Historic Accuracy
-
- Reactions:
- Posts: 1436
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:06 am
Historic Accuracy
Gentlemen:
Unfortunatly, while my computer is unable to play this game (and the new one, a 17", 8 Gig RAM, i7 2.96 Ghz, 1 GIG video is in the works and estimated to arrive within a month (if we ever stop arguing over wether a Mac is better or not), I've been doing a lot of research on Civil War fighting in general.
My find is stunning: Civil War era men cannot load and shoot accurately.
I say this because often times, regiments would be paired up against each other head on and slug it out for an hour. 60 minutes. On 40 rounds of ammunition.
However, this is often times because men are not stupid, and will lie down in any cover they can find (swales in the ground, trees, etc). This makes it very difficult to actually hit someone, if they are lying on the ground. And if the men are smart (which they are), they will not blindly fire into the smoke and hope to hit someone. They wait until they can actually see someone, and then fire at them. Not to mention that it is rather difficult to hit someone at 200 yards, which is the more common distance for fighting, not less than 160. While 160 is more effective, it is also considered very close combat by most commanders. The minie ball can still kill at 200 yards, someone just has to be in the way.
While this may address fighting not done on the firing line, the 5th New York at Gaines Mill is a perfect example of the firing line. The 5th New York, with the help of one other regiment, is able to stop Gregg's South Carolina brigade, without using breastworks. The 5th was in action for over an hour, and that only resulted in the 35% loss or whatever that it took. Against 5 other regiments. This must be because of two reasons: one - the men had terrible aim, two - smoke makes it difficult to see the other people, three - wounded men grazed by a ball or two still fight. So instead of 50 wounded men in a single fight, 35 to 45 of those would more likely be out of action.
In addition, even after taking so many casualties, the 5th New York stayed on the firing line until it ran out of ammunition, then was withdrawn. Another regiment immediately took its place. Flanks were the catch. A regiment head on duel will result in casualties, but not moral loss. Flanking fire generally resulted in a regiment falling out of position and the men becoming skittish.
Also, regiments never took their morning roll call strength to battle. A regiment 600 strong in the morning, after even a light march and preparing for battle, would dwindle down to 450 effectives during a fight. Doubleday on the 28th August, 1862 says that one of his regiments went to battle with 150 out of some 450 roll-call (after a long day of marching). Marching seems to take a lot out of the troops, diminishing their strength. However, exhausted troops always had a core of superhumans, and double quicking would not be compromised by the exhaustion (just less troops to fight with at the end of the march). Not to mention that SOW's double-quick is more of a run, a double quick is expected to be held for miles on end, since it is more of a slow jog or fast walk.
Finally, when a regiment was charging, they wouldn't go all gung-ho and brandish bayonets in the enemies faces. A charge is often a forward movement at a run, while firing weapons. Troops were trained to load while marching. During battle, they would load while running, then stop to fire. While the rate of fire diminished during this exercise, it proved to be effective to close the distance between enemy regiments. Bayonets were only used when regiments came within yards of each other - 10 yards distance is still enough to be firing (as seen at the railroad cut of Manassas).
For all this that I can think of at the moment, I would advise these changes:
1. Decrease moral loss per man killed or wounded.
2. Increase moral loss if being flanked.
3. Make the charge command a still firing manoever.
4. Increase weapon ranges.
5. Decrease accuracy, or increase all terrain defensive bonuses.
6. As firing goes on, have loading time get lenghtier (to reflect the smoke)
7. Decrease the speed of double quick, or add a run command (and decrease the speed of double quick)
8. Create straggling (not visible, but add to missing lists)
9. Exhaustion shouldn't prevent double quicking, it should increase straggling
I think that is it.
Obviously a lot, and I don't expect even one thing, but something to think about for the future.
Thanks
Unfortunatly, while my computer is unable to play this game (and the new one, a 17", 8 Gig RAM, i7 2.96 Ghz, 1 GIG video is in the works and estimated to arrive within a month (if we ever stop arguing over wether a Mac is better or not), I've been doing a lot of research on Civil War fighting in general.
My find is stunning: Civil War era men cannot load and shoot accurately.
I say this because often times, regiments would be paired up against each other head on and slug it out for an hour. 60 minutes. On 40 rounds of ammunition.
However, this is often times because men are not stupid, and will lie down in any cover they can find (swales in the ground, trees, etc). This makes it very difficult to actually hit someone, if they are lying on the ground. And if the men are smart (which they are), they will not blindly fire into the smoke and hope to hit someone. They wait until they can actually see someone, and then fire at them. Not to mention that it is rather difficult to hit someone at 200 yards, which is the more common distance for fighting, not less than 160. While 160 is more effective, it is also considered very close combat by most commanders. The minie ball can still kill at 200 yards, someone just has to be in the way.
