Indirect Fire clarification needed

This came up in another thread.  Some think it means skirmishers firing overhead have no penalty.  Others say it means you can shoot over your own skirmishers without the -2 penalty.

6.4 'indirect fire normally has a -2 penalty unless otherwise indicated in the army lists. Skirmishers have no penalty'.

What I am reading here is that any T with bows, javelin or slings can park themselves touching behind another friendly unit and fire at -2.  Skirmishers can do the same  without penalty?  (like Late Roman support archers in V1)  The only advantage of having a large unit with supporting archers is avoiding the -2 penalty.

Another unclear item is Visibility. Can shooters see thru friendly units for overhead fire purposes or do they need to be offset for visibility per 6.3.2 and require to be able to measure a line from one front corner and the middle of the firing unit?

We play it the way you describe above. Our rationale is that the S units are actually moving through the formed unit to fire and then retreating backwards behind the formed unit during melee. 

Friendly Units do not block line of sight. Technically  enemy Units do not block line sight either but there are other types of firing limitations that can occur because of their presence.

Gaius i don't really follow what you mean 'retreating backwards behind  formed unit during melee'.
When you measure to see if you can do indirect fire do you measure to the rear or front of the unit fired over. If its the rear the firing unit may be say 1cm behind friendly unit would then be able to fire at enemy just over 1cm in front of unit fired over surely this can't be right?
From your answer if I'm reading you correctly the -2 would apply to say T units firing over skirmishers.
Have to confess this type of indirect fire we have totally overlooked unless unit of T right behind another unit.

Can see answer to my question re measuring from example at botton4of page. So you can pull back S through friendly unit and do indirect fire at virtually point blank range from friendly unit firing over don't get the logic of that??

whether they are T with short bow A at -2 or S with short bow B you only seem to end up with 1, or maybe 2 dice vs cavalry, when firing overhead. not exactly game breaking.

I think you misunderstand kenntak. I am talking about what the rule is trying to represent, not the rules themselves. While we show two units, one behind the other, say FP and S, the actual situation is actually one of the skirmishers intermingling with the formed unit. A perfect example of this is the Late Roman Comitatenses who had a portion of the unit as archers. We show this with two stands but the Roman archers never actually fired over the battle infantry. Rather, they would move up through the formed infantry and fire away until the enemy got close and then they would fall back to the rear.

I am reexamining some of my late Roman enemies like Alamanni who can get 4-12 T shortbow A archers who could actually operate with the no-longer-so-impetuous FP warriors now. No more worries about out of control impetuous troops involuntatily bursting thru from behind and disordering the archers.

This indirect fire 'No penalty for skirmishers' question came up again yesterday in a few games our group played. Definitely needs to be clarified.

My personal view is firing over an intervening unit of friendly skirmishers has to be easier than any other troop type ? ....and so the no -2 penalty ?

Our group is split 50/50 over this one, discussed at length over lunch and a few glasses of wine ..... issue wasn't resolved of course.

why not both?  I'd be ok with both effects,

I understand why a vbu 2 unit doesn't suffer a -2 shooting overhead of another unit because 0 dice makes it pointless.  I would also be ok without the -2 penalty shooting over your own skirmishers, perhaps only when at long range. It does alter the vulnerability of archers as the enemy may be forced to target your skirmishers instead of the archers behind.

Gauis it was ejc not Kenntak that queried your reply, you through me by mentioning melee. Understand where you're coming from its a bit like our thinking about LU with rear missile unit not treated as overhead fire because of a degree movement in the ranks and would explain why no -2 for the S unit in your example as really direct fire, do you allow reaction fire or opportunity charge if fire in ZOC.
As indirect fire is arched fire i find it hard to accept that on level ground a unit of T standing a few yards behind a unit of say FP could carry out such fire on an enemy a few yards +1 in front of the FP unit thats without discussing visibility issues.
Tarty the way the rules are worded i think it goes against the way you would like it but i know where you're coming from. Agree it needs clarifying, i would personally like to see indirect fire with T only at long range ie over 4H.

What the rules say: Skirmihers has not the -2 modifier when the shoot over the heads of their comrades

The reason: well Skirmishers are more flexible and mobile. How they operate can be different according to the army. One of their role was to support with fire the heavy foot. Moving forward or staying behind or both doesn't bother.

As Stecal pointed out, at the end in most cases, they roll one die anyway.

Thanks for clearing this up Lorenzo