit in 2 ranks charged and was contacted on the the right-hand file and claimed the regimental gun bonus as the marker was placed on the adjacent file under the wording of the rules on page 118, para 2, "their dice is added to the effect of the fighting file nearest the battle group's centre". The claim was that this was adjacent to the battle group's centre and therefore was nearest. This was in the impact phase. In the subsequent shooting phase, the regimental gun was again claimed as a firing dice under the rules on page 107, ARC OF FIRE, bullet point 4, regimental guns are treated as if in the central file or in one of the cental files - owners choice". At this point the claim is that the gun can fire from the 2nd central file.
Finally, in the same move the another Korean unit was broken and the pursuit led to a contact with a 6 stand Korean unit in 2 ranks, 4 stand of which were already in a melee. In the following impact period, the regimental gun was claimed for impact for this left hand file under the rule on page 118 as above although the central file was already in combat.
Are all these uses of the regimental gun bonus correct, or has the interpritation been too liberal?

kadeshuk wrote:We had a couple of issues regarding regimental guns today which I think are fairly fundemental. Firstly, we had a situation where an 8 stand Korean unit in 2 ranks charged and was contacted on the the right-hand file and claimed the regimental gun bonus as the marker was placed on the adjacent file under the wording of the rules on page 118, para 2, "their dice is added to the effect of the fighting file nearest the battle group's centre". The claim was that this was adjacent to the battle group's centre and therefore was nearest. This was in the impact phase. In the subsequent shooting phase, the regimental gun was again claimed as a firing dice under the rules on page 107, ARC OF FIRE, bullet point 4, regimental guns are treated as if in the central file or in one of the cental files - owners choice". At this point the claim is that the gun can fire from the 2nd central file.

Sound like a "have your cake and eat it" scenario. If I was umpire I would rule that having chosen for the RGs to be in the right central file for the impact, the player could not then choose for it to be in the left central file for the shooting phase.

Yes it can be argued the way it was, but only at the risk of being considered a rules lawyer (git).

Finally, in the same move the another Korean unit was broken and the pursuit led to a contact with a 6 stand Korean unit in 2 ranks, 4 stand of which were already in a melee. In the following impact period, the regimental gun was claimed for impact for this left hand file under the rule on page 118 as above although the central file was already in combat.
Are all these uses of the regimental gun bonus correct, or has the interpritation been too liberal?

I think so, though I allowed such against me in a game at the weekend, but only because I forgot they were supposed to be treated as if in the central file - which was already in combat.

Although I was the player at the receiving end of the regimental guns the rules as written did seem to argue in favour of the firing player. I should also have quoted the balance of that section in page 118 "Regimental guns only get dice in the impact phase if at least some files are fighting to the battle group's front" .
It would seem from what you say that the intent is that if any file of a hitherto unengaged battlegroup with a regimental gun is involved in impact combat to its front, the regimental gun dice is applied, but that if the file taken as centre by the placing of the regimental gun marker is already in melee, the regimental gun dice cannot be used in a subsequent impact to an enengaged file. The intent for the shooting phase after impact is that if the regimental gun bonus has been claimed for a file in impact, the marker cannot be moved to an adjacent central file for shooting combat.
Curse the 8 stand Korean 1/2 archer units and their regimental guns ( although I did win the battle)!!

kadeshuk wrote:Although I was the player at the receiving end of the regimental guns the rules as written did seem to argue in favour of the firing player. I should also have quoted the balance of that section in page 118 "Regimental guns only get dice in the impact phase if at least some files are fighting to the battle group's front" .
It would seem from what you say that the intent is that if any file of a hitherto unengaged battlegroup with a regimental gun is involved in impact combat to its front, the regimental gun dice is applied, but that if the file taken as centre by the placing of the regimental gun marker is already in melee, the regimental gun dice cannot be used in a subsequent impact to an enengaged file. The intent for the shooting phase after impact is that if the regimental gun bonus has been claimed for a file in impact, the marker cannot be moved to an adjacent central file for shooting combat.
Curse the 8 stand Korean 1/2 archer units and their regimental guns ( although I did win the battle)!!

Well, to be honest, I cannot now recall exactly what the detailed intention was in these particular situations.

However, the original logic was that the guns were spread across the front of the battle group, and that measuring the arc of fire from the central file was a simple means of making sure that the extra dice could only be claimed if a majority of the guns could be brought to bear.

How this logic applies to the situations you describe, and the wording of the rules, needs some thought. It does not, however, seem right that a whole extra dice should be received at impact when 2/3 of the guns have been "overrun" by an ongoing close combat. This would have a disproportionate effect (50% extra dice) on the impact combat when it is only 1 file wide, when logically only 1/3 of the original complement of regimental guns are in fact capable of firing (i.e. equivalent to 1/3 of a dice).

So I would prefer to go with the interpretation as above, and will add it to the items for the FAQ.

rbodleyscott wrote:

Finally, in the same move the another Korean unit was broken and the pursuit led to a contact with a 6 stand Korean unit in 2 ranks, 4 stand of which were already in a melee. In the following impact period, the regimental gun was claimed for impact for this left hand file under the rule on page 118 as above although the central file was already in combat.
Are all these uses of the regimental gun bonus correct, or has the interpritation been too liberal?

I think so, though I allowed such against me in a game at the weekend, but only because I forgot they were supposed to be treated as if in the central file - which was already in combat.

I was the player Richard was so generous to over the weekend. I visualise it as the regimental guns fire and then the infantry vault over them (!) and charge through the smoke. So the guns are behind the line and can be wheeled to a new position ( this may be a bit fanciful though ...). So I didn't feel that I was pulling a cheesy move at the time.

