shot at by artillery

[lawrenceg]

It has been clarified that you still get the -1 on CT for being shot at by artillery, even if the artillery didn't cause any hits.

If you are shot at by artillery, which causes no hits, but you suffer 2 hits from something else, but this is less than 1HP3B, do you still need to take the CT? The logic above would indicate that you do.

[jre]

I use this thread to post some more artillery questions.

If I set up heavy artillery in ambush, I suppose can choose the facing (a big advantage) when revealed. As it is just an ambush marker, can it also move before being revealed? Turn the facing?

The light artillery, the "if it moves does not shoot" rule is for BG or for individual bases? i.e. If I expand while stationary, can the front base that has not moved shoot, or as the BG has moved it cannot?

José

[thefrenchjester]

Hi ,
the answer is only fair play in choosing during the set up of the markers of heavy artillery the direction of facing

thefrenchjester"human boltshooter , sometimes "

[shall]

Any ambush can choose its facing as it goes down, representing it aligning itself to the approaching threat while "invisible".

So heavy artillery must put 1 base wholly on the ambush marker - thus restricting it to 4 possible facings.

Other bases in the Bg then laid down contioguously. It doesn't give much flex in practice as far as we can see. Please let us know if there is some mega cheese to manipulate and we ill fix it.

The -1 factor on shot at by artillery counts if you are forced to test, but has no effect if you have no reason to test. So either the artillery must have done some damage or they must be supporting somebody who did to cause the -1.


Si

[lawrenceg]

Any ambush can choose its facing as it goes down, representing it aligning itself to the approaching threat while "invisible".

So heavy artillery must put 1 base wholly on the ambush marker - thus restricting it to 4 possible facings.

Other bases in the Bg then laid down contioguously. It doesn't give much flex in practice as far as we can see. Please let us know if there is some mega cheese to manipulate and we ill fix it.

Well, it does allow heavy artillery in ambush to move, which normally it can't. One could imagine heavy artillery advancing up into the enemy half of the table in a wood or gully or behind a hill, pointing itself at the enemy and then firing.

The -1 factor on shot at by artillery counts if you are forced to test, but has no effect if you have no reason to test. So either the artillery must have done some damage or they must be supporting somebody who did to cause the -1.


Si

I was looking for clarification for cases such as the following example:

My BG is 12 bases.
The enemy shoots it with artillery and bowmen.
The artillery score no hits.
The bowmen score 2 hits.
My BG has taken 2 hits and shot at by artillery, so is forced to take a CT.

[rbodleyscott]

Any ambush can choose its facing as it goes down, representing it aligning itself to the approaching threat while "invisible".

So heavy artillery must put 1 base wholly on the ambush marker - thus restricting it to 4 possible facings.

Other bases in the Bg then laid down contioguously. It doesn't give much flex in practice as far as we can see. Please let us know if there is some mega cheese to manipulate and we ill fix it.

Well, it does allow heavy artillery in ambush to move, which normally it can't. One could imagine heavy artillery advancing up into the enemy half of the table in a wood or gully or behind a hill, pointing itself at the enemy and then firing.

The rules say:

Troops can only ambush in terrain they could move in.

Consequently Heavy Artillery can only ambush behind a gentle hill.

They cannot move over the crest or they would be visible and hence unable to move.

So they would only be able to shoot at troops on the far side of the crest if they were within 1 MU.

Not overly effective!

[lawrenceg]

Any ambush can choose its facing as it goes down, representing it aligning itself to the approaching threat while "invisible".

So heavy artillery must put 1 base wholly on the ambush marker - thus restricting it to 4 possible facings.

Other bases in the Bg then laid down contioguously. It doesn't give much flex in practice as far as we can see. Please let us know if there is some mega cheese to manipulate and we ill fix it.

Well, it does allow heavy artillery in ambush to move, which normally it can't. One could imagine heavy artillery advancing up into the enemy half of the table in a wood or gully or behind a hill, pointing itself at the enemy and then firing.

The rules say:

Troops can only ambush in terrain they could move in.

I had overlooked that rule. Isn't it the case that Heavy Artillery can't move at all? That would mean they can't be placed in ambush at all. Light Artillery could be in ambush behind a hill, wood etc and then be revealed facing left, right or towards the terrain depending on how the enemy bypassed it or went through it. As they can move anyway, I don't think this would be cheesy.

[rbodleyscott]

I had overlooked that rule. Isn't it the case that Heavy Artillery can't move at all? That would mean they can't be placed in ambush at all.

True. That is what I wrote originally and then I had a "brain attack" about gentle hills and altered my post.

[jre]

The rules say:

Troops can only ambush in terrain they could move in.

Consequently Heavy Artillery can only ambush behind a gentle hill.

They cannot move over the crest or they would be visible and hence unable to move.

So they would only be able to shoot at troops on the far side of the crest if they were within 1 MU.

Not overly effective!

The artillery then cannot move anywhere, so the gentle hill would also be off. If that is the interpretation, I prefer it to be so, actually. Less discussion and possible cheese, such as H.Art covering the flank of the hill defenders, and choosing what side to deploy to (because if they can deploy as an ambush marker, they can move) in case a flank march is on the works.

Jose