Peter Perla - 06:41pm Oct 9, 2000 PST (#1137 of 1152)

After a more careful reading of the V 2.0 rules and running through a
couple of turns of Rolica, I have a bunch of questions and comments.

1. I am surprised at the rule about all but the British suffering a
moral reduction for each SP lost. Given the rest of the system, this
appears to create a race of supermen and makes the game extremely
difficult for the French in ways that appear ahistoric. More on this
subject later.

2. Sec 5.3: Some cards allow offensive bombardment. Does this mean that
ALL guns may bombard, or only guns attached to commands given attack
orders?

3. Sec 6.3: Does the CiC have a single continuation which he may either
use or give to exactly ONE other officer, or may he continue with is own
command and also provide continuation to ALL officers within range?

4. Sec 7.2: Given that this is the second edition of these rules, I am
surprised that the confusion over "prorating" MPs as infantry changes
from column to line or vice versa remains. It would appear that a unit
in column can move 5 MPs and convert to line, obviously leaving no MPs.
But what about a column that spends 4 MPs and then converts to line.
Does the unit have any MPs left? What abut 3 MPs? Or 2 MPs? Or 1 MP? If
a column converts to line after spending the given number of MPs
(including the cost of conversin) how many MPs does the unit have left
after converting to line? What about the reverse?

5. Sec 7.3: I am at a loss for any historical justification for
prohibiting stacking of units from differnt formations, or from
different arms, for that matter. Is this simply another outmoded
boardgaming convention, or could you explain why this prohibition
exists?

6. Sec 7.31: Am I missing something, or is there no real need or benefit
of moving units in a stack? Is there any effect for moving the bottom
unit of a stack out of the hex first and then moving the second unit to
stack below it in a different hex?

7. Sec 7.31: The rule prohibiting artillery from taking losses when
stacked with infantry effectively prohibits counterbattery fire in those
cases. Is there some historical rationale for this that I am missing?
What magic does being stacked with infantry create to prevent losses to
the guns and gunners?

8. Sec 7.4: Does the restriction on artillery moving and firing in the
same turn apply to Continuation? That is, if a gun moves during first
movement, may it fire during the continuation?

9. Sec 7.5: Mixing the voluntary and involuntary retreat rules in this
single case appears to have caused more confusion than keeping them
distinct.

10. Sec 7.5: Could you explain the historical rationale for preventing
units from moving through hexes in which it would violate stacking? If
it could retreat through two units, 200 yards (1 hex) apart why could it
not retreat through two units 100 yards apart?

11. Sec 7.5: I assume the prohibition on artillery's retreating applies
only to involuntary retreats as a result of combat, not to voluntary
retreats?

12. Sec 7.5: May a unit retreat through friendly units, causing morale
checks all round, even if other options exist? Personally, I see no
reason to prohibit such a move. If you do, could you please explain the
historical basis for it?

13. Sec 7.5: Again, could you please explaing the historical rationale
for prohibiting a retreating unit from stacking with another friendly
unit?

14. Sec 8.3: This is a very confusing rule. Am I to interpret this as
saying that infantry may only fire at adjacent enemy units in the
defensive fire phase if those units are part of commands activated to
attack ("units that are attacking"), or may they fire at any adjacent
enemy units? Similarly, may defending artillery fire at any enemy unit
in range and LOS, or must they restrict their fire to adjacent units
"that are attacking" or longer-ranged enemy artillery, but only if the
latter fired during the Offensive bombardment phase? May they thus NOT
fire at enemy infantry at ranges greater than one hex during defensive
fire?

15. Sec 8.43: This rule seems to imply that an artillery unit on a
hilltop with an infantry unit adjacent to it on a lower elevation may
fire through that infantry unit at an enemy artillery unit on that lower
elevation withoutr fear of retribution from its target, which cannot
return fire because of the infantry adjacent to the target. Is this
intended? Should there not be some reciprocity in the ability to fire?

16. Sec 8.61: Am I correct in understanding that no matter how many "M"
results a unit suffers in a single phase, it must only roll once? Does
this not defy the historical reality that it was more often the
intensity of combat that caused units to disorder and rout than the raw
amount of casualties taken? In other words, shouldn't a unit that
suffers enough cohesion hits to make it pass through two Morale check
chits in a single phase be more likely to break during that phase than
the same unit which suffers two such checks on successive phases?

17. Sec 9.0: Shock is optional. Does this mean that a unit with two
enemy stacks in its frontal hexes may attack one of those stacks and
ignore the other one? Does it also mean that I can attack both stacks at
once if I so desire?

18. Sec 9.2: Let me get this straight: Cavalry may NOT charge into
woods, but they can charge into towns? Why is that?

19. Indeed, why is it that towns block LOS but (apparently) have no
other combat effect when most historical accounts of Napoleonic fighting
make it clear that built-up areas were a different kettle of fish from
open field fighting?

