The decision is unlikely, but if it happens we aren't capable of fending them off. We don't have the ability to deal 15 cohesion damage while they are moving in.
You would be pulling this stunt to avoid 5 damage, if Wachenheim really commits to the flanking. The benefits are slim and the potential risk high.
Also, I don't see the need to hide. If our concealment is enough to hide us this turn, I think it should be enough for next turn. Wouldn't they be better used by doing ready fire?
Hiding would prevent them from being detected by him using one of his units for spotting, right? If we don't hide, he can first Spot them and then shoot, I assume.
He could, but it's better than being revealed by a simple search action. There is a chance of retaining an advantage, especially if Wachenheim fails to push the north again.
Tbh, if we order them to go west now, it might be that the enemy's Ready Fire does not trigger? I am unsure about how it will play out, will our new move order cancel the unit's current movement or will they turn only after completing their movement East?
Retroactive changes spoken later aside, what do the others think on:
The 90th is outside the range of fire of our field artillery, only the horse artillery can shoot them in medium rang. Meanwhile, the 100th has a hill position, giving us a further -20 to ranged attacks. Meaning we only have 49% chance of dealing cohesion damage. We cold rout them with fire, but what would that really accomplish? The unit is mostly dead anyways, so we are just dealing some cohesion damage against the adjacent 14th and 20th. I can see why the idea makes sense from looking at the cohesion table, but I think we should focus more on inflicting casulties than routing at this point, therefore targeting softer units.
Hmm, why fire at the Halfling 14th who, as halflings, are resistant to ranged attack? This is reflected in your calculations, using two pieces of artillery for a 50% chance for 2 Cohesion damage is not very good...
Because there isn't something better to shot at in medium range. We could shot the 14th Hum, who impose also disadvantage; the 20th in the forest (even worse at disadv. -40); or the nearly-dead dwarves in cover (-40; 63% for 1 damage, any surplus damage wasted). If we get lucky, we might be able to crit the half jäg and actually disrupt something, or weaken them for the upcoming battle.
Again, all of those are out of range for the 84th and 31st as of this turn. Shooting at a unit at long-range is even worse than shooting at cover or with disadvantage (39% chance for 1 damage), so I'm picking the best of a bad target selection.
The issue with this is that any cavalry charge would need to face artillery fire during the charge. In terms of defence, the current infantry line isn't able to screen them [ready fire for infantry is in a single-direction; can't be used to reach cavalry]. Disabling the infantry isn't much use if the 75th and Dwa Vol Art can punish us, they have a good chance of dispersing any charge before it can connect.
Offensive genius.
Very explicitly not. +1 cohesion every turn, unless routed.
Looking trough the combat log, his units were actually supposed to be pulled back further. The 177th was supposed to be pulled back one more east, but were blocked by the 15th Dwarves.
If he tried one of his few intact units back, I can only conclude he's about to retreat any moment now.
You mean "put the halflings in range of his artillery cover, where our own cavalry risks a rout before the charge can even happen". A charge would be a vulnerability, if charging didn't require our battered cavalry to take 2 artillery attacks. Additionally, this is the only way to get the Halflings to safety rather than having them captured. If we combine the information of "pulling the 177th even further east" with the strange movement of the Jägers, I think we are seeing an orderly retreat.
I'd still prefer to rout the Dwarves, then. Even a nearly dead unit can damage our unit, better finish them off completely.
However, as this is the case and we expect him to retreat soon, why not move the artillery to better positions instead of using this turn to fire on suboptimal targets? Specifically, moving the 31 st NW to the road (where our headquarters currently are) would prepare for said artillery piece to continue with NW, bringing the 102nd and 177th into medium range. Sure, if he calls the retreat immediately now the 31st will not move quickly enough to matter, but if he still wants to keep fighting said repositioning might make a difference. And the only thing we would give up is one suboptimal attack.
They can't realistically damage our units, due to being disorganized this turn and getting a -30 on mid-ranged attacks, which they aren't in a position to make.
Are you familiar with the special rules for artillery? Rearranging the artillery takes a considerable amount of time and would make us miss out on making attacks. You need 1 turn of set-up after every move, 2-3 turns of movement for getting in range using the road, requiring 3-4 turns of movement overall. Additionally, firing with disadvantage reduces the chance of significant damage, but two lucky rolls with disadv. can do more damage due to not being capped by hard negative modifiers.
Moving the 31st 2*NW would increase their range by one, while forcing us to miss out on 3 possible attacks until we could theoretically fire again. By the time that is done, I would expect the enemy to not longer be in range. I don't think giving up on 3 XP for our most important units is a good idea.
