"Guns firing on skirmishers" Topic

Hi again, Gents:

We are playtesting the artillery rules of the future "Count down to victory" Napoleonic set, and we didnīt reached an agreement on the following question:

Can the artillery units fire roundshot through the skirmish screen on the formed units behind it?

I decide to call for your invaluable help on this question.

Thank you in advance.

Can the artillery units fire roundshot through the skirmish screen on the formed units behind it?

Don't see why not. A typical skirmish screen isn't going to be dense enough to stop a cannonball.

Definitely – there's no way a battery firing roundshot will try to snipe at skirmishers instead of the nice big block of troops behind them….

The only issue with this is the smoke put up by the skirmish fire – how much does that affect the artillery's ability to hit, or even see, the troops behind the skirmishers ?

I can see that their ability to judge range through smoke would get worse so possibly shooting could be allowed but at some reduction in effect.

I think it isnīt the capability of screen to stop the ball but the difficulty to aim to the formed soldiers.

In several stories of Napoleonic witness the skirmish screen was often mistaken with the main line.

On our tables, some sparse miniatures doesnīt look enough flesh to stop the shots, and we can see through them the formed lads, but was it true in the real battlefield?

Surely if the only thing between the artillery and the enemy column is an enemy skirmish line, the gunners are in huge trouble. They cannot fire on the skirmishers effectively, even with canister and will be rapidly picked off. It could happen and Mercer suggests it with his ride up and down and the exchange with the "sniper".

Would not it be a critical role of one's own skirmishers to keep their's at a distance?…….Now the snag is you have friendlies masking the guns.

Was it not a complicated game of scissors, paper and stone in a way? Cavalry force infantry into square but cannot actually close with them, artillery fire till retiring to square, skirmishers are there to be slaughtered if caught in the open, attackers have to decide column or line and when to deploy …………

I think it isnīt the capability of screen to stop the ball but the difficulty to aim to the formed soldiers.

Napoleonic artillery aimed their fire?

On our tables, some sparse miniatures doesnīt look enough flesh to stop the shots, and we can see through them the formed lads, but was it true in the real battlefield?

As I said before that depends on the density of the skirmish line.

Enemy skirmish screen, yes.
Frindly skirmish screen, no.

I don't see why they couldn't. The skirmishers are not going to stop cannon balls. I would give some type of negative penalty to the battery for firing at an obscured target.

some games that I have played the rules put a 25/75 or a 25/50 percentage on firing on 'parent' units of the skirmisher. Taking into account the fog of war, smoke and so forth this seems like a far trade off

So, if we can fire through the screen, the shot would be a difficult shot.

But what about if we decide that the guns can not fire at all through the skirmish screen?

The first option is the most usual on the wargame tables, but…

Do you remember some ruleset in which the second one (the skirmish screen completely obscures the formed mass is used?

Guys!
WTH!
Why would artillery be aiming at skirmisher with round shot???? Skirmisher only impact the situation ( since they can't stop balls) when they get close enough to fire at the artillery.
I would hope these rules do not allow ball being fire through friendly skirmishers!!!!! I do not think that is the intent of the questions.
DO the math!
If the skirmisher are in front of troops between parent unit and battery:
1) THere will only be smoke if the they are close enough to the battery to be shooting at the battery….say 200 yards or less from battery and the parent (and is French so up to 4oo yds) further back for total 600 yards- (less if other Continental troops such as Prussian etc). So round shot range to the parent unit would make sense (and ideal target for that ammunition & range).
2) BUT, If the skirmisher are close enough to shoot at the battery, the battery either now: fires canister at the skirmishers starting at 300-400 yards to suppress the skirmishers, waits for the supports to remove the skirmisher threat or leaves for fear of gunners being picked off.
3) This level of detail is best for very tactical or skirmish level rules, yes? Beyond that…. the length of time for this period of the situation would exist… is too short for more grand tactical 15-20 min turns. So what level of play is this for?

What is going to separate these rules from the others to have me play them? I am not impressed so far by this type of question.

MG

@marshalGreg:

The rules are tactical rules: One supported division per player: several brigades. Typical Napoleonic Wargame.

The question is certainly basic, but important for me ;)

The skirmishers are at musket range: then the guns fire canister on them. Ok.

What if the skirmishers are beyond musket range and directly behind them comes the heavy infantry in columns?

Could the artillery fire on the columns? Can the artillerists "see" the columns through the screen in order to fire them?

Iīm not sure. Thatīs why I ask on this forum.

About the rules themselves, perhaps you would like them, perhaps not.

