Just to be 100% sure : a dismountable infantry unit moving mounted speed still has the full use of shield cover.
I would say yes but some argued that no mounted do have shield cover 8)
There is nothing in the rules that says mounted cannot use Shield Cover.
Then I would assume a note is required .
It is impossible to « shield over « a horse ... the horse is too big and the shield too small.
😂🤣
Quote from: Onurbm on February 06, 2023, 08:00:49 AM
Then I would assume a note is required .
It is impossible to « shield over « a horse ... the horse is too big and the shield too small.
😂🤣
I see no real reason why dismountable infantry shouldn't claim shield cover. It is the man not the mount that matters...
Richard
Sounds like there is a free way to dismount! Don't pay a yellow card, just make sure they shoot the horse from under you! ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: DutchFromBelgium on February 06, 2023, 04:03:18 PM
Sounds like there is a free way to dismount! Don't pay a yellow card, just make sure they shoot the horse from under you! ;D ;D ;D
Dismounting in having your horse shot from under you is not harmless to the rider .
Quote from: lionheartrjc on February 06, 2023, 12:03:16 PM
Quote from: Onurbm on February 06, 2023, 08:00:49 AM
Then I would assume a note is required .
It is impossible to « shield over « a horse ... the horse is too big and the shield too small.
😂🤣
I see no real reason why dismountable infantry shouldn't claim shield cover. It is the man not the mount that matters...
Richard
That's why during Napoleonic times the order was to aim for the horse 8) I fear I must disagree if you take only logic : horses are bigger targets and it was usual practise to aim for the horses. So it would disrupt the movement, the charge.
Honestly I cannot imagine a mounted guy having the benefit of shield cover. To protect the horse you need much more than that it's called a FARM horse . But we play rules. If you want something logic then mounted cannot have shield cover as the target is the horse. Now it is a game and you do not need to be historical, just gaming fun . So I follow the rules not reality :)
And by the way , rule makes a difference when under fire between ARMOURED HORSE / protected and unarmoured horse, full armour
Shooting from a distance , it's the horse .... Hashing and bashing close, it's the rider .
Nope for shield cover mounted .... You need shields as large as the horse ... did not exist ever , moved to cataphract.
Maybe this discussion is not for rule query but for rule evolution
🧙♂️🐯🐲🎋
Quote from: Onurbm on February 10, 2023, 07:05:11 AM
Maybe this discussion is not for rule query but for rule evolution
I think you are correct.
Something for future consideration.
I like positive mindset
If......Shield Cover is not allowed when mounted, then the simple answer is just to make it a dismounted infantry characteristic?
Lance.
Quote from: Lanceflint on February 10, 2023, 03:32:19 PM
If......Shield Cover is not allowed when mounted, then the simple answer is just to make it a dismounted infantry characteristic?
Lance.
I would have thought the easy answer is just to add it to the list of things dismountable infantry can't do while mounted (Appendix 1.U.4).
Would infantry with both dismountable and shield cover get a points (or perhaps 1 point) reduction?
Why would they get a point reduction ? Shield cover is in fact an infantry thing . The TUG just has to dismount to get it ( if it's changed )
Quote from: badhabum on February 10, 2023, 05:09:27 PM
Why would they get a point reduction ? Shield cover is in fact an infantry thing . The TUG just has to dismount to get it ( if it's changed )
Because at the current cost they can use it while mounted. If they lose that ability, they are not worth as many points.
Quote from: badhabum on February 05, 2023, 07:59:31 PM
Just to be 100% sure : a dismountable infantry unit moving mounted speed still has the full use of shield cover.
I would say yes but some argued that no mounted do have shield cover 8)
Yes is the intent as its the man not the nags we care about. A bit generous in that perhaps they should be forced to dismount if they choose to use it. But if they are mounted still then go charge them and kill them while they are combat shy.
S
Simon, I think you miss the point ! We have the rules and the logic.
Mounted TUGS need FARMHORSES to be protected from shooting .
Foot dismountable do not need it, OK .
Those are the rules and I can live with it.
The logic would be that mounted should not be able to benefit from shiel cover as when mounted the target is the horse, not the man 8)
Also why would mounted foot, considered on horses, nags, chariots be better protected that cavalry ? that's logic but it's the rules and I accept it
But when I think about the combat shy imposed on a dimountable infantry TUG playing mounted is it always enough . Think of a LS Greek TUG. They are combat shy but still have 2 rank LS and can stop any CL or DC or short spear mounted charge ! And they still negate their melee expert ..so yes it is still pretty strong. Perhaps Something to consider for the future