20. Sec 9.2: The original rules apparently made the British just as
subject to the morale check when attacked by a French column as anyone
else. Why the change? Again, you appear determined to make the British
infantry some sort of supermen by fiat, rather than by modeling their
capabilities in ways consistent with that of other units. This seems to
heavy handed and virtually impossible for the French to do anything.
Indeed, the historical record seems to indicate that it was precisely
because the Brits were able to maintatin their morale in the face of
such assaults and drive the French off with fire and a countercharge of
their own that theywere so successful, not because they were supermen
who simply were invulnerable to what the French did.

21. Sec 9.2: I assume that the Attacking in Line modifier applies if a
majority of attacking SPs are in LINE, rather than column?

22. Sec 9.3: There is no indication of which units take the hits in a
shock combat. It would appear that the top defending unit must suffer
the hits initially. But how should the Attacker distribute hits among
the top units of his attacking force if there is more than one attacking
hex involved?

23. Sec 9.41: I am surprised at many of these restrictions, which appear
to have more to do with outmoded game conventions than actual historical
reality. Would you explaing the historical basis for these restrictions?

24. Sec 9.43: May cavlary conduct this retreat before fire prior to an
enemy bombardment phase, even if not adjacent to enemy infantry or
artillery units?

25. I assume that Cavalry Charges take place wholly during the shock
phase and are not simply designated at then end of normal movement.

26. Sec 10.0: Cavalry is apparently prohibited from charging units is
woods. BUt is there no effect of terrain that the cavalry moves through
in its charge? May it charge across a river, for example?

27. Sec 10.3: This rule says cavalry continuation allows the cavalry to
move their full movement allowance. The SOP says half their MA. Which is
it?

28. Sec 11.0 This section says the continuation uses steps 2-6 of the
activation sequence, but the SOP says 2-7. Which is it?

29. Sec 11.0: What doees the defender do during continuation? May he
fire normally in the defensive fire phase, or are there some sort of
restrictions on what the defender may fire at?

30. Sec 12: As I mentioned earlier, I strongly disagree with the way
morale checks are handled when more than one may result from a single
attack. This is tied in with the morlae ratings of the units and the
special rules that create British Supermen. I suspect that if you
rethink and rework these rules, you would not only simplify them but
make them far more historical.

31. Sec 12.2: I assume that when a unit routs, any unit stacked with it,
as well as any adjacent units, must take a morale check (i.e. "and" not
merely "or").

32. By the way, I suggest that rather than flipping the unit counter
over to indicate it is disrupted, simply flip its cohesion marker over.

33. Sec 23.1: Does this mean that the British may enter Wellesley's
COMMAND, as well as three additional COMMANDS, or does Wellesley's
command count as one of the three commands allowed?

34. Sec 23.2: Do Reaction cards count as Initiative Cards for the
purposes of game length?

Peter


Steve Carey - 12:39am Oct 10, 2000 PST (#1138 of 1152)
Have Games, Will Travel

Peter, the following is my interpretation of the La Guerra system (just
trying to save Rob some time and a feverish hunt for the aspirin
bottle), but he should carefully review all of these:

1) 2.1 The British being exempt from losing one morale for each strength
point lost is there to reflect superior British leadership at levels not
represented in the game.

2) 5.3 When allowed via an attack card, all of the Initiative player's
artillery may offensively bombard during step 2, but in a Continuation
only the units that are actually part of an activated formation may
perform combat functions like bombardment, musket fire, and shock. This
puts a decision on the player whether to Continue a command with the big
guns for another shot, or perhaps activate an infantry command to move
and attack with.

3) 6.3 A CiC with the Continuation ability (i.e., with a star) may
transmit Continuation to one command in range, not all the commands in
range. In AWI, some leaders have 2 stars, so they can activate 2
commands for Continuation.

4) 7.21 As soon as an infantry unit goes into column, it receives +2MP.
Rob will have to clarify what happens when a unit changes from column to
line.

5) 7.3 Only infantry units of the same formation may stack together;
this helps keep command cohesion and also prevents unrealistic shuffling
around of troops like independent panzers.

6) 7.31 I also don't see any benefit for moving units in a stack. Rob
will have to enlighten us on his design intent here.

7) 7.31/8.3 When artillery and infantry are stacked together, infantry
always takes any losses from fire or shock combat. One could infer that
during the Defensive Fire phase, enemy artillery that fired Offensively
can be targeted by counterbattery fire (whether stacked with infantry or
not) since they exposed their position by bombarding.

8) 7.4 If artillery moved in its first movement, then I think it can
shoot (or move again) if Continued. Otherwise, the guns would be
straightjacketed to either moving twice or shooting twice if Continued,
and not allowed to move once and shoot once. I envision a Continuation
as another 'turn' for the activated formation, but the use of the word
'turn' in the rules is confusing. Artillery is so darn deadly in this
system, perhaps they should be restricted. Rob?

