Slitherine

1. Problem
Unreformed infantry are perceived as not being cost effective.

2. Simple Fix
Allow unreformed infantry to ignore the CT modifier for being in extended line
Page 70, amend 'Procedure' table, bottom right hand box to "if not unreformed infantry, defending obstacle or hill/slope[/i]"
Page 71, 1st bullet point, amend to "...and not unreformed infantry or in a Defensive Position ..."

Make retiring unreformed infantry face away from enemy if they retire 6MU or more.
Page 63, last paragraph, amend to "...equal or greater than a reformed unit's normal move distance ..."

3. Improvement
Small, but would allow unreformed infantry to consider forming extended line from time to time, and would remove the unfair situation of retiring unreformed infantry presenting their rear to enemy when a reformed unit would not.
More may be needed to assist unreformed infantry however these changes are easy to make and remove perhaps 'unfair' disadvantages.

A further small change might be to allow unreformed infantry in tactical to move 6MU if outside of 6MU of all enemy. Justification is that they would more likely be in column at longer ranges, the same as reformed infantry. Also, a 6MU move is aready allowed for in the first 2 rounds for unreformed infantry winning the iniative. Such an amendment would remove the 'grand tactical' disadvantage of unreformed armies, while leaving in place their slower movement when in close proximity to enemy (when they would more likely be deployed into line).

BrettPT wrote: A further small change might be to allow unreformed infantry in tactical to move 6MU if outside of 6MU of all enemy.

I think this, the extended line bit and the 6 MU if retiring are a lot.

The reality is the unreformed infantry will be a love affair with the army as they are always at a shooting disadvantage. If this is a tournament thing. Just give those listed armies 30 extra points.

The -1 on the CT stops players from using extended line except under exceptional circumstances.
The reason for adding it in the first place was to reflect the problems of command control over the area covered by a unit in line (over 400yds).
I guess the question is - should we expect (or want) to see extended line used more often.

The retire distance is interesting. It's suppoesed to reflect the fact that a unit in line is more likely to lose cohesion when retiring a short distance than a unit in column would.

I don't see a problem with players using unreformed infantry in competition. At Roll Call Austrian armies were 1st & 2nd after 3 rounds. (I think they finished 2nd & 4th in the end).