Support against Kn

[landmeister]

I read that Wb and Reg Ax (S) supported by a 2nd rank of the same type can have +1 vs Kn. If I understand it correctly, it means that an Irr Ax (I) can give rear support because ti ts the same type of troops. No matter its grade nor reg/irr status. Is this correct?

Thank you in advance.

[arvnranger]

[it] Having had a quick skim of the rules (Pg 4 Troop Definitions and Pg 36 Close Combat Rear Support) I'd say you are correct from a literal perspective. Troop "type"s are El, Kn, Sp, Ax, WWg et al whereas the grade distinguishes an element's "efficiency relative to the average for that type". Rear support conditional on type *and* grade is explicit elsewhere in the schedule of rear support factors, qv Pikes, Spears, Light Horse, Bows et al. The absence of such explicit wording for Ax(S) tends to support your position.

I'm not certain this was the writer's intention. I suspect this little lacuna arises from inclusion of Wb in the same sentence (where it seems entirely plausible that Wb(O) should be able to support a front rank of Wb(S), eg Saxons, Gauls) and the overarching drive to be ever more conservative with words.

Cheers,
Ivan.

[landmeister]

Thank you Ivan. These were my conclusions too. I know that Irr Ax behind Reg Ax is not an efficient mix for movement, but it's A LOT cheaper against Kn  . Unless otherwise stated by the author himself, I will understand that this lacuna can be exploited. 

[Orcoteuthis]

The present text arose as a response to my pointing out that the previous wording allowed Ax (S) to support Wb or vice versa. "Type" is meant to distinguish those two from one another, so I'm fairly sure the intention is that Ax (S) can be supported by other Ax (S) only.

It may be noted that the QRS says that "Wb, Ax (S)" can be supported against Kn by "same". This appears based on said previous wording.

[landmeister]

The present text arose as a response to my pointing out that the previous wording allowed Ax (S) to support Wb or vice versa. "Type" is meant to distinguish those two from one another, so I'm fairly sure the intention is that Ax (S) can be supported by other Ax (S) only.

I think this could be the spirit of the rule, but sadly is not the word.  On page 3 concepts "type" and "grade" are clearly separated. Both of them can be found throughout the rules set when necessary to specify types of troops (Ax, Wb, etc) and their grade. Once again, I'm not sure if the spirit of the rules is the one you suggest (I'd like to). 

It may be noted that the QRS says that "Wb, Ax (S)" can be supported against Kn by "same". This appears based on said previous wording.

And can't "same" be read as "same type", as per my previous para.? 

[Orcoteuthis]

The present text arose as a response to my pointing out that the previous wording allowed Ax (S) to support Wb or vice versa. "Type" is meant to distinguish those two from one another, so I'm fairly sure the intention is that Ax (S) can be supported by other Ax (S) only.

I think this could be the spirit of the rule, but sadly is not the word.  On page 3 concepts "type" and "grade" are clearly separated. Both of them can be found throughout the rules set when necessary to specify types of troops (Ax, Wb, etc) and their grade. Once again, I'm not sure if the spirit of the rules is the one you suggest (I'd like to). 

Certainty of intent is impossible this side of telepathy. The question is rather, will you play it as written or as is reasonably infered to have been the intention.

It may be noted that the QRS says that "Wb, Ax (S)" can be supported against Kn by "same". This appears based on said previous wording.

And can't "same" be read as "same type", as per my previous para.? 

It can, but I don't think there's any good reason to. Not that it matters much - the rules take precedence over the QRS in any case.

[landmeister]

Certainty of intent is impossible this side of telepathy. The question is rather, will you play it as written or as is reasonably infered to have been the intention.

LOL  I admit that telepathy is not one of my skills either . I agree that reasonably infered rules should be the norm, but what happens when what is reasonable can be differently interpreted, as is the case?

It can, but I don't think there's any good reason to. Not that it matters much - the rules take precedence over the QRS in any case.

