Two questions

[Coenedens]

(Please, let me say that the game appears very intriguing and very well manufactured! It seems a very good purchase! :D)
I've read through the rules booklet and I've only two doubts (by now, at least :rolleyes: ).

First one is not really a doubt and it's about stacking: I interpret that I can stack three vedettes freely (without leaders) only if all of them are actually vedettes. I mean: if I have 2 vedettes I cannot normally (without a leader) stack on them a third unit of a different kind. Is it right?

The second one is not so easy to solve by me: in the glossary is written that cavalry charges cannot be done by *vedettes*; in the cavalry charge rules is written that cavalry charges cannot be done by *light cavalry units* (that comprise vedettes, but not only). I would subordinate the glossary to the rules and consider that light cavalry (comprising vedettes) cannot charge. Am I right?

Thank you to anyone is so kind to put an answer.
Alessandro

[MHaggett]

Here is my take on it, Alessandro, and Kevin can correct me if I am wrong:

1) Vedette stacking is 3 per hex, regardless of whether there is a leader or not. The confusion probably comes from the exception in 3.11, "other than vedettes", which should be taken to mean (I believe) "2 combat units in addition to vedettes".

2) Kevin may have to clear this up. My take is that you are correct, neither vedettes or Light Cavalry can make a charge.

Hope you have fun playing, I am hoping to get a game of Grossbeeren or Dennewitz in this weekend :)

Mike

[Coenedens]

Thank you, Mike.
So I'll have 3 vedettes eventually stacked in addition to whatever could be stacked in a hex; i.e. if a leader is present in a hex, three vedettes are in addition to the three cavalry and/or artillery units that can be stacked with the two infantry.
I think that here it should be made clearer that if a leader is present there can be two infantry units or three if from the same division or Russian Infantry corps. Or am I wrong?

Anyway I'm nearly ready to play for the first time and I'll do it on monday evening. Have you any suggestion about what should be the first scenario to try?

Thank you!
Ale

[kzucker]

Grossbeeren is a good one to start with.

[MHaggett]

Alessandro,

That is the way I would play it.

Good luck with your game Monday. It looks like we'll be trying Grossbeeren on the 30th--we're looking forward to giving it a workout. We have a long day planned, so we might even get 2 scenarios in :)

Mike

[Coenedens]

Thank you Kevin and thank you Mike.

I dare ask another confirmation. From Hidden Units/Spotting rules I would understand that hidden units can be revealed also by a unit not on a hilltop, if within a 3 hex clear Los. In other words I would understand thar being on a hilltop grants a Los 12 hexes long, where from any other hex it's only 3 (in either case if not obstructed).

To be strict, instead, I could understand that a unit not on a hilltop but with a clear Los (of no more than 3 hexes) to an enemy unit cannot reveal it if the latter is hidden, but can impede the latter to become hidden if currently revealed.

Am I right with the first or should I take the last one?

Ale

[MHaggett]

Alessandro,

I believe your first notion is correct, as in 1.51 the 3-hex LOS in clear is case 5 and isn't modified by anything. All 5 cases are each an instance of when enemy units are revealed.

1.52 is mostly to define what constitutes a hilltop, for case 4 in 1.51; the different types terrain (slopes, hilltops, and crests) in the battle games make this necessary. The LOS for units in clear is explained in 11.63, under the artillery trace. I can understand why this might be confusing as it has the heading "Spotter Requirement"; more accurate might be "Hilltop Spotter Requirements".

Mike

[kzucker]

Mike,

Thanks for adding the necessary clarification. Looks alright to me.

[Coenedens]

Thank you!

If I can suggest, I think that rule 1.51.5, could be even clearer if it said that a spotter can be not on a hilltop if it has a (at most 3 hex long) Los that's traced through clear hexes, rather saying that the unit itself has to be in clear terrain (or am I wrong?).

Ale

[MHaggett]

Alessandro,

Yes, I believe you are correct. The key to this lies in 1.53 although perhaps for clarity it should say "see into or out of".

LOS rules are always a bit of a bother--they almost always make more sense when actually looking at the game board.

Kevin,

Thanks, glad I haven't been leading Alessandro astray!

Mike

[Coenedens]

We have had our first run at Grossbeeren. A good test and a nice game.
I took the Coalition part, Paolo the French.

The battle saw Bertrand blundering his first 5 Initiative rolls for activation and remaining still put with all of his units for the first five turns. When we decided to stop (for reached time limits - 1:00 AM, real time) at the end of 1500 turn, Blankenfeld was still in my hands.

In the middle of the map, I wasted the opportunity of re-deploying Bulow in a secured column (I forgot that also the Bulow corps was on map...) as dictated by the corresponding Mode Card. Bulow himself remained in a semiconscious state for three turns, so Reynier managed to blow up my lonely (albeit big) Prussian Brigade (Krafft) in Grossbeeren that, at the end of the 1500 was in French hands.

Next monday evening we'll fight again at Grossbeeren and we'll try to go till the end. Honestly the game is really intriguing and interesting!

Ale.

_____
P.S.: We found some more little doubts to ask for.

1) Card 24 (a very determining one here) refers to rule 18.73 but the example at the end of the rule has no matching with the card. In effects, we've rolled three times a 6 (I got a 6 first for Bernadotte, then for Witzingerode and last Paolo for Ney), but we felt uneasy to apply a delay of eleven turns (if you follow the card istructions, you have to add 2 hours for every point you roll above 2, starting with 3 for a roll of 2 and so on - i.e. a roll of 3 => (3-2=1)x2+3=5 turns delay; a roll of 6 => (6-2=4)*2+3=11 turns delay...) so we chose to follow the example text, instead (roll of 6 => 4 turns delay). The question is: have we interpreted correctly the card text (where it says "etc.")? And/or have we been wrong in following the example, instead?

2) <deleted: finally I've understood it by myself! English is not my mother language so, sometimes, I still incur in abismal mistakes!>

3) The turn sequence seems to imply that Mode Cards are played first by the first player, followed by his/her game turn, and then by the second player. In chapter 18 it seems that Mode Cards are played as part of the setup procedure instead. We have taken the last one (first Paolo played his Mode cards, then I played mine, then he took his first game turn and then I took mine).

[MHaggett]

Sounds like a good time, Alessandro :)

Your question #3 is answered in 18.51. It looks as if you played that correctly.

I don't have a set of cards, so Kevin (or another knowledgable person) will need to help with #4.

Mike

[Coenedens]

Thank you Mike.