While this may address fighting not done on the firing line, the 5th New York at Gaines Mill is a perfect example of the firing line. The 5th New York, with the help of one other regiment, is able to stop Gregg's South Carolina brigade, without using breastworks. The 5th was in action for over an hour, and that only resulted in the 35% loss or whatever that it took. Against 5 other regiments. This must be because of two reasons: one - the men had terrible aim, two - smoke makes it difficult to see the other people, three - wounded men grazed by a ball or two still fight. So instead of 50 wounded men in a single fight, 35 to 45 of those would more likely be out of action.
In addition, even after taking so many casualties, the 5th New York stayed on the firing line until it ran out of ammunition, then was withdrawn. Another regiment immediately took its place. Flanks were the catch. A regiment head on duel will result in casualties, but not moral loss. Flanking fire generally resulted in a regiment falling out of position and the men becoming skittish.
Also, regiments never took their morning roll call strength to battle. A regiment 600 strong in the morning, after even a light march and preparing for battle, would dwindle down to 450 effectives during a fight. Doubleday on the 28th August, 1862 says that one of his regiments went to battle with 150 out of some 450 roll-call (after a long day of marching). Marching seems to take a lot out of the troops, diminishing their strength. However, exhausted troops always had a core of superhumans, and double quicking would not be compromised by the exhaustion (just less troops to fight with at the end of the march). Not to mention that SOW's double-quick is more of a run, a double quick is expected to be held for miles on end, since it is more of a slow jog or fast walk.
Finally, when a regiment was charging, they wouldn't go all gung-ho and brandish bayonets in the enemies faces. A charge is often a forward movement at a run, while firing weapons. Troops were trained to load while marching. During battle, they would load while running, then stop to fire. While the rate of fire diminished during this exercise, it proved to be effective to close the distance between enemy regiments. Bayonets were only used when regiments came within yards of each other - 10 yards distance is still enough to be firing (as seen at the railroad cut of Manassas).
For all this that I can think of at the moment, I would advise these changes:
1. Decrease moral loss per man killed or wounded.
2. Increase moral loss if being flanked.
3. Make the charge command a still firing manoever.
4. Increase weapon ranges.
5. Decrease accuracy, or increase all terrain defensive bonuses.
6. As firing goes on, have loading time get lenghtier (to reflect the smoke)
7. Decrease the speed of double quick, or add a run command (and decrease the speed of double quick)
8. Create straggling (not visible, but add to missing lists)
9. Exhaustion shouldn't prevent double quicking, it should increase straggling
I think that is it.
Obviously a lot, and I don't expect even one thing, but something to think about for the future.
Thanks
Hancock the Superb
Re:Historic Accuracy
G'day Hancock,
Neither the brigade commander, Warren, or the regimental commander, Duryea, mention ammunition shortage for the 5th NY in their ORs.
Graeme
Neither the brigade commander, Warren, or the regimental commander, Duryea, mention ammunition shortage for the 5th NY in their ORs.
Graeme
-
- Reactions:
- Posts: 1436
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:06 am
Re:Historic Accuracy
True, but look in Don Triani's (or however you spell it) book, he claims they were out of ammunition, and he does his research.
Hancock the Superb
Re:Historic Accuracy
I can attest to that. It says that they were "running low, if not completely out of ammunition."
-
- Reactions:
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 7:20 pm
Re:Historic Accuracy
1., 2. & 5.: As it is now, I think the system is fairly well balanced and regiments do break already pretty quick when they get fire from the flank, may it be arty or inf fire, due to the increased moral loss and casualties.
3. What you propose is already implemented with the Advance-button. The men are advancing on the opponent while still firing. I use this button quiet often to close the distance between me and the opponent before using the Charge-button. The actual Charge-button reflects a quick rush over a short distance and the following melee.
4. & 7.: This was already discussed at different places at the forum. I am actually quiet happy with the current settings. But for the sake of historical accuracy, I wouldn’t mind any changes there.
6. I am not sure about this but my impression from various SP- and a lot of MP-games is that this is in the game too, but I think the rate of fire decreases due to exhaustion. Smoke on the other hand influences the accuracy, I assume.
8. & 9 are viable changes. It would be great to include straggling.
3. What you propose is already implemented with the Advance-button. The men are advancing on the opponent while still firing. I use this button quiet often to close the distance between me and the opponent before using the Charge-button. The actual Charge-button reflects a quick rush over a short distance and the following melee.
4. & 7.: This was already discussed at different places at the forum. I am actually quiet happy with the current settings. But for the sake of historical accuracy, I wouldn’t mind any changes there.
6. I am not sure about this but my impression from various SP- and a lot of MP-games is that this is in the game too, but I think the rate of fire decreases due to exhaustion. Smoke on the other hand influences the accuracy, I assume.
