Skirmishers are a cheap unit, there are many types, they can be hired as mercenaries and tend to be used a lot by the AI.

Do you like them :) , dislike them :( ?

If so, why?

And how do you like to use them? :mischief:

I´ve seen some experienced skirmshires do some pretty impressive things, share your tales.

Wich ones are the best? :strength:

What should their overall role on the battle tactic be?

Give me all your thoughts on the matter, i anger for knowledge :D

I use Velites in front of my Hasteti on offense and defense. On offense I just plummet the enemy a lot, on defense I kill them as they advace, then pull them behind my troops.

I like Militia Cavalry though....mounted skirmishers... :)

Thats the classic way to use them, and prob the most effective.

Ive noticed that a rapid movement into the flank side of an enemy unit (after that unit is pinned down by your center), then holding it at a fair distance, and let the skirmishers fire, will kill more then from a front facing, because the darts will pick the enemy on their sides, also and more importantly, the side dart firing will making them route after one volley or two.

Militia cavalry is excellent for harrasing the enemy but if he as heavy infantry or cavalry holding the flanks it can become an useless unit....

I'm not a big fan of skirmishers. Unless the enemy has poorly armored troops--in which case you're likely to be easily victorious anyway--they don't do that much damage. They also require more babysitting than other missile troops. Bottom line, I prefer archers.

It probably is easier to get at an advantageous angle with skirmishers, though, as they're more expendable and (usually) better in melee than Cretans (which I have if I can get them). Because the shields of units only affect attacks from the front and left, maneuvering your skirmishers to the left of the enemy line after they're engaged could perhaps make them more effective.

With the Romans I almost never use skirmishers... I use Hastati or the cheaper Legion Cohorts to do the firing part.
If they´re Illyrians or Spaniards/Scutarii you can do pretty awesome charges in the early game... if you put them flanking a unit, they´ll first fire until they´ve run out of ammo -and not hit them on the shields, that somehow seems to hit them more- and then they´ll charge with swords. Nice!
I´ve also used Illyrians against the ram-carriers while defending palisaded cities. They can fire at them while they´re maneuvring their ram into position and they can also fire at the rearmost fighters in a breach fight. As an extreme means, they can hodl the line as well...
Militia Cavalry is good for sallying out, either of a walled city or a deep-ranked close formation like a square... they do more damage than ordinary horse archers but also have less missiles, so it´s for an in-and-out.

1- "I use Velites in front of my Hasteti on offense and defense. On offense I just plummet the enemy a lot, on defense I kill them as they advace, then pull them behind my troops."

2-"Because the shields of units only affect attacks from the front and left, maneuvering your skirmishers to the left of the enemy line after they're engaged could perhaps make them more effective."

3-"I´ve also used Illyrians against the ram-carriers while defending palisaded cities. They can fire at them while they´re maneuvring their ram into position and they can also fire at the rearmost fighters in a breach fight. As an extreme means, they can hodl the line as well..."

And i would like to had a 4th and for that i must illustrate it (the quality could be better, but hey, im no computer designer)

Red - enemy
Blue - You
Green- your skirmshires
X - Fighting
-> Movements
- - - Darts

In the second phase you put your skirmishers on a column formations and pass rapidly between the gaps, going for a dart launching from the rear, beiing even able to snipe out the general or just meelle attack the rear after all ammo is spent.

Can you give a key on whats what? thanks :)

Can you give a key on whats what? thanks :)

You didnt give me time to finish he he :cool: But now its done, and i hope you get the picture, its pretty clear i think.

You didnt give me time to finish he he :cool: But now its done, and i hope you get the picture, its pretty clear i think.

Oops, soory mate! I see it now. :)

Nice :lol:

Only problem is if you can't fit them between the companies....

Nice :lol:

Only problem is if you can't fit them between the companies....

Against phalanx formations you can for sure, i ve managed it many times because they tend to open spaces while advancing, against others you just have to wait and see how it goes....

