Bataille Empire

Thanks for your thoughts gibbyj.

Don't know that I disagree, but how can you just ignore the very specific -2 modifier mandated on page 70?

We had an interesting situation arise in our game yesterday. A French unit and a British unit were on opposite sides of the crest on a steep hill with light cover. Both units were within 1 UD of the crest and facing each other. Page 70 of the English Edition of the rules states: "A unit on the rever...

Roger,

Would this include units that have fired or been in a melee combat as well?

Kevin

Thanks gentlemen.

That is what I thought as well, but I began to doubt when loose order included cavalry. I thought there was a chance the others might be intended to include cavalry as well.

OK, I'm back again with (perhaps) a stupid question. By way of background, discussion of tactical doctrine on p. 23 of the English edition rules describes 4 doctrines that define "the formations that infantry units can have". These are linear, deep, mixed, and loose order (side note: in contradictio...

Don't think so Dan. As I understand the rules, units providing fire support must be able to "fire" at the target unit (or the charging unit) in order to do so. In example you cite, Your would be supporting unit is itself firing at a supporting unit for the defense - not good enough.

I'll take it. Seemed logical to me that as part of unlimbering an artillery unit can be oriented in any direction. I just couldn't find that stated anywhere.

I totally agree. But there is a general injunction against getting within 1 UD of a formed enemy without closing to hand-to-hand (i.e. charging). I simply do not see why that does not apply in this situation as well. As I said, I can live with the whole "move the defender back 1 UD" thing. I'm too m...

Agreed as to group move. Doesn't answer the original question though.

Oops!

Sorry Dan. My bad. This posting is from Olivier, not Herve.