Keils and Overlaps - Questions from Godendag
Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2015 5:35 pm
Two queries that I have that both arose from a game I had on Saturday afternoon.
A keil formed of 3 files of 4 pike plus 2 wings of 2 arquebusiers moved into combat. After prolonged fighting the position was that:-
1. The right hand arquebus wing was in combat with a commanded shot unit.
2.The first file of pikes was acting as overlap only - the group originally contac6ted had routed.
3. The centre file of pikes was in combat with a commanded shot unit.
4. The last (left hand) file of pike was an overlap to this combat.
5. The left wing was unengaged.
6. The pike columns were each 3 bass deep - the keil formation was illegal.
7. A unit of enemy dragoons was within 2" of the left hand wing of arquebus such that if the unit was not a keil it would be exerting a ZOI over arquebus bases.
I thought that I should be reforming into a keil formation.
I wanted to take the 3 pike bases from the left hand file and put them into the first and central files and slide the arquebus wing across to maintain the overlap. My opponent argued that:-
a) Moving the 3 pike in that way meant moving a base that was contributing to overlap; and
b) Because the unit was no longer in a legal formation for a keil, the arquebus couldn't be moved because it was in a ZOI.
I don't fully buy either of those arguments as it seemed to me that I was maintaining the overlap (albeit with different bases) and just because the unit is temporarily not in a legal formation shouldn't mean it loses all the benefits of it being a keil. However, my opponent, a far more experienced FOGR player than me, wasn't buying my counter-arguments either.
I therefore suggested that I took just the second and third bases from the left hand pike file and put them into the first and central files. The pike base in overlap and the arquebus would therefore not move. But my opponent would not agree to this either as he said it did not create a legal keil formation because of the fact that one of the files would be only 1 pike base deep whilst the others would be four deep.
In the end I agreed to do nothing as we were clearly losing and I'd rather do so with good grace than have a protracted argument, but I would like to know what, if anything, should have happened.
The other situation that struck me as odd was an overlap situation. A unit of his horse was in frontal contact with a unit of mine in combat. A unit of his MF arranged in 3 files slid along the side of his horse. The file closest to the combat was 3 bases deep. It moved so that the first and second bases were alongside my horse and the third was in corner to corner contact. In the shooting phase the first 2 ranks shot at some fragmented LF in front of them. In the melee phase he claimed an overlap in the combat with the third base in the file. It seemed odd to me that troops in the same file should be able to both shoot and act as an overlap. Any thoughts on that?
Thanks
C
A keil formed of 3 files of 4 pike plus 2 wings of 2 arquebusiers moved into combat. After prolonged fighting the position was that:-
1. The right hand arquebus wing was in combat with a commanded shot unit.
2.The first file of pikes was acting as overlap only - the group originally contac6ted had routed.
3. The centre file of pikes was in combat with a commanded shot unit.
4. The last (left hand) file of pike was an overlap to this combat.
5. The left wing was unengaged.
6. The pike columns were each 3 bass deep - the keil formation was illegal.
7. A unit of enemy dragoons was within 2" of the left hand wing of arquebus such that if the unit was not a keil it would be exerting a ZOI over arquebus bases.
I thought that I should be reforming into a keil formation.
I wanted to take the 3 pike bases from the left hand file and put them into the first and central files and slide the arquebus wing across to maintain the overlap. My opponent argued that:-
a) Moving the 3 pike in that way meant moving a base that was contributing to overlap; and
b) Because the unit was no longer in a legal formation for a keil, the arquebus couldn't be moved because it was in a ZOI.
I don't fully buy either of those arguments as it seemed to me that I was maintaining the overlap (albeit with different bases) and just because the unit is temporarily not in a legal formation shouldn't mean it loses all the benefits of it being a keil. However, my opponent, a far more experienced FOGR player than me, wasn't buying my counter-arguments either.
I therefore suggested that I took just the second and third bases from the left hand pike file and put them into the first and central files. The pike base in overlap and the arquebus would therefore not move. But my opponent would not agree to this either as he said it did not create a legal keil formation because of the fact that one of the files would be only 1 pike base deep whilst the others would be four deep.
In the end I agreed to do nothing as we were clearly losing and I'd rather do so with good grace than have a protracted argument, but I would like to know what, if anything, should have happened.
The other situation that struck me as odd was an overlap situation. A unit of his horse was in frontal contact with a unit of mine in combat. A unit of his MF arranged in 3 files slid along the side of his horse. The file closest to the combat was 3 bases deep. It moved so that the first and second bases were alongside my horse and the third was in corner to corner contact. In the shooting phase the first 2 ranks shot at some fragmented LF in front of them. In the melee phase he claimed an overlap in the combat with the third base in the file. It seemed odd to me that troops in the same file should be able to both shoot and act as an overlap. Any thoughts on that?
Thanks
C