9) 7.5/9.41 A player may only voluntarily retreat (withdraw) units from
a ZOC if the current card allows, or he is using the Cavalry retreat
option (9.43). Otherwise, retreats are involuntary.

10) 7.5 Units may not retreat in violation of stacking limits; here for
simplicity, I imagine.

11) 7.5/9.42 Both say that when an artillery is forced to retreat (i.e.,
involuntary), it is eliminated instead. If you have the right card that
allows withdrawal from enemy ZOC, you may move your guns away without
penalty.

12) 7.5 No, you may not voluntarily retreat a unit through another
friendly unit if other options exist. Remember, the unit is retreating,
not redeploying.

13) 7.5 Again, simplicity to prevent retreating units from stacking with
other units (except if they were stacked together, then they could
retreat together).

14) 8.3 Defensive fire is made against any enemies that you desire,
except during Continuation where only enemy units that are activated are
eligible targets. Continuation is there to reflect the ebb-and-flow of
the battle, and I'd imagine defending troops would be more inclined to
engage enemy units that are active, rather than ones hiding behind
trees. 

15) 8.43 Common sense dictates that if you can see them, they can
see you. Subsection 3 should probably refer to the target and
intervening adjacent combat unit both being on the same elevation, which
may be different than the firing unit's elevation. 

16) 8.61 A unit only makes a single check per phase regardless of
losses, though it may be forced to make multiple checks during the
course of a complete turn. Remember that a firing unit may only inflict
maximum casualties up to its strength (so a 2 SP unit cannot inflict 4
casualties), so overflow losses don't occur that often. I think Rob is
trying to keep things simple here.

17) 9.0 Shock is optional. If you move next to too many enemy units,
they all can engage you in defensive fire combat, and you're stuck in
all their ZOC's, too. Usually not a good move to approach multiple enemy
units without support.

18) 9.2 Cavalry may not charge units in woods, and I do play that they
may not charge towns either (for obvious reasons).

19) 8.43 Towns do block LOS, but Rob has said they have no effect on
combat. He'll have to explain this one since I can't.

20) 9.2 The British are immune to the French Column attack bonus, again
to reflect their superior leadership. Personally, I think the Frenchies
need this rule specifically against the Brits to give them a fighting
chance in the game.

21) 9.2 This is a typo (good catch). To receive the Column or Line
modifiers, a majority of attacking SP's must be in the appropriate
formation.

22) 9.3 When allocating losses among multiple attacking units, the
defender chooses (I spread 'em out as evenly as possible) among the top
units in the attacking stacks.

23) 9.41 Retreat restrictions are in place to inhibit gamey tactics.

24) 9.43 No, Cavalry may not retreat before enemy Bombardment (which is
a different phase than fire or shock).

25) 10.0 Cavalry charges take place during Shock Combat, as stated in
the very first line. There is no 'Cavalry Charge' phase in the sequence
of play.

26) 10.0 Cavalry may not charge through woods (also not towns, if we
agree), and certainly not across rivers (but what about streams, or
uphill?). Oversimplification here, and Rob needs to clarify.

27) 10.3 I've seen Rob state that Cavalry continuing may use both half
and full MA, so he'll need to specify which is his final answer (where's
Regis Philbin when you need him?).

28) Continuation is just steps 2-6, not 2-7 as stated in SOP. Having
Cavalry charge/shock, continue the charge, become disordered, then
suddenly activate for Continuation again is a bit much.

29) 11.0 Only activated Continuing enemy units are eligbile targets for
Defensive fire during Continuation. Ebb-and-flow...

30) 12.0 British Supermen? Don't let Vasey or Barker hear you say that!
Seriously, the French have a very tough road to travel.

31) 12.2 Any unit adjacent to, or stacked with, a unit that routs must
make a morale check.

32) 12.0 Since none of the counters are backprinted, it's strictly
personal preference to flip over the cohesion marker or the unit itself
when disrupted.

33) 23.1 I thought it was Wellesley the leader, with his own command
counting as one of the three.

34) 23.2 No, Reaction cards never count towards a scenario limit.

Whoa, when I started this, I didn't know it would take a full 3 hours to
reply! Anyway, I now have 'Marty Feldman Eyes', and must go to sleep.
Rob can indicate my batting average in the morning.

STEVE

Rob Markham - 07:56am Oct 10, 2000 PST (#1139 of 1152)
Steve,

Your batting average is extremely high. I've asked Peter to email me
these questions, because my employer would not take kindly to my taking
3 work hours to answer these. What I'll do is clear up a few things here
later.

To all,

I hope to get Chippawa in the mail later today.

Rob