Skirmishers Again

Ask a question about rules
Répondre
viperofmilan
Sous-lieutenant
Messages : 128
Enregistré le : mer. 12 févr. 2020 22:56

Skirmishers Again

Message par viperofmilan » jeu. 4 mars 2021 15:28

I was going through the rules again the other day (always a dangerous activity) when I noticed on p. 22 in the discussion of "Skirmisher Factor" the indication that SK0 represented poor quality skirmishers. Now the text makes clear that this only applies to units that include organic (intrinsic?) skirmishers. After a fairly cursory examination of the descriptions of the various national armies the only nation that appears to fit this definition is Saxony. Saxon musketeer companies had intrinsic skirmishers but too few to merit a skirmish factor > 0. For every other nation, there is no indication that musketeers had any intrinsic skirmisher capability at all.

I have two questions:

1. Should Saxon musketeer units be assumed to have intrinsic skirmishers (albeit crappy SK0 ones) with all the benefits that apply thereto: 3 UD skirmisher fire, artillery suppression, etc.?

2. Are there other national forces that I missed that ought to be given intrinsic skirmisher capability as well?

Thanks in advance for any enlightenment you can provide.

fdunadan
Capitaine
Messages : 240
Enregistré le : sam. 5 janv. 2019 10:10

Re: Skirmishers Again

Message par fdunadan » jeu. 4 mars 2021 17:07

Well,
1)a skirmish factor of 0 does not authorize to fire on the skirmisher column for a LN or LT. Only Sk can fire if they have a skirmish factor of 0, but they're not included skirmishers but troops dedicated to skirmish. See page 65 on "skirmisher', the first dot is the answer to your question.

2) All the LT and Sk have a +1 or +2 factor with the exception of Danish volunteers (Sk +0 carbine). All others units with +0 can't use skirmish fire.

viperofmilan
Sous-lieutenant
Messages : 128
Enregistré le : mer. 12 févr. 2020 22:56

Re: Skirmishers Again

Message par viperofmilan » jeu. 4 mars 2021 18:08

Ahhh, missed that one.

Thanks.

Répondre