ITLSU Close Combat result & MGs

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe

Post Reply
Martin1914
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:23 am

ITLSU Close Combat result & MGs

Post by Martin1914 » Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:51 am

Hello All.

Last night played a small learning scenario in which a Turkish battalion assaulted a small oasis village held by an Indian company with an attached MG. The village was treated as a complete, individual feature (a 'sector', as with the Durham Boys' Africa rules).
The Indians were defeated by 1 and 'withdrew' 4 inches out of the village. The Turks followed up and occupied the village with one of their companies. The respective kills were removed but no suppressions were assigned as Havildar Heroes and Johnny Turks have equal SRs. Firstly, was this right with the suppression?
Secondly, we discussed and decided that the MG was lost. Was this right? Should there be a different approach depending on a 'withdraw', 'retire' or 'rout' result?
Thanks in advance for your words of wisdom.
Regards
Mart

Archdukek
Posts: 2916
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: ITLSU Close Combat result & MGs

Post by Archdukek » Sat Feb 04, 2017 7:10 pm

Hi Mart,
On your close combat question you played it correctly. There is no difference in the spunk rating of either combatant so no additional suppression points are added.

As for MGs, they can move at the same rate as infantry so we would allow the crew to take the MG with them when withdrawing which is a more orderly process than retiring or routing, assuming there is any crew left. The rules don't actually say as far as I can see but the distinction works for us.

John

Martin1914
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:23 am

Re: ITLSU Close Combat result & MGs

Post by Martin1914 » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:02 pm

John
Thank you for replying to the post. I was thinking along the same lines that there should be a difference between withdraw and rout for the MG. I will take your comment back to our group and restart the discussion.
Regards
Mart

Post Reply