Can A Small Number of Skirmish Units be Useful?

[Kabill]

I'm wondering whether anyone has good uses for small numbers of skirmisher units in a force.

There's two problems I see with this:
1) Skirmisher units can't typically cause cohesion loss individually so you need at least two and probably three to pose any meaningful threat; and
2) Skirmishers are most easily defeated by other skirmishers, and usually the army with the largest number of skirmishers will win that phase.

Fielding a small number of skirmishers is therefore open to two weaknesses:
1) you may not have enough for them actually to be a threat; and
2) they are vulnerable to being driven off by a superior force of skirmishers without causing any meaningful damage on the opposing army and thus just being a waste of points.

I've been testing this, sort of, with the Legions Triumphant tournament. Dacia gets a reasonable number of archer and javelin picks, so I've taken a lot of these (I may even have maxed out), while Rome gets fewer and they are more varied, so I've chosen none when playing with them. Where I have been playing Dacia, I so far seem to have kept my opponent's skirmishers at bay with my own; where I have been playing Rome, I have basically been ignoring my opponent's skirmishers and, relatively few in number, they have caused very little meaningful damage to my army.

I feel, then, that skirmishers are a kind of all-or-nothing pick: either you take a lot of them (when they become useful) or else there's no point bothering because they can't do enough and risk being wiped out by a superior force. But I'm wondering whether there's some good uses for a small number of light units that I'm overlooking which would make adding a couple to a list to finish it off worthwhile over taking (e.g.) another infantry unit.

[76mm]

What do you mean by a "small number" 2? 3? I generally feel naked if I don't have at least 6 skirmishers, maybe more if my opponent has lots of skirmishers. I think you'll eventually find that choosing no skirmishers is a bad idea.

[devoncop]

One use for outnumbered skirmishers is to put them behind a unit in combat to prevent it being pushed back if that is important to protect the flank of another unit.

I do like your general point though. I have found that unopposed skirmishers placed in front of my heavy infantry can seriously affect the ability of the unit to charge into a more inferior heavy unit in front of mine as there is often a tendency to chase the skirmisher and thereby expose a flank to opposing units...

[rbodleyscott]

Early Imperial Romans don't really need skirmishers to protect their infantry from enemy skirmishers because all their infantry are armoured. However, their cavalry are rather substandard, and will easily be outmatched by enemy cavalry. (I tend to keep them in reserve at the back of the infantry). What your skirmishers can do is give the enemy cavalry a hard time, if they are supported by bolt shooters protected bu auxilia or mediocre legionaries, and perhaps carefully used auxilia sagittarii.

[Kabill]

What do you mean by a "small number" 2? 3? I generally feel naked if I don't have at least 6 skirmishers, maybe more if my opponent has lots of skirmishers. I think you'll eventually find that choosing no skirmishers is a bad idea.

Depends on the battle size but something like that, yes. To be clear, I'm not saying skirmishers as a whole are useless and I do get a lot of use out of them. The circumstance I am mostly thinking of is where an army list only has limited light picks - in that context, is it worth bothering with them at all or should you ignore them and use the points to bolster another part of the army (i.e. infantry or cavalry)? The Rome/Dacia match-up for the tournament is a good example of this - Rome has quite limited light picks relative to Dacia, hence I wasn't convinced fielding a small number of lights as Rome would be worthwhile as they'd be ineffective and/or easily defeated by more numerous Dacian lights.

One use for outnumbered skirmishers is to put them behind a unit in combat to prevent it being pushed back if that is important to protect the flank of another unit.

I do like your general point though. I have found that unopposed skirmishers placed in front of my heavy infantry can seriously affect the ability of the unit to charge into a more inferior heavy unit in front of mine as there is often a tendency to chase the skirmisher and thereby expose a flank to opposing units...[/quote]

I'd thought about push-back blocking but discounted it because you could just use a (more useful) unit. But then you have made me think that lights are maybe better for this as they are more mobile so you can position them where they are needed better. I've not seen much benefit in terms if disrupting infantry charges but on reflection I'm probably not trying to use them that way in contexts where it would be effective/useful.

Early Imperial Romans don't really need skirmishers to protect their infantry from enemy skirmishers because all their infantry are armoured. However, their cavalry are rather substandard, and will easily be outmatched by enemy cavalry. (I tend to keep them in reserve at the back of the infantry). What your skirmishers can do is give the enemy cavalry a hard time, if they are supported by bolt shooters protected bu auxilia or mediocre legionaries, and perhaps carefully used auxilia sagittarii.

I guess against an infantry heavy army with only limited cavalry/light support, I can see a few lights being useful for holding up or disrupting cavalry (but I'd expect a stronger cavalry force to overrun them quickly?). I can also see their use bolstering an also poor cavalry option (and that might have been worthwhile in my Rome/Dacia match had my opponent taken any cavalry options).

