Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)
https://wargame.ch/board/nwc/

I proprose a petition
https://wargame.ch/board/nwc/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=16543
Page 2 of 2

Author:  Richard Bradshaw [ Mon Nov 08, 2021 8:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

A 2X skirmisher in a chateau requires hundreds and hundreds of infantry to possibly dislodge them.

Author:  Christian Hecht [ Mon Nov 08, 2021 10:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Yea well this is a more then seldom used terrain. And thinking of Hougoumont, initially about 1k Allies vs 4k French did work for the French and in later stages the men power ratio shifted even more in favor of the French and still Hougoumont wasn't taken.
Even if you see a problem here it would be a terrain problem and not that of the skirmishers.

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Mon Nov 08, 2021 10:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

shouldn't routed skirmish units be eliminated when attacked by formed units in open spaces?

I don't see how they inflict more casualties than they take.

I'm fighting the full Waterloo battle right now and I've had at least a half dozen combats against routed skirmishers in the open (if they're in obstructed hexes I could at least get this) and have lost more men than the routed units did.

I have no idea how to technically fix this, of course, but is this how the game should run?

Author:  Christian Hecht [ Mon Nov 08, 2021 11:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Afaik elimination of whole units, even skirmishers, isn't that easy. They usually have to be routed & isolated and then loose a melee to be eliminated.
That skirmishers are eliminated in the open ground when just routed would be new to me, of course you can always try to overrun them with cavalry.

Author:  Richard Bradshaw [ Tue Feb 08, 2022 10:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Skirmishers in a chateau may as well be a a company of Navy SEALS. Attacked by a thousand A rated troops could not dislodge them.

And why do units that lose a melee retreat toward the enemy lines if there is a friendly unit to merge with? And routed units should never retreat forward. They should have to retreat or surrender. Skirmishers are like Covid. They are everywhere and the only vaccine is a non-disordered horse unit.

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Tue Feb 08, 2022 11:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Richard-

Wait until you play someone who uses the skirmishers who routed behind your lines to wait until they reform and then go after your supply units.

That's their tactic.

That's why I think you have to insist that skirmishers must stay within five units of your formed battalions.

Author:  Karl McEntegart [ Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Garret,
I have to agree wholeheartedly with your thinking.

Skirmishers operating, in that role, in front of their formed unit should not be capable of more than covering their parent unit and within a defined range, as you indicated.
A detatched skirmisher unit in defense of a built up area/chateau is IMHO an acceptable employment of them also. Should they decide/opt to remain there as the enemy force advances or envelopes them, they will/should presumably suffer from isolation and ultimately perish/surrender.
A skirmish unit operating, preferably from cover, on the flanks of an enemy is another historical usage.
However, having random skirmish units running amok in the rear/far rear of the enemy is pushing their historical use way beyond the bounds of realism and their intended role and/or function. I'm sure, like most things in life, there are isolated incidents of such occurrences. The exception should not make the rule. Skirmish troops, as we know, are not Commando/LRDG/Airborne type units and their employment in such manner, whilst perhaps a game winner/changer, does not do justice to their role or historical use IMHO, again.

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:42 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

It absolutely makes trying to play a historical simulation into a joke, that's for sure.

Very frustrating trying to attack and having to deal with formerly routed skirmishers in your rear.

Units have to operate under some sort of command and control system.

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Tue Feb 08, 2022 12:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Richard Bradshaw wrote:
Skirmishers in a chateau may as well be a a company of Navy SEALS. Attacked by a thousand A rated troops could not dislodge them.

And why do units that lose a melee retreat toward the enemy lines if there is a friendly unit to merge with? And routed units should never retreat forward. They should have to retreat or surrender. Skirmishers are like Covid. They are everywhere and the only vaccine is a non-disordered horse unit.



Historically, it was incredibly difficult to force skirmishers out of a chateau

Author:  Richard Bradshaw [ Tue Feb 08, 2022 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

They need to build those type of chateaus in the trailer parks of the Midwest, USA! Impenetrable! Easier to breach a gate of a city than one of those fancy houses....

Author:  Christian Hecht [ Sun Feb 13, 2022 2:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Skirmishers surely could use some work.
If anyone misuses skirmishers like commando units he may have other problems soon. At least I would not play such a person again if he insists on using them that way.

I find it annoying that skirmishers are currently more a blockade unit. While cavalry can overrun them, infantry can't even shift them. Formed bat. were not stopped by skirmishers, these just fell back when the formed bat. advanced. And so I would like to see a system that shifts skirmishers if a formed bat. enters its hex.



And yes, the routing routine has to be looked at, sometimes it doesn't even look unrealistic but sheer impossible where they end up.

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Mon Apr 11, 2022 10:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

I've tried to play someone using skirmishers as commandos and it drove me out of my ever-loving mind.

It makes the simulation unplayable.

The armies of that era weren't trained that way.

Author:  Richard Bradshaw [ Sat Oct 22, 2022 7:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Well, just had a melee on a skirmisher unit who had hexes to retreat to his lines. Yet the bugger "retreated" through my lines and is now behind me. I think that is considered an advance. Skirmishers are like a paper sign placed in the road in the lane of traffic. Along comes a dump truck at 50 mph and strikes the paper sign and comes to a jarring halt.

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Sat Oct 22, 2022 7:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

Good to see you're still active, Richard.

I think you have to make it clear at the start of any battle that ALL units that rout behind enemy lines will retreat to obstructed terrain until they can make their way back to friendly lines

Even a battalion should be able to work as a free agent- which is one reason why the command control option of the game is very important to use.

It makes you have to have units under close command to assault.

I don't like the business of using skirmishers run willy nilly around the rear of an army capturing leaders and supply trains. It makes it all absurd.

BTW- Richard hates skirmishers...LOL

Author:  Garret Fitzgerald [ Sat Oct 22, 2022 7:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: I proprose a petition

amended-

Not necessarily obstructed, but not running around disrupting the rear anyway.

They have to be trying to move back to friendly lines or hiding in obstructed hexes.

They certainly can't take a VP objective behind enemy lines.

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/