A little advance:

There are no turns or specific control of the time the events occur. One side has the initiative and order his units until he suffers a setback. Now the initiative switches to the other side.

The passage of the time is not under control of the players, so for instance, you do not know when the reinforces scheduled for 1100 will arrive on your table (well,you know that the reinforcement arrives at 1100, but you donīt know how many setbacks, initiatives and so each player will have before.)

There are some events that "makes" the time goes by. From 0 to 25 minutes.

These are the general lines of the new mechanism included. Tha fight, fire and so is more or less conventional (using dice and rulers)

I will keep asking here about our doubts.

Thank you for your help.

Which fits in with what I thought earlier. Surely artillery could expect, in this situation, to have their own screen of skirmishers…..but then the friendlies are masking their "battery" fire unless in hollow ground!

Sounds a dilemma not easily resolved, or am I missing something ?(very possibly I admit!)

I guess I am also talking about the real thing and not how wargame rules could accomodate this.

Great topic for a discussion. I hope it continues.

Yes of course the guns can fire through the enemy skirmishers into the huge great inviting target behind them.

In fact if the guns are set up correctly, firing flat trajectory or skipping rounds over a flat plain, the roundshot will 'engage' both the skirmishers and the follow up columns as it flies/bounces along. Don't expect to actually hit many of the skirmishers though.

Cannon balls have a long beaten zone, unless you are doing something silly like firing down from the top of a steep hill.

Once the enemy get closer, then the gunners switch to case shot.

I wouldn't imagine friendly skirmishers or anyone else would be very inclined to stand in front of their own firing artillery. Supported artillery is perfectly capable of defending itself by shooting, at some point the gunners either fall back to their supports or succeed in driving the attack off.

Yes, at this point in the battle why would you have your own skirmishers masking your guns?

It seems like friendly skirmishers could protect the battery without masking its fire. They could advance 50 yards to either side and keep enemy skirmishers at bay. Of course if there were more batteries on either side like in a grand battery, that could be a problem, but I would think most skirmishers would not try to take on enemy artillery from the front. Napoleonic skirmishers were still dense enough to be worth a round or two of cannister to see them off.

Agreed entirely. Exactly what I was asking, in my ignorance. Everyone seems to be agreeing with me and saying that would be daft. BUT…….

Still, I find myself having great respect for these gunners, who see their skirmishers fall back behind them and now face being picked off, individually, by the enemy sharpshooters, with little hope of retaliation. That took guts………

What does "supported" mean? I guess that is fundamental. I am trying to swab out a cannon or ram home a shot, whilst some guy is taking potshots at me. Whom can I count on to defend me, how will he do it and where is he?

This must have happened in every single infantry assault of the Napoleonic Wars. Did the artillery always, then, abandon their guns in the face of such an assault at some critical stage and leave it to the line volley?

There are a lot of IF's in this situation …

… at one extreme the artillery can ignore the skirmishers, has a clear view of the columns behind them and can shoot without obstruction.

… at the other end the skirmish line is well ahead of the columns (who may be 400yds behind them and obscured by terrain until the skirmishers start shooting) and starts to shoot about 200yds out, knowing that the wind is blowing their smoke down into the artillery's position (hoping that they can close safely and pick off the artillerymen). The artillery never see the columns to shoot at them, even if they shoot expecting them to be there they won't be effective except by luck guessing the range right.

There is no one answer – just more questions.

Napoleonic artillery aimed their fire?

Definitely yes-it was called 'pointing.' Sometimes the 'pointer' would sight along the gun tube (the line of metal) or they would use the particular sight in use by the particular artillery arm.

The French used a fixed front sight and an adjustable hausse sight that was attached to the breech and did not have to be removed when firing.

If you have access to an illustrated period French artillery manual or treatise, the rear sight is usually illustrated in a technical drawing.

At night, the French would put phosphorus on the fixed front sight to be able to see it, and sometimes they also used a chalk line drawn on the gun tube.

B

In that case that the artillery is in such a poor position, bad luck on wind direction and not ordered to die at the guns ( typically of Russians defending the motherland)the guns would probably pull out for a new and better position, if not in direct support of infantry ( On Either side and or to the rear of the battery).
In the case of cavalry supporting – the skirmishers would be chased off by the cavalry skirmishers long before or getting into range to shoot at the battery.

@ Mayo
I like the time concept, so my interest is picked.
I am just a littler disappointed in your prior research. There is much already out there, that many have spend tonnes of their times & dedication to for our reference, that would clearly give you direction you need to answer such a question.
I understand using the TMP when; a question is not answered appropriately or there is need of a consensus when there is conflict.

