""Clouds of skirmishers" in your rules?" Topic

In whatever game you play, how do the rules handle the French "clouds/swarms of skirmishers" that some books reference?

Is it distinguished from other nations use of skirmishers?
Reflected in the quality of skirmish ability of each nation?
Factored into the general firepower of the units?
Something else entirely?
Not a factor that is taken into account?

We play Empire V. The rules take national characteristics into account. Some nations can only field semi-skirmishers, others can field Jägers or other specialized skirmishing light troops. Even distance ranges/advantages for rifles versus muskets are handled. Quality is factored. Skirmishers, used effectively, can be a real pain, and if a unit is weakened, can cause morale issues for the enemy, so can become a real threat.

French can field whole battalions as skirmishers, and of course have voltigeurs that can screen each battalion. It is not unusual in our games to have to face a cloud of French skirmishers larger in numbers comparatively. To repel them, move into firefight with the enemy formed units as quickly as possible, causing the French skirmishers to fall back behind the formed units. Of course, this may only speed your demise : > )

Simple. Light and crack units have more skirmish shots than line ones and may send out separate detachments with increased skirmish firepower.

Also undrilled and unexperienced units may act as mob.

Austrians – fielded clouds of skirmishers often as well.

I give skirmishers better hitting rates, there they could exploit the potential of a smoothbore better in contrast to rank and file in close order.

Firing is slower.

After two hourse they have to be rotated out of the skirmishing line because they are out of ammunition.

When attacked by formed troops they have to fall back or on the flanks

Factor it in to combat.

G'Day Hans-Karl

I have "First Fire" for formed body of troops…and light infantry can attempt to goad the formed body of troops into executing their "First fire" upon them…

There are accounts of tirailleurs returning / changing out after their ammunition has been expended…and I really like that concept that tirailleurs must rotate after two hours of skirmishing…

Easy enough…once the tirailleurs are in range…two hours later…they must change out…even if they did not fire at any figures on the table…sort of a random fire…

Thanks!

Best Regards
Art

Very simple system for the "big games", when two units/brigades face off against each other, one will occasionally have "skirmisher dominance" and the chance to inflict an extra hit(or desorganisation point). If two units are of the same quality( roughly) there is no skirmisher dominance and so no effect from skirmish screens (that are not reperesented as such on the board) EX. British and French line brigades facing each other, no skir.dom. and so no dice and no effect. British rifles will have skir dominance over French line Lights etc. A very basic system but it keeps the game moving forward without totally disregarding the skirmishers.

We use a 1:10 ratio with 72-figures in six companies. One simply sends out the light company of 12 figures to skirmish. A brigade of four battalions could therefore send out 48 skirmishers ahead of the brigade. That's a cloud of skirmishers IMHO.

Jim

I have "buckets of dice" skirmishing (6 hits, 5/6 at short range) – with saving throws (456 run behind supports).
- Normal skirmishers" (line light coys; light batts) one dice each,
French line deployed as skirmishers: lose 1 dice in 3;
French light voltigeurs and British Light Division): gain 1 dice in 3;
Spanish new light, guerrilla's etc: lose 1 in 2

Light battalions normally send out one third in skirmish order. French can send whole battalions of light or line.

In close combat:
- I have a whacking first fire bonus (+4) that one tries not to waste on skirmishers
- Just been under skirmish fire penalty (-2)

This is a little time consuming but simulates the Peninsula skirmish fights quite well.I resolve by sections of the front. One side breaks when it has 50% casualties and withdraws. A light infantry unit which is rotating one third out to skirmish (rather than all skirmishing) can replace those falling back – but otherwise there is a clear victor to the skirimish fight, and the loser has a -2 in the decisive clash between formed troops.

Effectively, with my rules, French can't usually beat British unless they can win that skirmish fight.

Cavalry skirmishers on the other hand seem to be ignored in 99% of rules, at least as a separate mechanism.

David F Brown

EMPEROR includes both infantry and cavalry skirmishers.

boki.ee/Wargame/EMPEROR/EMPEROR/EMPEROR330.htm

This text is in translation process.

cavalry skirmishers were essential to obtain information about the terrain, in case formed cavalry had to charge.

But do they fight to any measurable effect for our rules. Skirmish games, maybe. But a part 1:20 game using, say, GdeB?

G'Day Gents,

My rules also has cavalry that skirmish in this role:

la charge en fourrageur (par escadron or peloton) or deployed squadrons or pelotons into open order.

While this does not constitute a charge you also have a peloton dispersed en tirailleurs, which would harass a battery.

As an example…here are a few general principles that were applied against cavalry en fourrageur:

Deployed squadrons or pelotons into open order presents a particular danger, since the cavalry has a greater circumference, which makes it difficult to keep the cavalry away. This is where the terrain plays a vital role in defense against cavalry.

Therefore if the battery is well positioned, by using both terrain to its front, and flank (appui fixe), it should be able to hold the enemy cavalry at a distance.

an execution of fire against cavalry en fourrageur should be coup par coup (aimed fire-once piece at a time) and never executing all its fire at once, but keep a portion ready for a sudden charge.

Once the fourrageurs have begun to retire at a distance, the battery should fire ball.

tir a obus should be used when the fourrageurs use the terrain movement to hide behind.

With mounted tirailleurs and isolated cavalry, tir a obus is recommended which cause fear by means of explosions.