One final thing I'd not thought about is area denial in rough/wooded terrain - mediums can do this too but I guess lights are a cheaper way of holding a flank if there's good ground for it and is a role individual skirmishers can be effective at.

[Ktonos]

If you have skirmisher superiority you can dictate the terrain of the battle. You can draw armies from fortified positions or force others to assault your own. That's the advantage above all else. But even if you don't have a chance to gain that superiority, based on comparable army lists, even then in my opinion you must snatch what few skirmishers are available to you. Three light units instead of zero will make give much more advantage than 12 heavy foot instead of 11. You will surely find that critical moment to use them, Either make a rear attack on a wavering enemy general, find an ambushing spot, draw heavier units into bad terrain and gain some time when it is much needed etc.

[Ludendorf]

Having at least some skirmishers can screen your force from the enemy's skirmishers, drawing them into battle and then falling back when beaten while your heavies get the job done. If you do it right, you can avoid losing any skirmisher units, will waste the enemy's best opportunities to harass your soldiers, and may even score a few routs on the enemy skirmishers as well.

As mentioned, you can also keep them back for key moments in the battle. I like using them to support my cavalry; groups of skirmishers can seriously mess up a cavalry formation.

[MVP7]

I don't play multiplayer but against the AI I always want to have at least some skirmishers. Skirmishers can force the enemy into attacking with it's main force (any damage or other disturbance to waiting enemy group will trigger an advance). Even small number of skirmishers can keep larger number of enemy skirmishers busy or help friendly cavalry with enemy cavalry. I guess the AI lets a relatively small number of skirmishers affect it more than a human player would but it still seems like a good dynamic. Playing against human player with superior number of skirmisher I'd imagine that spending the points on anti-skirmishers units (instead of a weaker force of skirmishers) could be more effective solution.

[Ludendorf]

Incidentally, light chariots make an excellent substitute for skirmishers. They're relatively cheap and nimble enough to be able to scoot in, smash up a skirmisher line and then get out of trouble before the enemy's main force catches up. The danger is of course that the skirmishers don't break quickly enough or the chariots chase the skirmishers somewhere even their speed can't get them out of.

[ahuyton]

I think that skirmishers are nearly always useful. I use them not only for the obvious skirmish, but to hold difficult terrain, to chase routed troops and to sit behind the lines waiting for an isolated unit to appear that I can then shoot to pieces.

It can be disturbing when the opponent has more skirmishers, but then I would concentrate mine in the most useful place or keep them in reserve for use later.

The biggest mistake I make, and it happens too often, is to get over ambitious with skirmishers and send them too close to the enemy without back-up. Then there are numerous tricks to employ to catch them and eliminate them.

[Delbruck]

As skirmishers I think LI & LC are quite different, given LC can charge heavier troops and are faster than any unit in the game. Obviously, this makes them very useful harassing the flanks and attacking weakened opponents. Generally, I have been scaling back on LI. Although javelins can be useful for holding terrain, often I view LI as a point drain, but worse when they run low on ammo. Of course, all this depends on your army, opponent, and the terrain. In the end it's the heavier troops that (usually) win the game, and given the choice between LI archers and raw hoplites (for example) I often go with the HI

[KiwiWarlord]

Then there are numerous tricks to employ to catch them and eliminate them.

Yes, you know many.........

[GiveWarAchance]

Then there are numerous tricks to employ to catch them and eliminate them.

Yes, you know many.........

Can you tell us some tricks?
I usually use my skirms against theirs and try to win the ranged exchange. I like skirmisher units.
I know cavalry can eventually catch up to them, but even that is costly cause the skirmishers can chew up the horses a lot during the chase.

[Ludendorf]

One approach that has had mixed results with me is to engage the enemy foot skirmishers in melee with your own and then use light cavalry to flank the line of skirmishers. The theory being that you will at least get the guys on the sides, and might even cause a domino effect if lucky. It is easily counterable by the enemy keeping their heavy units or even other light cavalry nearby though, and of course, it requires an equal number of foot skirmishers to do it from both sides. Skirmishers and heavy cavalry can also be a potent combination; the skirmishers pin enemy skirmishers in place, and then the cavalry crush them.

Finally, if your opponent is reckless and leaves groups of skirmishers right up against your front line of infantry, a particularly evil move can be to move your heavy infantry forward in such a way that you cut off all avenues of retreat for the skirmishers. Put them in a box and stamp on them. Just watch out for heavies following up to attack you while you're out of formation.

