Obstacles & Barricades

[IanN]

We are recently refighting Cerignola; and were confused by the wording regarding barricades/obstacles, so am seeking clarification.
In the game, two swiss keils were attacking Spanish troops behind obstacles/barricades. Pgs 209/210 states "Files fighting defenders behind obstacles do not count any factors that require good going ie are cancelled if affected by terrain (but are only affected by terrain if in that terrain).
1/ We interpreted this as Swiss Pikes = +3 (Superior, Pike, 4th rank); Spanish Arquebusiers = + 2 (barricades).  Is this correct. The defenses were in open going, but it was argued that the defenses themselves should count as difficult going ??

2/ Other than fighting to cross defenses built in in difficult going when do attackers factors  not apply

Thanks

[nikgaukroger]

Wording in the updated Compendium is:

"Cavalry, camelry, chariots and elephants fighting defenders behind barricades cannot count any claims that require good going – i.e., those that are cancelled if affected by terrain. However, they only give affected or badly affected claims to enemy if they are in such terrain."

Which is different from the original printing which said "Files" instead of "Cavalry, camelry, chariots and elephants" as per the part you quoted.

I don't think this difference is in the clarries 

The revised wording is what is in the PDF draft.

Current QRS also has Pike and Long Spear as * and the wording for * is "not if affected, badly affected or vs. barricades". So the claims for Pike would not apply against troops behind barricades.

[nikgaukroger]

There is also this in the clarries which applies:

"BARRICADES You cannot claim supporting files when fighting against troops defending Barricades. This was an accidental omission in the Compendium that existed previously. Also, barricades and obstacles can only be defended by Foot UGs."

[IanN]

Thanks Nik .... that makes much more sense, or at least I understand it

[LawrenceG]

Wording in the updated Compendium is:

"Cavalry, camelry, chariots and elephants fighting defenders behind barricades cannot count any claims that require good going – i.e., those that are cancelled if affected by terrain. However, they only give affected or badly affected claims to enemy if they are in such terrain."

Which is different from the original printing which said "Files" instead of "Cavalry, camelry, chariots and elephants" as per the part you quoted.

I don't think this difference is in the clarries 

The revised wording is what is in the PDF draft.

Current QRS also has Pike and Long Spear as * and the wording for * is "not if affected, badly affected or vs. barricades". So the claims for Pike would not apply against troops behind barricades.

As far as I can see, the only factors requiring good going are Foot LSp, Pike, Charging Lancer and Mtd Polearm.

So the rule wording might be better as:

"Claims for Foot LSp, Pike, Charging Lancer and Mtd Polearm do not count against defenders behind barricades. "

I'm confused on how barricades and terrain interact.

Attackers in terrain give defenders the bonus? But only if the barricades are in the terrain?
Defenders in terrain give attackers the bonus? But only if the barricades are in the terrain?

[lionheartrjc]

Not sure what is confusing.

Close order troops in rocky going defending a barricade against loose order foot will still be terrain disadvantaged.  (So their opponent would get a +2 combat claim against them).  They still get a +2 claim at impact for defending the barricade.

Close order foot attacking troops defending a barricade in rocky going will be terrain disadvantaged.  (So their opponent would get a +2 and a +2 combat claim against them at impact).

If the attackers have Pk, LSp, MP or CL they do not get a claim for weapon type against barricades if they are disadvantaged or severely disadvantaged by terrain.

Richard

[LawrenceG]

Not sure what is confusing.

Close order troops in rocky going defending a barricade against loose order foot will still be terrain disadvantaged.  (So their opponent would get a +2 combat claim against them).  They still get a +2 claim at impact for defending the barricade.

Close order foot attacking troops defending a barricade in rocky going will be terrain disadvantaged.  (So their opponent would get a +2 and a +2 combat claim against them at impact).

Confusion was "they" used twice when it was not obvious what each "they" was referring to (in "However, they only give affected or badly affected claims to enemy if they are in such terrain.").

In the first case above it is the defenders in the terrain that are disadvantaged. In the second case, the close order foot attacking will be disadvantaged but is it the attackers in the terrain, the barricades in the terrain, or the defenders in the terrain? I'm guessing it is the attackers, but not sure.


If terrain effect is the same as in the absence of barricades is there any need to mention it at all in this context?

If the attackers have Pk, LSp, MP or CL they do not get a claim for weapon type against barricades if they are disadvantaged or severely disadvantaged by terrain.

Richard

That's not what Nik said, so did you mean to type "If the attackers have Pk, LSp, MP or CL they do not get a claim for weapon type against barricades or if they are disadvantaged or severely disadvantaged by terrain"?

Looks as though the melee +1 for Cv,Cm,Ch vs skirmish foot in good going also does not apply if the skirmishers are defending barricades.

[Rino]

In the qrs the long spear, pike and many others cannot use their claim if
Affected, badly affected or vs barricades.

The Swiss would only have his +1 for superior