American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

used extensively in the Civil War. Many of the articles I have been reading mention that this or that regiment went into line of battle with a company of skirmishers that led the way and engaged the enemy skirmishers, before all skirmishers were absorbed back into the main battle lines.

In some instances of Burnside falling back to Knoxville, the skirmishers of the rear guard regiments fixed bayonets and gave the appearance of larger forces, causing Longstreets troops to form lines of battle to prepare for action. The skirmishers would then retreat and cause further delays in the Rebels trying to catch up to the main body of Burnsides troops.

So, my point is that the non-use of skirmishers in the game is ahistorical.

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
LtGen, Commanding, Army of Ohio

ACWGC Cabinet member
</b></font id="gold">

General Sands,

I agree. However, I don't see 'skirmishers' as presented in the current game engines as performing the same function as historical skirmishers, so I don't see the need to use them personally. Historically, I think they gave a much better picture of what was being faced than they do in the games. They drew enemy fire.

Because of their function in ferreting out the enemy, they necessarily moved slower than massed troops and were allowed to take advantage of available cover. The troops they covered would have been forced to move slower to keep from running over them, which is why units in game move slower with skirmishers deployed.

I've read that as the war progressed skirmish lines became heavier and heavier. Apparently leaders learned it was important to have greater firepower up front. When the skirmish option first became available in the games I thought it would be great -- but I find the disadvantges far outweigh the advantages in most cases. Personally, I prefer to give up being alerted to the possible presence of enemy forces for the gain of speed and greater firepower.

Just my two cents worth.


Your humble servant,
Gen 'Dee Dubya' Mallory

David W. Mallory
ACW - General, Chief of the Armies, Confederate States of America & Cabinet Member
CCC - Sergeant, Georgia Volunteers, Southern Regional Deaprtment, Colonial American Army

<font color="beige"><b>I would agree that skirmishers were used quite extensively, especially when a regiment was maneuvering near the enemy, acting as a screen for the battle line and <i>feeling out </i>the enemies position and strength. I have read many accounts where skirmishers were deployed before a line advanced or skirmishers were driven in by an advancing battle line.

Within the games we have a birds eye view of the entire field with extremely accurate head counts of every enemy unit within line of sight, skirmishers kind of become redundant, except for wooded positions where visibility is limited and here the game skirmishers work fairly well. Now....if the line of sight rules were modified so that the strength-make and model of enemy units was a little less well defined, skirmishers might have more use.

Now my pet peeve [}:)] (well I have a few..[;)] this is just one) is there is no way within the game to represent units that have "gone to ground" here again I have read many accounts of reserve and some times front line troops ordered to go to ground in order to become less of a target to enemy artillery or as at Fredericksburg where union troops went to ground because they had lost the drive to advance under such fire.
</b></font id="beige">

<font color="blue"><b>Brig.Gen. R.A.Weir</b></font id="blue">
<font color="yellow">-- CALVERT LINE --</font id="yellow">

<b>First--III--AoA CSA</b>

I used to dislike the skirmish function, but HPS Gettysburg changed my
mind. That is because Doug Strickland increased the movement cost penalty to enter a skirmisher's range to three. This can really affect the enemy's ability to close with your line. Unfortunately, there are two flaws. One is that the enemy can advance one unit adjacent to the skirmish unit and negate its effects for all the other units moving in that phase. The other flaw is that the enemy unit ignores skirmish costs if it would prevent a unit from entering a hex it would otherwise have enough movement points to enter. Other problems are that while skirmishers don't work when a unit is adjacent or the skirmish unit is disrupted, it is still in skirmish formation and suffers the skirmish penalties. While the HPS skirmishers are a far cry from their historical counterparts, I think the solution is a workable compromise, and much more playable than the Napoleonic skirmishers. Trying to keep track of those fellows used to give me a headache.


MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

I have had a hard time pinning down the effects of skirmishers. Regiments almost always deployed a company of them unless they were already engaging the enemy. Brigades sometimes deployed entire regiments as skirmishers. Having just read Campion Hill I have a much greater impression of there use but still no feel for how much damage they actually do other than delay.

At Champion Hill Cumming's brigade deployed nine companies of the 39th GA as skirmishers on the Middle Road. These joined skirmishers from Lee's and Garrard's facing Osternhaus's division. Some if not all of Lee's and Garrard's were recalled but Cumming's stayed and delayed the advance on the Middle Road until after 3 PM. This fight on the Middle Road reflects many of the good and bad qualities of skirmishers. They act as a screen hidding from the enemy what's behind them. In Osternhaus's case he thought he faced a prepared enemy. They force the enemy to deploy which took Osternhaus's division sometime to do. They keep up a steady fire which can pin the enemy. But they can become lost to the parent regiment as was the case here. When Cumming's brigade was ordered to assist Lee at Champion Hill he didn't get word to his skirmish companies so he went into battle a regiment short.

Unfortunately in HPS games the only useful purpose for skirmish formation is to "see" two hexes into woods and at night. Sometimes the movement cost is a useful affect. The problem is more in the game since most of the functions of skirmishers are made unnecessary by our perfect LOS. The Napoleonic games implement a skirmisher unit that is capable of much more but they become to powerful due to the god like control we have over them.

Personaly I think most functions of skirmishers could be imbedded in the unit formation. If spotted units were represented by just a "?" until they came adjacent to a unit or into a skirmish zone it would give the formation a spotting use. Extending the zone they affect units to three hexes would also help. Having column formations pay a much higher penalty for moving into the zone would make it a good formation for descouraging its use. The three hex zone could be graduated, higher penalty for near zones. The zones could also have an automatic fire affect on units moving through them especially units who likewise hadn't deployed skirmishers. Also, small regiments, under 100 men, could be deployed as skirmishers with the parent unit just becoming a location holder.

BG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)

An alternate way to increase the effects of skirmishers and cavalry as scouts is to alter a scen before play and reduce visibility to say 5-8 hexes. Sure, the artillery guys will become furious, but there are some scens that use very little artillery and then only at close or medium range.. Try it - it's quite fun when EFOW is on![;)]

Gen Lars W
1/XIV
Army of the Cumberland
USA