Maniakes wrote:

rbodleyscott wrote:

Finally, in the same move the another Korean unit was broken and the pursuit led to a contact with a 6 stand Korean unit in 2 ranks, 4 stand of which were already in a melee. In the following impact period, the regimental gun was claimed for impact for this left hand file under the rule on page 118 as above although the central file was already in combat.
Are all these uses of the regimental gun bonus correct, or has the interpritation been too liberal?

I think so, though I allowed such against me in a game at the weekend, but only because I forgot they were supposed to be treated as if in the central file - which was already in combat.

I was the player Richard was so generous to over the weekend. I visualise it as the regimental guns fire and then the infantry vault over them (!) and charge through the smoke. So the guns are behind the line and can be wheeled to a new position ( this may be a bit fanciful though ...). So I didn't feel that I was pulling a cheesy move at the time.

Nor did I, but my feeling is that it may make regimental guns too effective in such circumstances (50% more dice than the opponent on a single file impact, whereas in 2 file impacts it is only 25% and 3 file impacts it is only 16%), which could be bad for game balance. Luckily (for me) my dice were sufficiently jammy to overcome the disadvantage.

Hey less of the git cookie boy!
When the rules are not entirely clear it's normal to take them at face value which is what we did.
Add the rg dice to any files firing forward and add the rg dice to any impact combat. Doesn't say only if the centre file is shooting or contacted which is now what you appear to be saying.

Really not bothered whatever is decided as I always believe rules should be transparent and not get in the way of a good game but when they clearly say one thing but 'should say' something different I think it reasonable to follow what is said - as did our in-house rule guru.

Happy to be insulted but rules lawyer calls for the horses head in the bed treatment!

I should also say that using RG in this way did seem to at last justify their points cost which is quite considerable.

Given your response perhaps we should consider something along the lines of RG dice can only be added if at least 50% of the unit is firing or involved in the impact? This to me would make more sense than tying down where the marker is placed with eg an 8 base unit

saltire wrote:Happy to be insulted

For which I apologise.

As I say, one for the FAQ once the optimal interpretation has been decided upon.

Gladly accepted mainly because I also look down apon rulesmen which is one of the main reasons I happily moved wholeheartedly to FOG and away from other well known brands. You are to be complimented on producing a common sense set of rules with minimal scope for interpretation (even for some people I know who struggle with English as their first language!)
And until the final decision I'll suggest an in-house rule of 50% of front rank bases before you can add the RG for either shooting or impact as that would appear to best represent your intentions.
Assuming the rest of the club agrees of course - democracy in action!

saltire wrote:Gladly accepted mainly because I also look down apon rulesmen which is one of the main reasons I happily moved wholeheartedly to FOG and away from other well known brands. You are to be complimented on producing a common sense set of rules with minimal scope for interpretation (even for some people I know who struggle with English as their first language!)
And until the final decision I'll suggest an in-house rule of 50% of front rank bases before you can add the RG for either shooting or impact as that would appear to best represent your intentions.
Assuming the rest of the club agrees of course - democracy in action!

As long as you realise that this is a change to the rules as published (see page 120). I think it is not a good idea because it will lead to people manouvering to hit RG equiped BGs on a single base instead of front on - and I had hoped we had got away from that sort of micro manouvering.

I think this is relatively easy to fix.

Regimental guns fire once in impact. They may not fire again (shooting or additional impacts) until the battle group has an intervening Joint Action Phase where it is not in contact with a battle group it was in front edge close combat combat with.

Or thereabouts.

As long as you realise that this is a change to the rules as published (see page 120). I think it is not a good idea because it will lead to people manouvering to hit RG equiped BGs on a single base instead of front on - and I had hoped we had got away from that sort of micro manouvering.

Good point. That's why I don't write rules. I'll wait for the official response and in the meantime just keep throwing sixes, that seems to fix most anomalies!

hazelbark wrote:I think this is relatively easy to fix.

Regimental guns fire once in impact. They may not fire again (shooting or additional impacts) until the battle group has an intervening Joint Action Phase where it is not in contact with a battle group it was in front edge close combat combat with.

Or thereabouts.

This is fixing a relatively rare problem and could have unintended consequences - rewarding the use of wave attacks against regimental guns, which I don't think has any historical basis. It's not as if regimental guns are super weapons at the moment!

I think that it was perhaps a rare problem because no-one had closely studied the wording of the rules on regimental guns. Word spreads quickly, however, and Pandora's Box is now open.....whilst there are no superweapons in FOGr, an extra dice at good odds is an extra dice !

kadeshuk wrote:I think that it was perhaps a rare problem because no-one had closely studied the wording of the rules on regimental guns. Word spreads quickly, however, and Pandora's Box is now open.....whilst there are no superweapons in FOGr, an extra dice at good odds is an extra dice !

True - but you get it every turn while shooting and only once in impact - so the incentive for the player with the rg to get into combat (at strange angles or not!) is much less. Remember you have to pay for that gun as well - and I would say it is already fully priced for it's abilities!

Am i missing something?

Do RG fire as muskets do until the impact, were they give an extra dice and then they are removed, is this wrong?

david53 wrote:Am i missing something?

Do RG fire as muskets do until the impact, were they give an extra dice and then they are removed, is this wrong?

No - I just mean they don't get any melee phase dice (unlike a musketeer - who costs less and counts as a base rather than a marker)

I can see I wrote that one clumsily - I was thinking about within one combat but wrote it as though within the whole game. Sorry for any confusion