This question does not seem to fall in either category to be such a case.

My 2 cents answer- if the parent battalion is not hidden/masked per comment by an earlier response ( Can't find it at the moment) of a hill or tree line between them and their skirmishers, the artillery would easily see them and thus target them. So it should become LOS issue.
How well and to what range with LOS good… is what separates the quality of British/French from the others and thus should typically be a modifier issue then.
Skirmishers only screened skirmisher from harm to what they protect. They do not affect LOS.
Artillerist officers had telescopes/binoculars back then, as well as did the generals to sight enemy, period knowledge here…
MG

In answer to the original question, yes.
Who is to stop them if they want to.
Skirmishes may screen the main body from enemy skirmishers but not from artillery, they are not some kind of sci-fi force field.

I know from the colonel of a Chasseur a Cheval regiment ' s diary at Leipzig, when a battery was targeting his men, he sent out skirmishers to engage the battery. In return the battery stopped firing and the enemy sent out their own skirmishers to duel. This effectively stopped the battery from firing at his regiment.

Worth noting for your information I think.

Ok.

Artillery fires on the close order infantry at same elevation, through the screen:

Obviously, the shot on the formed lads is some kind of, letīs call "difficult shot", but does the screen suffer any damage from the same fire?

If the artillery is on a higher ground, it can fire on the formed troops over the skirmishers, isnīt it?

Thank you again for such a lot of interesting and clarifying answers, by the way!

If you are on ground high enough to safely fire over friendly troops then chances are you are too high. Your shots are either sinking into the ground or striking the ground and bouncing up over the enemy's head. The ideal is to "skip" the round-shot. Thus grazing the ground, passing through at chest level, grazing a couple of hundres yards later, and passing though a waist leve, and then grazing the ground again and going through about ankle/shin level. There is one account of a soldier, seeing a round-shot roll by him, putting out his foot to incercept the it nad losing his foot in the process.

I think that I Drink your Milkshake's tale is good one. It makes sense to suppress artillery fire with skirmishers, the only response to which must be a counterattack like for like, or slaughter them with cavalry. The gunners cannot fruitfully engage such a dispersed target, even with canister and surely will not just nobly serve their guns to fire on the enemy main units, whilst being passively shot down one by one (unless Russian I concede).

Now, instead, the friendly units are masking the "battery", unless in hollow ground (as may often have been the case at Waterloo). The attacking skirmishers have still achieved their aim and, if there is a big column following them up, it is protected.

I simply cannot imagine the cannon line still being manned for long, after the skirmish line has been forced back through it. The challenge must have been effective fire whilst your own lads were still out in front trying to protect you.

A fascinating discussion, but I am still left baffled and glad I did not have to command a "brigade" of artillery in 1815 and try to puzzle it out!

Interesting comments so far.

WR thoughts…

We play that the battery can fire at either target (skirmisher or massed column but firing past an enemy skirmisher screen causes the volume (percentage to hit) to adjust downwards to 1/3 effectiveness (example..60 % chance for miniature loss becomes 20% chance). Now wargame players quickly point out that the cannon ball effect is not reduced by hitting or missing the skirmishers.. so why the adjustment?

In our group rules (played since 1975) we assume the following major points for tabletop play regarding reducing the cannon fire vs. the screened (by skirmishers) target:

1) The skirmisher "lines", even though represented at a specific point on the tabletop by the miniatures, are assumed to be operating "between the primary battle lines" of each side… the 500-1000 yards between the armies common for the period weapons.

2) Skirmisher cannot engage an artillery battery frontally by firepower with muskets unless in terrain (positioned in) on the tabletop. Reason for this is the artillery commander historically order several of his cannon to engage the nearby skirmishers with occasional canister firings. This kept the skirmishers in place , heads down so to speak, out of effective close musket range and caused the occasion skirmisher loss. Canister shot spreads out and covers a lot of open ground as well documented by actual live cannon firing (at targets) found on YouTube. Just the threat to fire (portafire ready) gave pause to the skirmisher advancement. By removing several cannon from engaging the massed column, the firepower effect on the column is reduced. Note: rifle armed skirmishers can engage a battery since their range exceeds the protective "no open order formation unless in terrain zone" fire range of artillery 6" vs. 4" protective zone.

3) The skirmisher formations represent a form of smoke and confusion on the battlefield. Most wargames take no account effect of the vast and dense battlefield smoke clouds created. After a few cannon volleys, the battery commander couldn't see the effect of his firing against any distant target. Another factor for reducing the firepower effect "artificially" done with the skirmisher formations.