8. & 9 are viable changes. It would be great to include straggling.
Re:Historic Accuracy
I believe that this was already posted on the forums, but the average engaged range at Gettysburg was just over 100 yards. This leads me to believe that regiments preferred closing in on the enemy before firing, contrary to engaging at maximum ranges.
-
- Reactions:
- Posts: 1436
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:06 am
Re:Historic Accuracy
Unfortunatly, the advance button is very slow moving forward, waiting for the entire regiment to move. In addition, regiments often stop this manover on their own. A charge command should realistically have the unit moving forward at a run, while firing, then engage in hand to hand combat when close enough to the enemy. I believe that this is more realistic, but yet easy to change within the game (hopefully).
Hancock the Superb
-
- Reactions:
- Posts: 839
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 12:13 am
Re:Historic Accuracy
There was very little target practice in the CW...and in the heat of battle, many soldiers simply forgot to cap their rifle-muskets. After Gettysburg, there were 37,574 rifles collected and sent to Washington to be inspected and reissued. Approx. 24,000 of them were still loaded. Of these, 25 % of them (6,000 rifles) had 1 round in the barrel while 75 % (18,000 rifles) had 2 to 10 rounds in the barrel.
Also, one research source has determined that circa 20,000 rounds were fired to effect one kill during the Civil War (and 50,000 to effect one kill in Vietnam).
J :huh:
Also, one research source has determined that circa 20,000 rounds were fired to effect one kill during the Civil War (and 50,000 to effect one kill in Vietnam).
J :huh:
Last edited by Kerflumoxed on Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Jack Hanger
Fremont, NE[/size]
"Boys, if we have to stand in a straight line as stationary targets for the Yankees to shoot at, this old Texas Brigade is going to run like hell!" J. B. Poley, 4th Texas Infantry, Hood's Texas Brigade
Fremont, NE[/size]
"Boys, if we have to stand in a straight line as stationary targets for the Yankees to shoot at, this old Texas Brigade is going to run like hell!" J. B. Poley, 4th Texas Infantry, Hood's Texas Brigade
Re:Historic Accuracy
I would recommend reading Brent Nosworthy's The Bloody Crucible of Courage. In there he does an extensive analysis of the mechanics of Civil War infantry fire. Most regiments were only trained to load their weapons and didn't recieve any instruction as to range determination, effects of wind or anything that would effect a projectiles flight. Point and shoot was the extent of the training for most regiments on both sides. Specialist regiments (1st and 2nd US Sharpshooters) did recieve some instruction, but not nearly enough to make them truely a factor.
What can you actually tell about someone at various ranges is a contributing factor to accuracy with the muzzle-loading weapons of the time as well. To quote from Nosworthy's book for approaching infantry at the following approximate ranges:
Approximate range - What is distinguishable
650 yards - The movement of companies marching, advancing, or retiring, the red color of infantry.
450 yards - The direction of their march and the movement of their muskets.
325 yards - The barrels of the rifles or carbines, the rifle at the shoulder, the different parts of the uniform.
215 yards - The color of the uniform; the badges of the belts or shakos; hilts of the swords, the cartridge box.
110 yards - The different parts of the body; the movement of the men individually; the form and color of the uniform.
Add to this the effects of any haze or smoke on the battlefield and it's not surprising that so many rounds were expended to get a hit.
Both Nosworthy and Paddy Griffith's book's on the tactics used during the Civil War are well worth the price for a better understanding of what soldier's were faced with.
What can you actually tell about someone at various ranges is a contributing factor to accuracy with the muzzle-loading weapons of the time as well. To quote from Nosworthy's book for approaching infantry at the following approximate ranges:
Approximate range - What is distinguishable
650 yards - The movement of companies marching, advancing, or retiring, the red color of infantry.
450 yards - The direction of their march and the movement of their muskets.
325 yards - The barrels of the rifles or carbines, the rifle at the shoulder, the different parts of the uniform.
215 yards - The color of the uniform; the badges of the belts or shakos; hilts of the swords, the cartridge box.
110 yards - The different parts of the body; the movement of the men individually; the form and color of the uniform.
Add to this the effects of any haze or smoke on the battlefield and it's not surprising that so many rounds were expended to get a hit.
Both Nosworthy and Paddy Griffith's book's on the tactics used during the Civil War are well worth the price for a better understanding of what soldier's were faced with.
War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.
Sherman, December 1863, remark to a Tennessee woman.
Sherman, December 1863, remark to a Tennessee woman.
-
- Reactions:
- Posts: 1436
- Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:06 am
Re:Historic Accuracy
I would agree with both of what Shirkon and Kerflumoxed said.
While SOW is easily better than TC2M, I believe that this could be the next step for a later patch.
While SOW is easily better than TC2M, I believe that this could be the next step for a later patch.
Hancock the Superb