I would like you take into consideration the following comparison. At least this the origin of my doubts:

1a. What the rules say about Reg Ax (S) support:
     Warband or Regular Auxilia (S) supported by a 2nd rank of the same type - only if fighting against Knights.
1b. What is read in the QRS says about it:
     Rear rank is:  Same

2a. What the rules say about LH (S/F) support:
     Light Horse (S) or (F) supported by a 2nd rank of the same type, grade and designation/origin - only if fighting against foot.
2b. What is read in the QRS says about it:
     Rear rank is:  LH identical

I accept that the rules take precedence over the QRS but it seems that same and identical are refered to different considerations. I think the rules are very clear. Rear support for LH (S/F) is possible only when type, grade and designation are equal. However Reg Ax (S) can be supported by other troops of the same type only. Why is this disctinction specified then?

[Valentinian Victor]

I read that Wb and Reg Ax (S) supported by a 2nd rank of the same type can have +1 vs Kn. If I understand it correctly, it means that an Irr Ax (I) can give rear support because ti ts the same type of troops. No matter its grade nor reg/irr status. Is this correct?

Thank you in advance.

You could have the situation where its better to have Ax(I) supported by Ax(O), because if Ax(I) are beaten by Knights in the open then it does not matter about the -1 for being 'I' grade anyway as the -1 only kicks in if they are beaten!

[landmeister]

You could have the situation where its better to have Ax(I) supported by Ax(O), because if Ax(I) are beaten by Knights in the open then it does not matter about the -1 for being 'I' grade anyway as the -1 only kicks in if they are beaten!

Great! You're right! 

[Orcoteuthis]

I would like you take into consideration the following comparison. At least this the origin of my doubts:

1a. What the rules say about Reg Ax (S) support:
     Warband or Regular Auxilia (S) supported by a 2nd rank of the same type - only if fighting against Knights.
1b. What is read in the QRS says about it:
     Rear rank is:  Same

2a. What the rules say about LH (S/F) support:
     Light Horse (S) or (F) supported by a 2nd rank of the same type, grade and designation/origin - only if fighting against foot.
2b. What is read in the QRS says about it:
     Rear rank is:  LH identical

I accept that the rules take precedence over the QRS but it seems that same and identical are refered to different considerations. I think the rules are very clear. Rear support for LH (S/F) is possible only when type, grade and designation are equal. However Reg Ax (S) can be supported by other troops of the same type only. Why is this disctinction specified then?

Your doubts about what? I'm not sure what you are trying to argue.

[Orcoteuthis]

You could have the situation where its better to have Ax(I) supported by Ax(O), because if Ax(I) are beaten by Knights in the open then it does not matter about the -1 for being 'I' grade anyway as the -1 only kicks in if they are beaten!

Great! You're right!  

Ax (I) aren't eligible to be supported against Kn (except list-specifically by Ps (S/O) if the Kn are not (X)).

[landmeister]

Ax (I) aren't eligible to be supported against Kn (except list-specifically by Ps (S/O) if the Kn are not (X)).

Yes, they are. Ax (S) and Ax (I) are the same type of troop (Ax), so they can support. Grade is diferent, but type is not.

[toby]

Rules always take precedence over the QRS - it is an aide-memoire rather than a statement of the rules - space is the primary consideration rather than completeness.

I agree that if Phil had meant type and grade he should have said so - he does elsewhere. Indeed for LH, he restricts it by ethnicity as well for some reason.

[Orcoteuthis]

Ax (I) aren't eligible to be supported against Kn (except list-specifically by Ps (S/O) if the Kn are not (X)).

Yes, they are. Ax (S) and Ax (I) are the same type of troop (Ax), so they can support. Grade is diferent, but type is not.

support != be supported

By the rule as written, Ax (I) can support Reg Ax (S), but not themselves be supported by other Ax.

[landmeister]

Rules always take precedence over the QRS - it is an aide-memoire rather than a statement of the rules - space is the primary consideration rather than completeness.

I agree. This is why I compared both.

I agree that if Phil had meant type and grade he should have said so - he does elsewhere. Indeed for LH, he restricts it by ethnicity as well for some reason.

I agree again. I don't know the logic behind it, but I have to admit that Irr Ax(I) giving support to Reg Ax (S) is weird, to say the least.  But this is what the rules say.