Thats awesome RickFGS, I'm off to try it now, thanks & good job! :D

Thats awesome RickFGS, I'm off to try it now, thanks & good job! :D

Thks Imperial ;) Hope you find good use for it, scutarri/hastati/principes can be used in the samme manner while the center holding line can be composed by crappy units, wich can make this a phalanx killing army on the beginning of the game.

Heh, actually, I play M:TW, not R:TW. It works just as good, I just need to find some god forsaken flatland..

Find it on a custom battle.
Why do you start with your skirmishers in the rear? I do see that our styles are different

militia cavalry is all i use, plus ballearic sligers.

Are slingers better than archers? The stats say hey are...plus I was Seleucids, hired some slingers, and the Egyptian Pharoah charged em....one volley and he was killed :lol:

Find it on a custom battle.
Why do you start with your skirmishers in the rear? I do see that our styles are different

They start on the rear on this tactic for 2 reasons:
1-To avoid getting tired as they will be doing a lot of movement during the main battle as you can see by the pictures, and i tend to value freshnesss a lot because i believe an weaker unit less tired withe moral up can make a lot of damage on a better one. Because even when flanked from behind, most heavy infantry can still hold the shock.

2-i only want to spend one volley or 2 at most of darts on the initial phase to soften up the charging of the enemies, saving the rest of the enemy to play on their background. But this one is discussable, because if they where droping like flies since the inital volley i wouldnt want to interrupt their fine work :) - but this doesnt seem to happen a lot.

3-(not really a reason) if i pute them starting front its not a bad ideia at all since they could lure the enemy, but then again, they would get tired.

Heavy pelstats are so good for this type of manuever ;)

militia cavalry is all i use, plus ballearic sligers.

Ballearic slingers are great, since you can have 2 or 4 from the intial campaign and they can kill well, on multiplayer battles i prefer archers, they kill more i think (cretan archers ahh :)), longer range, and the fire abbility is a must to scare/kill off elephants/chariots, snipe out the general and even burn down enemy onagers/scorpions or attacking siege towers/batering rams.

Of course you cant make archers up from the start , so ballearic will rule the field for quite some time.

Are slingers better than archers? The stats say hey are...plus I was Seleucids, hired some slingers, and the Egyptian Pharoah charged em....one volley and he was killed :lol:

You prob hired Rhodian Slingers, they come as the ballearic, already charged up with 3 bronze experience, very good for early game.

Almugavars are beasatly in MTW, if you can find them. After them, most skrimishers are outclassed by archers, as they are much more plentiful in AI armies, and have longer range/ better stopping power and whatnot. WHen i have to skirmish, though, I use Byzantine Cavalry, they can own it up in melee, but are fast enough to get out and harass like horse archers

Are those Byzantine Cavalry like the Trapezidae?

Almugavars are beasatly in MTW, if you can find them. After them, most skrimishers are outclassed by archers, as they are much more plentiful in AI armies, and have longer range/ better stopping power and whatnot. WHen i have to skirmish, though, I use Byzantine Cavalry, they can own it up in melee, but are fast enough to get out and harass like horse archers

I don't bother with javelinmen in MTW. I just use archers and then arbalesters when I can get them. I prefer playing catholic factions, so I don't use horse archers much either.

Im waiting on Medieval TW 2, the graphics seem to be much better, the MTW seems a bit crappy on this matter compared to Rome.

Almuguvars are the ONLY javalinmen i use in MTW, their range is just so crappy. I prefer Arbalesters ( not pavise, mind you), and i only use horse achers style units for defence; you dont have to manouver your other units much and can concentrate on your mounties

I prefer Arbalesters ( not pavise, mind you), and i only use horse achers style units for defence; you dont have to manouver your other units much and can concentrate on your mounties

I was actually interested in this scenario, so a few days ago I did a Riflemen(Don't remember there exact name) v. Pavise Arbalesters, and then the same Rifle guys against a unit of Arbalesters.

The Pavise Arbalesters actually survived..

/shrugs/

I think I'll try it again..