And the trick I've fallen foul of many times (not too good at doing it myself) is forcing them to run parallel to your front line so they come to rest in front of your units and then slamming into their flanks with whatever you've got there. Driving light cavalry that are harassing your heavy cavalry in front of your heavy infantry can be particularly cathartic.

[GiveWarAchance]

Ludendorf, so you are using heavy cavalry to attack sideways across your front and push the enemy skirmishers to evade & end up in front of your troops? Are they allowed to evade twice on one turn? I guess they can't evade again so they are easily hit by troops. Is that how it works?

[jomni]

Ludendorf, so you are using heavy cavalry to attack sideways across your front and push the enemy skirmishers to evade & end up in front of your troops? Are they allowed to evade twice on one turn? I guess they can't evade again so they are easily hit by troops. Is that how it works?

Only one evade action per turn is allowed. So the second attack catches them.

[GiveWarAchance]

Thank you jomni.

[ahuyton]

Then there are numerous tricks to employ to catch them and eliminate them.

Yes, you know many.........

Can you tell us some tricks?
I usually use my skirms against theirs and try to win the ranged exchange. I like skirmisher units.
I know cavalry can eventually catch up to them, but even that is costly cause the skirmishers can chew up the horses a lot during the chase.

Probably I am exaggerating when I say many... and others will have ideas as well, but my approach is as follows and I am afraid there is nothing very original here.

- Obviously there is the concentration of fire to disrupt, but it is surprising how quickly you can get a unit down to autobreak bu concentrating fire on it. Waste of ammunition? Maybe, it depends on the circumstances.
- I try to deploy one javelin armed unit to two sling or bows, so that the javelinman can try to charge a fragmented unit (if for example your opponent is kind enough to leave a disrupted unit in range of your bows/slingers)
- If you charge the light unit from an angle eg 45 degrees or from the flank, then it will not just evade straight backwards. Then you probably have a greater chance of catching it with another unit in the battle line or another skirmisher
- Have a light horse or cavalry well positioned to catch an evader
- Sometimes I simply send a cavalryman or two charging into a big swarm of light troops. It is, for me at least, impossible to predict how they will evade and provided you do not charge from too far away you may catch one as they block each other. But the downside is that if this fails they will swarm around you next turn and shoot you to pieces. When it works, it can be spectacular as if a cavalry unit catches a light unit in the rear he will likely break it at impact and then pursue and maybe get another.
- Try to attack the light unit so that it does not evade, eg send in a slinger against a javelinman head on and the latter might well decide to fight. Then follow up with a charge from a nearby unit, eg a skirmisher on the flank or a heavy unit in support. Just try not to be lose the initial impact of the weaker unit too badly...
- Where troops are close up together,engage the enemy heavy or medium unit with one of your own. This may prevent a nearby light troop from fleeing through the combat area or force it to take a longer route and thus increase the chance of catching it.
- Don't charge from far away, except to make a unit flee off board. Get close and then charge for obvious reasons.

I am playing an interesting game currently, my Samnites against Majandro's Romans. He uses his skirmishers very skilfully, keeping them just in front of his heavy troops and messing up my chances to attack. One mistake I too often make is to put too much distance between my light troops and the main battle line.

That's all I can think of for now. Others will have better ideas I am sure.

[GiveWarAchance]

Thank you ahuyton.
I've been doing the concentration of fire style like you mentioned and never tried using them in melee cause I was scared off by their lack of morale dropping ability but your advice of pinning them for the heavies to land a finishing blow makes sense.
It is kind of funny to think of slingers being ordered into melee like they would rebel with "What do we attack them with? Our fists?"... and get the order in reply... "Use your slings as whips and to strangle the heathens! Or tie them together to make nets to hold the badguys in place."

[Kabill]

Thanks for the replies folks. Some useful ideas.

As skirmishers I think LI & LC are quite different, given LC can charge heavier troops and are faster than any unit in the game. Obviously, this makes them very useful harassing the flanks and attacking weakened opponents. Generally, I have been scaling back on LI. Although javelins can be useful for holding terrain, often I view LI as a point drain, but worse when they run low on ammo. Of course, all this depends on your army, opponent, and the terrain. In the end it's the heavier troops that (usually) win the game, and given the choice between LI archers and raw hoplites (for example) I often go with the HI

Just following up on this, I've found this in my Palmyria vs. Rome tournament game. My light cavalry have been outstanding, turning an apparent defeat into a tight-fought contest through harassing flanks and routing fragmented units. But the light infantry have been less impressive, and at this end-stage of the battle they've literally nothing to contribute as all meaningful targets are non-light and engaged in melee. That's not to say that they haven't contributed - they were certainly helpful early on in support of my light cavalry - but the huge versatility of light cavalry seems to make them a much stronger pick, especially if you have limited light options, as I can see even one or two light cavalry units having a significant impact if used effectively.