Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Maybe its just me but I dont exactly like how skirmishers are portrayed in 8th. With a degree of abstractionism in warhammer, in CC since they dont have "ranks" even though they are ranked, I would imagine skirmishers fighting in more loose combat formations such as say the difference between drilled roman legions going against mobs of celts who can surround the romans.

So my idea is this, skirmishers always have fight in additional ranks much like that HE rule, which can be combined with spears/etc.

Feel free to shoot this idea down or critique it

Skirmishers could use another charge reaction.
Feint flight: fall back a D6" and auto rally and end of opponents remaining moves.

It would make them a lot more useful.

-Matt

Skink skirmishers are already pretty amazing! Not as much as chameleon skinks, but still... not sure that they need a boost without a debuff to go with it.

Dryads would certainly benefit from this.

Nagashek wrote:Dryads would certainly benefit from this.

Actually this was primarily the unit I had in mind, I wasnt thinking too much about skinks . It just bugs me that GW completely forgot about dryads when under the skirmisher rules they pretty much state "Skirmishers will get beaten in combat vs ranked units!"

Yeah Dryads certainly need a boost. They have great stats and aren't terrible for their points, but they got smashed by the new skirmish rules - no rank negation to the enemy, a terrible blow. I think that Skirmishers should negate enemy rank bonuses - a surprise attack would dis-coordinate the enemy, and ranks wouldn't make that big a deal. Or maybe they just negate rank bonuses for the first round of combat (obviously only when they attack from the side or rear), to represent the enemies' shock. IMO

Guardian_Phoenix wrote:Yeah Dryads certainly need a boost. They have great stats and aren't terrible for their points, but they got smashed by the new skirmish rules - no rank negation to the enemy, a terrible blow. I think that Skirmishers should negate enemy rank bonuses - a surprise attack would dis-coordinate the enemy, and ranks wouldn't make that big a deal. Or maybe they just negate rank bonuses for the first round of combat (obviously only when they attack from the side or rear), to represent the enemies' shock. IMO

Dryads need to pick up the strider rule, and lose the skirmisher rule.
They simply take up too much space if made into a combat sized unit.

-Matt

kenshin620 wrote:Maybe its just me but I dont exactly like how skirmishers are portrayed in 8th. With a degree of abstractionism in warhammer, in CC since they dont have "ranks" even though they are ranked, I would imagine skirmishers fighting in more loose combat formations such as say the difference between drilled roman legions going against mobs of celts who can surround the romans.

So my idea is this, skirmishers always have fight in additional ranks much like that HE rule, which can be combined with spears/etc.

Feel free to shoot this idea down or critique it

The problem is that close formation is about getting support from the back ranks, loose formation would actually reduce the number of attacks you could get from other troops.

The big problem with the skirmisher rule is that Dryads have it, like HawaiiMatt said you could fix just by taking it off Dryads. Do that, and add in a rule like 'feigned flight' that HawaiiMatt thought of*, and we'd be getting pretty close to skirmishers operating like they really did, and how they would be most interesting on the battlefield.



*Though I'd probably do it a little differently. Feigned flight was always a pretty risky option, as it carried with it the risk that the unit wouldn't rally and just keeping running from the field. But it was also used to turn a suddenly present a strong combat line to a pursuing enemy that suddenly found itself out of position and vulnerable. I'd give the unit the option to flee as normal, but if caught I'd give it the chance to make a leadership check to rally, if successful combat would be fought as normal.

I think that Skirmishers doing poorly against rank and file is pretty accurate. The Celts could surround the Romans, sure. And they died a lot.

Dryads, Wardancers, Plague Censer Bearers. How many other "heavy Skirmishers" are there? These guys, specifically, need a little help. Dryads and Wardancers, I say, could benefit greatly from Hit and Run. Censer Bearers would be a ton better with I4. I think we could look to possible solutions on a case-by-case basis here.

If Dryads become rank and file, they should certainly have a rule that allows them to retain rank bonus in woods...

I both like and dislike skirmish-improving rules proposals.

On one hand, they were nerfed a little too hard.

On the other, WE lists (in the Southern Wisconsin/Northern Illinois areas anyway) are performing well. (Well, there are two primary players who have been cleaning up at tourneys with Tree-kin/dryad support/various support).

Honestly, I've been thinking about it, and...

What if Skirmishers were simply infantry Fast Cavalry? They could reform as much as they like, so they're still maneuverable, but they'd have a reasonable footprint, and they'd still be restricted during a charge and so on. Really, the only thing that would be that they'd be ranked up.
I guess it would be a bit of a stretch to say that they're still in a "loose" formation when they look the same, but I don't think it's too hard to imagine.

The BRB has all kinds of fluff about them being light infantry and...well, skirmishers.

But the way the game is, they take up a lot of real estate for not a lot of return. They are supposed to "harry and harrass the foe," but I'm not really sure they do.

They get a bonus vs. ranged and templates won't be as effective, but any real unit is gonna smush them--and that is repeatedly stated as the desire in the BRB.

Hammers, Anvils, War Machines, Fast Cav, Heavy Cav, gunlines, etc. Are all pretty well-defined.

Why would you take a unit of Skirmishers over traditional shooters? What as a tactician do you expect from them that's unique from your other guys? I mean, what do you guys see as their objective?

They ought to be able to get in where you want them, and do what they do.
They shouldn't be practical, taken in large units, because their numbers won't count for much as they're in loose formation and lack the know-how/equipment/desire to fight rank-and-file opponents.

Small units of skirmishers should be quick and maneuverable, which the free reform thing helps with. Their giant-sized footprint, however, makes them more unwieldy than their supposedly less agile rank-and-file kin.

Dryads are the big one, but honestly, I don't much care. WS4 S4 T4 A2 with a 5+ Ward for 12pts is a good buy. They used to be one of the most efficient models in the game. If we could only get them to where they need to be, I'm confident they'd fair well against a wide variety of troops.

I'm still thinking that a regular unit formation--all ranked up--would suit them best. Free reforms, no rank bonus, no disruption. I really think that just making them take up less space, more or less like they used to, would be a tremendous boon.

DukeRustfield wrote:Why would you take a unit of Skirmishers over traditional shooters? What as a tactician do you expect from them that's unique from your other guys? I mean, what do you guys see as their objective?

They should be nuisance troops, moving out in front of the main line, using close range missile weapons to score a couple of casualties at they look to frustrate the enemy into breaking formation and charging them. At which point the skirmishers should be able to feign their flight.

I see small units deployed ahead of the main line, so the greater area they occupy shouldn't matter much, but I think they need to be able to better flee any charge declared against them.

Well that's an interesting idea. What if they just had the option to flee an extra D6 as a charge reaction?

I think Wrap's idea is fitting for assault troops and that Sebster's seems good for true skirmishers.