/wanders off.

Edit: I played as the Arbalesters(non-pavise) this time, and dominated the rifle guys, so I guess the pavise is an unneeded expense.

Oh i use regular arbalesters because they are faster, the pavise arbalesters have, well, a pavise, or tower shield, and thus are slower moving, thats why your pavise arbalesters survived the engagement with arquebusiers

oh, and this is unimportant, but theyre not riflemen, but musketeers; rifling didnt come about until the 19th century

No, the thing is that arquebusiers have almost no range and almost no accuracy. They are very primitive guns. Their biggest asset is that they cause a big morale penalty if they actually manage to kill someone. Also, for what it's worth, rifling came along much earlier than the 19th century; it just wasn't that practical for standard military use until then.

What´s the difference between an arquebus and a musket? I mean, seriously.

an arquebus is a piece of crap that you have to put on a stick to aim it. Its heavier and less reliable.
a musket has a much better firing mechanism and is substantially lighter.

an arquebus is a piece of crap that you have to put on a stick to aim it. Its heavier and less reliable.
a musket has a much better firing mechanism and is substantially lighter.

You also saw muskets being rifled and used in militias, along with the militia sniper that pissed the British off so much by popping their generals/commanders.:lol:

Skirmishers are a cheap unit, there are many types, they can be hired as mercenaries and tend to be used a lot by the AI.

Do you like them :) , dislike them :( ?
Yes and no.

If so, why?
In general, I like how they bulk up my army in lands away from my cities (i.e. expeditionary forces led by family members). But in combat I find that they are lacking too many points for what I'd like to use them for. However, when the enemy is too much of a moron to attack them when I send my skirmishers forth to pepper them, they are wonderful. I do on occasion use them are "archers" in my settlements until I can train actual archers.

And how do you like to use them?
Take out as many of the enemies best troops as possible, and hold them in place so my other units can flank the enemy.

I´ve seen some experienced skirmshires do some pretty impressive things, share your tales.
I pull them out of dangerous situations, unless I'm leaving them in place to guard a pass, crossing, etc, or else to slow down the enemy advance.

Wich ones are the best?
I like how the Mercenary Peltasts can hide, but if you consider Rhodian Slingers skirmishers, I like them (I view them to be somewhat of a middle ground between skirmishers and archers).

What should their overall role on the battle tactic be?
Pepper the enemies best troops, then hold them in place so my better units can flank them.

Give me all your thoughts on the matter, i anger for knowledge
The are good for bulking up the army, but I think that there is not much else that they are good for. I would just as soon buy other non-skirmishing units. However, when I am too impatient to wait for my cities to churn out better infantry, cavalry, and archers, I will use skirmishers as the base of my army to fight the enemy. I did this after I bribed a few German, Briton, and Rebel family members. I then proceeded to hire lots of mercenaries ( mainly Illyrian Mercenaries and Mercenary Peltasts) and attacked and overwhelmed the Dacians in a matter of I think it was 3 turns.

I like Militia Cavalry though....mounted skirmishers... :)
That's how I always beat Egypt as the Selucids, or the other way around :crazyeyes:. I build them up, and they have inferior melee units, so those and a general are all the cavalry you need.

with whom?
the Gippies have Axemen and their archers either outarmor or outnumber your skirmishers...

with whom?
the Gippies have Axemen and their archers either outarmor or outnumber your skirmishers...
I'm talking about early in the game. Somebody has inferior spear-melee units and for that you can encircle and even charge them with Skirmisher Cavalry.
But I never use Auxiliary Cavalry. I have one in each army, but they're rarely used.

an arquebus is a piece of crap that you have to put on a stick to aim it. Its heavier and less reliable.
a musket has a much better firing mechanism and is substantially lighter.

Its actually visa versa.

The original musket (first made in 1600s) need a stick to fire, since it was so heavy, but the firing of the weapon was easier, it was more powerful, and it was more reliable

Hte firing of the weapon was easier only if you had the stick, if not, you had to lift it yourself... :p