Group charges

[RogerGreenwood]

As I am on a rant about this with nothing better to do
If, by the same interpretation, skirmishers not being able to charge they cannot move alongside a charging unit and add fire support. However, if the target of the charge flees the infantry can continue with a normal move, in which case the skirmishers could have moved up alongside the infantry, but you will not know this until the infantry have reached half way point and the target reacts and the skirmishers may no longer be part of a group. So you tell your opponent "I always intended the skirmishers to move with the infantry"? In any case the skirmishers who should be able to give fire support only get to move to where they could give support if it isn't possible to give support. This is not only rather silly, I suspect it is going to need a page of clarifications.

I think this whole debate started because Huw was making the outrageous suggestion that his horse artillery gallop along behind his charging cavalry. One wonders what horse artillery were intended for.

[Hazelbark]

There is no such thing as a group charge move in BE. There is only a group move. Some of the units in the group may be intending to end in contact. These units are charging and are subject to limitations and restrictions. What the rest of their group do is only subject to the group movement rules.

This however (and I like a good rant) is not entirely accurate.

A charging unit can only wheel 45 degrees at its start.
A moving unit can do many other things like a facing change and move, or wheel partway through.

So there is a difference.

However if the ruling was like you want, I would not be put out either. It is something to clean up.

[Hazelbark]

As I am on a rant about this with nothing better to do
If, by the same interpretation, skirmishers not being able to charge ...

Yes. And its a good rant and not automatically wrong.

However, I could argue that making it harder to bring in skirmishers, makes the desire/need for more CP more important and I can make a case that it is too easy to get by with ordinary generals and there should be more benefits for competent generals and this is a small way to do that.

Again, stoke the rant. I think it is a thin slice of an issue in truth and don't care which way the final is, but I don't think it is as clear as you think it is.

[RogerGreenwood]

A group moving with charging units in it is not a group charge.

Consider two cavalry units lined up behind each other. For 1 CP the group charge against an enemy not straight ahead. The charging unit must wheel immediately because it is so restricted by the rules. The unit in the second line, in all the games I have seen anyway, gets lined up behind the chargers. The only way to do this is to advance the second line unit to the position of the first then wheel to follow it. It is making a normal move and not following the charge move restrictions.
My point is that in some circumstances we are perfectly happy with having a unit obeying the charge restrictions and another unit in the group doing a normal move.

You make an interesting point about CP usage. Rather than make a dog's breakfast out of the group and charge rules I would happily see some changes to the cost of better generals. I am not sure if there is an easy way to do this. The current CP generating system is easy to use and I do like simplicity where possible.

[knightfast]

I think this whole debate started because Huw was making the outrageous suggestion that his horse artillery gallop along behind his charging cavalry. One wonders what horse artillery were intended for.

Me?
Actually I think it was a Prussian Player (who shall remain nameless) who caused this
*My* cavalry lacked such technological wizardry as "Artillery" (and indeed as events showed were rather frightened of these big metal things even when left alone and unsupported out in the open!)

[RogerGreenwood]

It must be legal if the Prussians did it. They are certain to have done everything by the book!

[Adrian Steer]

I do wonder why you want to move artillery with a charging group as it can't actually support is this some dodgy way of double moving an artillery piece?

[RogerGreenwood]

You will not get a double move. Only supports get to move with pursuers.

I don't know why this is such an issue. A group move doesn't cease to be a group move just because one or more of the group's members tries to end in contact.

[Adrian Steer]

I'd be of the opinion that a charge move by a group couldn't contain Artillery or attached skirmishers as it says so on page 42.

[RogerGreenwood]

Artillery and skirmishers cannot move to contact. That is all it says. There is nothing that says they cannot be in a group move that includes a charging units.
A charge is a move intended to end in contact.
Rear supporters are moved with a group that has chargers in it are they not? They are not going to end in contact so are not chargers. By the logic you are using, only units who end in contact can be in a charging group.