Skirmishers

[hazelbark]

Hazelbark: You say "Having medium range fire against reformed hit on 6s really make medium range fire ineffective."
Well, that´s the basic idea when both sides are using skirmish screens! To be truly effective, one screen must prevail over the other.
The current system ignores the effect of the adversary´s defensive screen.

Well here is an important thing that we as modern people misuse the term screen for this period. Skirmisher clouds in this period were not about lessening the fire effects on troops. They were a way of increasing fire on the enemy.

Under your system you dice to determine which screen is prevailing. Then you dice for impact.
Under current system you dice for impact. If the dice don't hit then obviously you weren't prevailing. If they do then weren't.
Since under the current system one player fires first, if they succeed the other player is reduced.
So it is all the same with less steps in my view.

[deadtorius]

I have to agree. If your dice rolls are not so good then it looks like the enemy skirmish screen stayed put. If you hammer your opponent than it looks as if you managed to drive in his skirmishers. Much cleaner and easier to keep it the way it is. I doubt if Nappy was standing on a hill checking to make sure his regiments still had their skirmish screen out front, he just wanted to make sure that regiment was where he wanted it still. Its a case of whats going on down at lower level which is really not our concern at grand tactical, let the lower officers deal with it, thats why they are there.

[SSLConf_joaquin9]

What you say sounds good, if you want a more abstracted feel. I find that´s also ok, BUT in that case, the current system should modified as well... As it stands now, your skirmishers chance of hurting the enemy is identical wether he has skirmishers as well or not, which can´t be right. I think the chance of hits in that case should be lowered (may be -POA, may be -1 or -2 dice). Just my opinion.