So as you can see cavalry skirmishing does have an importance…
and should have some importance in a game as well.

Best Regards
Art

G'Day Gents

During the first two years of the Guerre De La Revolution…I have French figures that are based with oval stands in lieu of the right-angled ones for formed infantry and trained skirmishers.

This is to represent those who are en "Debandade" ou "tirer éparpillés" (Shoot scattered) or move around like a ‘mob'…helter-skelter so to speak…

Best Regards
Art

Hello Weasel!

Great question.

I only game in 6mm and distinguish all light infantry units by mounting them on skirmish formation bases. They are the same size as formed unit bases but contain fewer figures spaced farther apart. So for example an entire Leger unit would be based that way. This base simply identifies their capabilities not necessarily their actual formation. All units are always considered to be in the best formation for the situation at hand and can be in different formations at different parts of the turn.

We normally game large battles so every French brigade has a base of voltigiers that represents the skirmishers drawn from the various units. Depending on the scenario the French player can increase the size of his "cloud", by simply adding more bases from his formed units into the "cloud" and informing the others players of his actions.

"Is it distinguished from other nations use of skirmishers?"

Yes and no as nobody can increase the size of their cloud without specific details within the scenario.

"Reflected in the quality of skirmish ability of each nation?"

To some degree, as some skirmishers are rated better trained then others. It boils down to the design of the scenario. In some situations for example the voltigiers can be considered well trained and others just trained or even poorly trained.

"Factored into the general firepower of the units?"

Yes to some degree, well trained units have greater fire power then trained units and poorly trained units.

"Something else entirely?"

All skirmish units are less of a target and can move a little faster.

"Not a factor that is taken into account?"

If we really scale the game down to a small encounter all the same principles apply, except the brigade voltigier base becomes the combined elite companies of the battalion that contains two other formed bases for the other companies. So we can create any size of "cloud" at any level of game.

Best regards,

Glenn

In whatever game you play, how do the rules handle the French "clouds/swarms of skirmishers" that some books reference?

Weasel:

Most all Napoleonic rules I have played assume somethings for game simplicity sake or based on conventional wisdom:

1. The French can always field more skirmishers because
2. The Allies couldn't field many
3. The French could deploy whole battalion-sized forces
and the Allies couldn't.
4. Only specialists were deployed: lights or Voltigeurs etc.

Those conclusions are wrong, and wrong from 1792 to 1815.
For example, the Prussians fought in two ranks and deployed the third rank as skirmishers during their participation in the French Revolutionary Wars 1792-1795.
The Austrians were doing the same in 1794 and later. The Prussians/Saxons deployed @25% of their entire infantry force as skirmishers at Jena, the same proportion as the French during the battle…the difference was that the French outnumbered the Prussians better than 2:1.

Is it distinguished from other nations use of skirmishers?

IF there is one thing that distinguishes French from Allied skirmish practices is that the French were more willing [As opposed to able] to deploy lots of skirmishers. The Allies didn't see skirmishing as 'decisive' and a weakening of the real power of infantry: formed combat. In 1796 you see Archduke Charles instructing officers NOT to deploy too many skirmishers. In 1800 Mack as chief of staff twice instructs officers not to 'deploy too many skirmishers'. In 1805 and 1809 the same instructions are repeatedly issued. In 1813, Schwarzenburg specifically warns officers that it is not necessary to "deploy entire battalions" as skirmishers. Why this continued litany of instruction? Because the Austrian officers WERE deploying large numbers in response to the French. In every battle I have studied, the Austrians did deploy large numbers at different times…and entire battalions. The problem was that the French were better skirmishers, so to counter them required more Allied troops… this disparity disappeared in the later years.

Reflected in the quality of skirmish ability of each nation?

The closest thing I have seen is the Empire 'semi-skirmishers', but I think those rules miss the mark. Skirmisher formations are treated in most game systems differently than other formations. You don't see 'semi-columns' for conscript formed troops. The skirmish methods were as alike across the nations as column formations. Some nations were good at them, others weren't. That is usually portrayed by quality differences, not different formations. There were really only two basic skirmish formations: combat skirmish formations and 'grand band' formations.

The idea that skirmishers move faster often ignores their function, particularly as a screen for formed troops, so they would move no faster than the formed troops. As a grand band, their movement would rarely be 'faster' if operating as an independent force. Moving in rough terrain such as woods would be where their movement abilities would really be 'faster.'

Factored into the general firepower of the units?
Something else entirely?

I think this method misses the mark entirely in regards to how skirmishers worked. It is like factoring in horse artillery fire to cavalry combat.

Not a factor that is taken into account?

Lots of rules factor out skirmishing…much like artillery is factored out in large scale games where entire divisions are the maneuver element.

"Factoring out" skirmishing when representing Napoleonic battles is a mistake. In general, skirmish operations were:
1. A constant issue for Napoleonic armies. More manuals and treatises for light infantry were written than for formed infantry during this period.
2. Seen as a major change in infantry use. Scharnhorst believed French skirmish operations were the reason they won battles.
3. A large part of most battles, operations often directed by the corps or army commander. [e.g. Salamanca]

The "clouds" of skirmishers is a vivid description, but in terms of numbers, formation and tactics, it doesn't tell you much other than the observer felt there were lots of skirmishers out there.