Queries re artillery and regimental guns

[andyfinkel]

The following points came up in my FoGR game today -Early Swedes v Later Imperial Spanish

1. Do regimental guns shooting at infantry get the - PoA for artillery shooting at infantry?
2. Does artillery shoot with any different modifiers at short range ( up to 3") as opposed to long range?
3. Does infantry shooting at artillery get any inherent PoA? As far as I could tell, they will hit on 4+ most of the time.
4. Infantry fire routed artillery gunners deployed immediately in front of a Tercio, with no room to shift 1 base sideways;
(A) does the loss of the artillery cause a CT on the Tercio?
(B) do the gun models stay in place while the gunners run away?
(C) can the gunners run through the Tercio without disrupting them?
5. If the Tercio is immediately behind the guns and therefore supporting the artillery, do the Tercio bases only move onto the gun position if the artillery is meleed - i.e if there is a firefight before any melee, at what range does the Tercio file which is not immediately behind the guns shoot from; the front of the guns or 40mm further back, parallel with the other bases of the Tercio?

Thanks

[ravenflight]

1. Do regimental guns shooting at infantry get the - PoA for artillery shooting at infantry?

No.

2. Does artillery shoot with any different modifiers at short range ( up to 3") as opposed to long range?

No, it just has a narrower arc and can only shoot 1 base width to the side.

3. Does infantry shooting at artillery get any inherent PoA? As far as I could tell, they will hit on 4+ most of the time.

No, treat artillery as any other foot troop, so generally 4+

4. Infantry fire routed artillery gunners deployed immediately in front of a Tercio, with no room to shift 1 base sideways;

There are no gunners to rout. Nothing moves per se.

(A) does the loss of the artillery cause a CT on the Tercio?

Yes, and everyone within 3"

(B) do the gun models stay in place while the gunners run away?

Currently the rules say they stay as uncontrolled artillery. If captured by troops with shot capacility they then become poor and shoot at a -1 POA. This is subject to intense debate.

(C) can the gunners run through the Tercio without disrupting them?

There are no gunners. Nothing moves.

5. If the Tercio is immediately behind the guns and therefore supporting the artillery, do the Tercio bases only move onto the gun position if the artillery is meleed - i.e if there is a firefight before any melee, at what range does the Tercio file which is not immediately behind the guns shoot from; the front of the guns or 40mm further back, parallel with the other bases of the Tercio?

The tercio is treated as if it is at the front edge of the artillery and therefore fights as if there, but remain behind the guns as support.

[benjones1211]

Actually there is one incorrect answer in that lot.

If Artillery are routed by firing or by failing a cohesion test for any other reason (not being captured in close combat ) they are removed. See page 130.

This is one way to remove artillery, don't charge them just shoot them until they rout.
As for the shooting any BG supporting artillery, can shoot with files that are not directly supporting the artillery from the front of the artillery, and are shot at as if they are there. You should always move the file to be in this position, so both sides can see what is going on.

This then begs the question, if a BG is supporting the artillery and the artillery rout due to shooting is the BG moved forward to match its shooting file or is the shooting file moved back to where the rest of the BG is.

I would ague that pg 126 where it states "Hence the BG in a position to give rear support is treated for all purposes as if its front edge was in the position of the front edge of the artillery" means the former happens and the BG is moved up to where the artillery where.

This then leaves a beauty. A bg is supporting an artillery BG, this BG has one file alongside the artillery, the BG wishes to turn through 90 degrees to move away behind the artillery can it. Pg 126 would seem to suggest not, as you would be turning where the artillery is, although I doubt if there are any umpires that would rule that way as it means once a unit is supporting artillery the only way it can stop would be to move through the artillery. Actually even if they didn't have a file alongside the artillery pg126 suggest you cannot as you are in effect where the artillery is.

Finally an artillery unit needs to take a test, it has a BG the same width supporting it, can it get the +1 for rear support to the test, again pg126 would suggest not, its that ALL PURPOSES bit, meaning the unit is not actually behind the guns but is actually where the guns sit.

[quackstheking]

Actually the first bullet on page 126 says that when an unlimbered artillery base has unbroken friendly foot lined up in edge to edge and corner to conner contact with the artilleries rear edge, then it has rear support!

Don

[kevinj]

This then leaves a beauty. A bg is supporting an artillery BG, this BG has one file alongside the artillery, the BG wishes to turn through 90 degrees to move away behind the artillery can it. Pg 126 would seem to suggest not, as you would be turning where the artillery is, although I doubt if there are any umpires that would rule that way

I would. As you have said, the infantry and guns are occupying the same space.

[benjones1211]

So once an infantry unit has come up to support artillery the only way they can move away from the artillery is by going forwards and ending up in front of the artillery.
I must admit I have seen many opponents decide that they didn't want to continue supporting artillery, but wanted to turn and move to the flank so they don't interfere with the artillery shooting (especially 2 wide kiels ), I have never questioned this, mainly because I considered it would just lead to a massive argument and generally didn't have a major factor on the game. Maybe I will at a competition you are umpiring.

It makes it easy to bottle up units by just standing far enough in front of the artillery so the unit cannot move through, so you get two guns shooting at you but you could bottle up a quiet a large kiel with say some LF. Harder if there are additional shooters around.

Personally I rarely support my guns with infantry, prefer to have them shooting, or available to charge, so this is just another reason not to.

[ravenflight]

So once an infantry unit has come up to support artillery the only way they can move away from the artillery is by going forwards and ending up in front of the artillery.
I must admit I have seen many opponents decide that they didn't want to continue supporting artillery, but wanted to turn and move to the flank so they don't interfere with the artillery shooting (especially 2 wide kiels ), I have never questioned this, mainly because I considered it would just lead to a massive argument and generally didn't have a major factor on the game. Maybe I will at a competition you are umpiring.

It makes it easy to bottle up units by just standing far enough in front of the artillery so the unit cannot move through, so you get two guns shooting at you but you could bottle up a quiet a large kiel with say some LF. Harder if there are additional shooters around.

Personally I rarely support my guns with infantry, prefer to have them shooting, or available to charge, so this is just another reason not to.

Yes, I think the best idea is to sit just behind not quite rear supporting. You are then free to do whatever, but can quickly and easily move into support if the guns are threatened. Then again, Japanese don't get much artillery