Attachment confusion

Moderators: hammy, Blathergut, terrys, Slitherine Core

Post Reply
Simpleton
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:25 pm

Attachment confusion

Post by Simpleton » Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:24 am

What happens when an attachment chart says two things and one may contradict the other? Example: The 1809 Austrian Reserve Cuirassier Div. The maximum artillery attachments are 1 per Division, however all 6 base Cuirassier units MUST have an artillery attachment. Does this mean 1) only one 6 base Cuirassier unit per Division so that the attachment rule takes precedence, or 2) The Cuirassier Div MUST have more than 1 artillery attachment if more than one 6 base Cuirassier unit is fielded (the special instructions taking precedence over the general rule).

quackstheking
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 844
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:41 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, England

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by quackstheking » Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:32 am

I think you're missing out the word "additionally" which is crucial. The full instruction from p. 10 is "Up to one (Artillery attachment) per division. Additionally all large cuirassier units MUST have one."

This is quite clear. If the cuirassier division has only small units it may take only one artillery attachment but doesn't have to. If it has one or more large cuirassier units then each of them must have an attachment with the key word being "additionally".

Hope this makes sense!

Don

deadtorius
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4173
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by deadtorius » Wed Jul 11, 2012 12:35 am

Only question I have had regarding this is if you have a large and small cuirassier unit, the large must have an attachment which is mandatory, but is that mandatory one also the optional one so that the small unit can't have one as well?

Yes I am using an Austrian army and more than likely the answer is no the small unit can't have one as the first mandatory one is the only one the division could have in this case, but still one has to hope and dream correct :wink:

gibby
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 336
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:50 am
Location: Northampton

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by gibby » Wed Jul 11, 2012 9:34 am

Sometime you don't get to eat the cake.
Keep dreaming.

Simpleton
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:25 pm

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by Simpleton » Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:54 pm

quackstheking wrote:I think you're missing out the word "additionally" which is crucial. The full instruction from p. 10 is "Up to one (Artillery attachment) per division. Additionally all large cuirassier units MUST have one."

This is quite clear. If the cuirassier division has only small units it may take only one artillery attachment but doesn't have to. If it has one or more large cuirassier units then each of them must have an attachment with the key word being "additionally".

Hope this makes sense!

Don
Actually this is the point of the question. If you have all small units you may attach one and only one artillery attachment to any of the units. If just one of the cavalry units is 6 bases then it MUST have the attachment and the others cannot have an attachment. However, if you have a limit of one artillery attachment per any division, and all units of cuirassiers with 6 stands must have an artillery attachment, does this limit a Cuirassier Division to no more than one 6 base regiment? or can I field more and go above the 1 per division limit?

A strict reading of the attachment chart would seem to indicate that you must still obey the 1 per division ratio and this limits your regiment size, but I would like to hear from the rules writers.

Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by Blathergut » Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:16 pm

Since the list allows for 3 large cuirassiers units, then, as quake has explained, I would read it as:

a) if only small units in the division, then 1 arty attachment allowed
b) if 1 large plus small units then 1 arty attachment for the div + 1 for the large cuirassier unit
c) 2 or more large...same...one arty attachment for each large cuirassier unit + 1 for the division

quackstheking
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 844
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:41 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, England

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by quackstheking » Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:18 pm

I agree with Blathergut - the key word is "additionally"!

Don :D

viperofmilan
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 192
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 12:26 am

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by viperofmilan » Thu Jul 12, 2012 4:33 pm

I respectfully have to disagree. You have layed out one possible interpretation of the word "additionally" but not the only, or the most obvious one. Another, equally valid interpretation is to view the word as imposing an additional restriction on the assignment of the 1 (maximum) artillery attachment permitted for each division similar to the way skrimisher attachments are dealt with the in 1809 Army of Italy list - up to 2 per division, but a maximum of 1 per 3 line units.

We need to hear from the authors on this one. What was their intent?

Kevin

edb1815
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:28 pm
Location: Delaware, USA

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by edb1815 » Thu Jul 12, 2012 5:24 pm

viperofmilan wrote:I respectfully have to disagree. You have layed out one possible interpretation of the word "additionally" but not the only, or the most obvious one. Another, equally valid interpretation is to view the word as imposing an additional restriction on the assignment of the 1 (maximum) artillery attachment permitted for each division similar to the way skrimisher attachments are dealt with the in 1809 Army of Italy list - up to 2 per division, but a maximum of 1 per 3 line units.

We need to hear from the authors on this one. What was their intent?

Kevin
I have to agree with Kevin, but there is no need to wait for the authors answer. Let's look at this assuming the rule works and there is no contradiction. "Additionally" means another restriction applying to solely to large cuirassier units, it does not mean that you can add another artillery attachment by having both large and small units. Keep in mind this is listed in the "Restrictions" column of the list.

In order for the restriction to a maxium 1 per division to make sense or work as intended, the only logical interpretation would be that a large unit must have an artillery attachment and a small unit may have an artillery attachment however this does not change the limit of one per division. Read together this way you have 2 complimentary restrictions for cuirassier divisions. For example: 2 small units can have 1 arty att. or none at all, 1 large and 1 small, the large must have the one arty att., and the small can't have one. Effectively this limits a division to 1 large cuirassier unit.

Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by Blathergut » Thu Jul 12, 2012 5:26 pm

Wait upon the author reply then.

deadtorius
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4173
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by deadtorius » Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:03 pm

ooh nothing like starting massive controversy with a simple question ....

Actually as I see it, and this is how I actually interpret it all dreaming aside, if you have one large cuirassier unit you get the mandatory artillery for the division. If you have 2 small units one of them can have an artillery attachment. If you have a large and a small unit, only the large may have the mandatory attachment. Get two large units they both have to have a mandatory artillery attachment. The notes specifically state this is the exception to 1 attachment per division, thus allowing the cuirassier division to possibly have more than a single artillery attachment.

My silly original post was a poor attempt at saving some points and getting the best of both worlds by getting max artillery for least cost of cuirassiers. Certainly would be an expensive division.

Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5864
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Attachment confusion

Post by Blathergut » Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:27 pm

moved here

terrys
Panzer Corps Team
Panzer Corps Team
Posts: 4189
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:53 am

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by terrys » Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:50 pm

Actually as I see it, and this is how I actually interpret it all dreaming aside, if you have one large cuirassier unit you get the mandatory artillery for the division. If you have 2 small units one of them can have an artillery attachment. If you have a large and a small unit, only the large may have the mandatory attachment. Get two large units they both have to have a mandatory artillery attachment. The notes specifically state this is the exception to 1 attachment per division, thus allowing the cuirassier division to possibly have more than a single artillery attachment.
This is correct.
I thought the entry was fairly straightforward.....but to reverse the wording:
ALL large cuirassier units MUSt have an artillery attachment.
Up to one other unit MAY have an artillery attachment.

edb1815
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:28 pm
Location: Delaware, USA

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by edb1815 » Fri Jul 13, 2012 6:53 pm

deadtorius wrote:ooh nothing like starting massive controversy with a simple question ....

Actually as I see it, and this is how I actually interpret it all dreaming aside, if you have one large cuirassier unit you get the mandatory artillery for the division. If you have 2 small units one of them can have an artillery attachment. If you have a large and a small unit, only the large may have the mandatory attachment. Get two large units they both have to have a mandatory artillery attachment. The notes specifically state this is the exception to 1 attachment per division, thus allowing the cuirassier division to possibly have more than a single artillery attachment.

My silly original post was a poor attempt at saving some points and getting the best of both worlds by getting max artillery for least cost of cuirassiers. Certainly would be an expensive division.
I didn't think it was a massive controversy, but also not as straightforward as it seemed. Just that the use of the word "additionally" does not mean an exception to a general rule (in a legal sense anyway). Although it is a moot point now, I still don't see where the note specifically states it as an "exception" - is that also on p10? (I don't have the book at hand).

Now I may have to paint some more cuirassier bases!

Simpleton
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 10:25 pm

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by Simpleton » Sat Jul 14, 2012 12:59 am

terrys wrote:
Actually as I see it, and this is how I actually interpret it all dreaming aside, if you have one large cuirassier unit you get the mandatory artillery for the division. If you have 2 small units one of them can have an artillery attachment. If you have a large and a small unit, only the large may have the mandatory attachment. Get two large units they both have to have a mandatory artillery attachment. The notes specifically state this is the exception to 1 attachment per division, thus allowing the cuirassier division to possibly have more than a single artillery attachment.
This is correct.
I thought the entry was fairly straightforward.....but to reverse the wording:
ALL large cuirassier units MUSt have an artillery attachment.
Up to one other unit MAY have an artillery attachment.
So large cuirassier units get their attachments above and beyond the one artillery attachment per division limit, so if a Cuirassier Division had two 6 base Cuirassiers, each has to have an artillery attachment AND if there are more cavalry units in this Division, one can have an artillery attachment as well.

terrys
Panzer Corps Team
Panzer Corps Team
Posts: 4189
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:53 am

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by terrys » Sat Jul 14, 2012 10:25 am

So large cuirassier units get their attachments above and beyond the one artillery attachment per division limit, so if a Cuirassier Division had two 6 base Cuirassiers, each has to have an artillery attachment AND if there are more cavalry units in this Division, one can have an artillery attachment as well.
Correct.

hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by hazelbark » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:17 pm

Simpleton wrote:So large cuirassier units get their attachments above and beyond the one artillery attachment per division limit, so if a Cuirassier Division had two 6 base Cuirassiers, each has to have an artillery attachment AND if there are more cavalry units in this Division, one can have an artillery attachment as well.
Of course this division will cost you an enormous proportion of your army points. It does have the advantage of being able to wreck any single unit in its path.

deadtorius
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4173
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 12:41 am

Re: Attachment confusion

Post by deadtorius » Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:40 pm

In theory it should over run anything it gets pointed at or at least one would hope so after spending half your army points on it. Perhaps some day Austria will give it a try.

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”