4) No battlefield is flat. We assume the ground is uneven and has ground folds which can "shelter" a unit of massed infantry or cavalry from cannon fire. No regular multi-use gaming table typically has these gentle features represented on the flat surfaces. So we again represent these common features by having the skirmishers represent them indirectly when firing past the skirmisher screen into massed formations behind them.

5) Some game rules "factor in" their skirmisher formations for game play and don't have actual skirmisher miniature formations on the tabletop. We use actual skirmisher open order miniature formations on the tabletop. Either way is fine with WR… player choice and enjoyment. Our group just wants all the action of the H&M period… at all the levels of play… skirmisher formations, individual battalions, cavalry regiment or batteries, brigade, divisional, corps…all the way up the hierarchy of command to the Army or Nation level command in out monthly group games. This makes historical scenario easy to create and play.

There are several other reason for reducing the firepower vs. a massed screened target but the above reflect the common general reason why we reduce the firepower.

Firing though friendly skirmisher screens subject. We allow cannon batteries to fire though their own skirmisher formation…why?

1) Again the skirmisher screens are representative on the table at a specific location (to allow engagement of, firing at measurements etc) but are assumed to be operating in the dead zone between the major battle-lines of each army. Thus the skirmisher may or may not be in the actual cannonball glide-path towards the enemy formation.

2) In our early years of play, we required an actual gap in the skirmisher line of miniatures. This became tiresome to constantly determine the beginning and endpoint of the skirmisher formations. So, to make simple… we assume the skirmishers will be out of the way and kept out sanity with not requiring "actual openings or gaps" but allow the open order skirmisher formations to be easily positioned on the tabletop and fire the artillery normally.

3) In reality, the battery commander would fire his cannon at the massed enemy target even if the friendly skirmisher was positioned in the line of fire. After the first volley of artillery fire, the skirmisher commander will reposition his men (or they will act themselves)… even before the first volley if looking about the battlefield,, because he/they will know the artillery battery will open fire. Add in the confusion of battle, noise, smoke etc… the battery will engage the massed enemy target and friendly skirmishers be dammed.

4) We play either canister fire or roundshot can be fired though friendly screens. See above thoughts.

Firing at the actual skirmisher formation. We allow cannon to fire at the actual skirmisher formation but except for semi-skirmisher targeting not worth the valuable ammo usage. We play with specific limiting ammunition supply for artillery batteries so wasting a low percentage firing at enemy skirmishers is player's option. The fire effect is reduced depending on the type of skirmishers. We use four classifications:

a. Semi-skirmisher or really just a loose order foramtion which the men are not taking advantage of terrain protection and not using a "buddy system pairing". Firepower 1/2 effect compared to a massed formation.

b. Full-skirmisher or a typical buddy pairing with men taking advantage of local terrain from firepower. Firepower reduced to 1/4 effectiveness. All cavalry is rated as full skirmisher mainly due to the abilities to quick;y ride about the battlefield and change position rapidly.

c. Extreme-skirmisher restricted to the highly trained British rifle battalion. 1/10 fire effectiveness again them.

d. Germanic 3rd rank or similar source of skirmishers. Same as semi-skirmherr above.

Example photo taken from last saturday's battle of Sacile April 1809 scenario shows the open order skirmisher, massed formations and cannon batteries:

my 2 cents…maybe a quarter's worth.

M aka WR
link

P.s. Our game scale is typically 1:100 miniature ratio but can be shifted for historical scenario needs. So the typical unit is battalion of infantry, cavalry regiment or battery of cannon. Ground scale is 50 yds to the inch. Game turns are 20 minutes.

If I've got artillery firing at a battalion of infantry at 600 to 1200 yards and they send out a skirmish screen to stop me firing, then they better be a brave skirmish screen to leave their parent unit that far behind to get close enough to trouble me. If they did I would presumably have supporting units to deal with them or canister.
Also I don't think around sixty ish muskets spread out firing would be enough to obscure the parent unit, because I'm firing from 800 plus yards away.
Even if they did I would just fire through them at the parent unit.
Any battery commander staying in one place alowing skirmishers to get close enough to snipe him would move on or call support.

Remember that skirmishers were normally supported by small bodies (quarter of a company) in close order acting as a reserve and rally point in case of cavalry attack. Worth targetting by the battery.

I have three questions -

1. Why did all armies take the trouble of developing skirmish screens if they didn't work?

2. Why do gamers seem to picture Napoleonic skirmish screens as looking similar to 21st century skirmish screens?

3. Why did the French screens fail when attacking British positions placed on hills?

In my opinion, you could not easily see through a Napoleonic skirmish screen. This is how they worked.