Slitherine

Light infantry in entirely skirmish mode is represented by bases in "loose formation" (e.g. 3 figures per base)
I've been told that such a unit can either have all its bases in a single rank or in two ranks.
Is this correct? I can't find the later in the rules.

If this is correct, is there any difference between the two?
When changing from one another does this require a full move as if it is a reform?

If this is correct, is there any difference between the two?
When changing from one another does this require a full move as if it is a reform?

A unit in skirmisher formation can also be in tactical (2 deep) or extended line (1 deep) formation. It is a reform to change from 1 to the other.

Main differences:
In single line they cover more frontage (and protect more units to their rear).
In single line they lose a dice in the CT in the same way that any other unit does.

This is only partly a question about skirmishers...

I can't find any specific rule about changing a large unit from 3 deep to 2 deep (we just treated it as a formation change).

However, neither can I find any rule to say that skirmish cannot be 3 deep! I can't think of many occasions when you would want to be 3 deep in skirmish formation, unless it is a 3-deep large light infantry unit wanting to cross difficult terrain and still come out 3 deep again. Unlikely, but...

Skirmish Formation should really be Skirmish Order - but p107 definition of skirmishers mentions skirmish formation, then the index does not include 'formation'! Aaaarrrgh!

Definitions of formations on p16 are not helpful, as they don't actually define anything in game terms like base positioning.

So - can you be in Skirmish "Formation" 3 deep?

I would think you could be 3 deep if you wanted to. I don't see anything saying you can't.

Caratacus wrote: I can't find any specific rule about changing a large unit from 3 deep to 2 deep (we just treated it as a formation change).

you are correct.

Skirmish Formation should really be Skirmish Order - but p107 definition of skirmishers mentions skirmish formation, then the index does not include 'formation'! Aaaarrrgh!

Aaaarrrgh! is right.

So - can you be in Skirmish "Formation" 3 deep?

I believe so. But an inefficient and expensive use of lights.

Thanks- and agreed it's not particularly efficient; I just wanted clarification.

So - can you be in Skirmish "Formation" 3 deep?

At long range this will negate being in skirmish order, as you gain a +POA for tagets in 'Deep formation'.

Don

I appreciate all the arguments against it. I was just trying to point out that the rules do not specifically define "skirmish formation" in terms of arrangement of bases. Which is why I would rather see the definition on page 107 changed to "Light Infantry may adopt 'skirmish order' in any tactical formation or extended line by replacing the 1/2 close order/line bases in the unit with light bases, counting as a formation change; regular Light Cavalry in extended line and all Irregular light Cavalry are always considered to be in skirmish order" or something clear like that.

I hope my suggested wording does clearly state the intention of the rules!

It helps to think of skirmishing as a state of mind rather than a formation.

Kevin

All Skirmishers MUST also be in either tactical or extended line formation.
Deep formation is still a tactical formation - although as pointed out at long range it negates your skirmisher advantage when fired at.

So no double-moves on a road for skirmishers?

Philip wrote:So no double-moves on a road for skirmishers?

If they are in march column that is not skirmisher formation.

I'm thinking of troops like Cossacks. Irregular Light Cavalry are defined as skirmishers. Does it follow that they are allowed only tactical or extended line formations, and not march column?

I'm thinking of troops like Cossacks. Irregular Light Cavalry are defined as skirmishers. Does it follow that they are allowed only tactical or extended line formations, and not march column?

No - If they are in March formation they are NOT also in skirmisher formation. Something I've not come across before - so never thought to define it in the rules.
It's pretty rare to see cavalry in column - I think I've only ever seen it happen when cavalry moved onto the table from reserve.

Could be an issue of cossacks trying to cross a bridge.

Could be an issue of cossacks trying to cross a bridge.

Hadn't thought of that .....

terrys wrote:

Could be an issue of cossacks trying to cross a bridge.

Hadn't thought of that .....

Easy... Extended line and side step see still legal

nigelemsen wrote:

terrys wrote:

Could be an issue of cossacks trying to cross a bridge.

Hadn't thought of that .....

Easy... Extended line and side step see still legal