regiment disorganization

[Saddletank]

This follows on from what I said above. Perhaps if melees ONLY occurred if one or both sides had hit the charge button. If neither does, rather than the autocharge we have an autostop (and firefight).

[Willard]

The biggest problem is that at least in MP, the game has changed from an ACW game to a Napoleonic War game wearing ACW uniforms. Column charges have been basically been replaced with assaults by massed regiments in attack column formation. The amount of damage that can be inflicted by defenders is not even close to what is needed to prevent this from tactic from basically being successfully at any time.

The attack column was basically abandoned as an effective stategy by the ACW due to advances in the effective range of rifled muskets and artillery by the mid-19th century. As it stands now in MP, you can quickly put your entire division into an assault using the attack columns and march to a single point and easily drive a wedge in a defensive line. It can be mitigated somewhat by the defender based upon geography or defensive positions (woods/fences) but for the most part the only way to defend is through mass melee.

At Gettysburg there were a handful of instances of units that engaged in melee throughout the 3-day battle. We have more in 30 minutes of MP play than they had in 3-days of battle. The reason for this is simple: the game engine as currently constructed allows it be a successful strategy. During a recent battle, Seal took his entire division and attacked on what amounted to a 400 yard front against my division which was deployed in line and backed up by 2 batteries. I was able to hold him off temporarily until overwhelmed despite the fact that I had 3 regiments deployed in line providing flanking fire against the entire depth of his assault formation. The impact was neglible. My artillery which should have been able to inflict punishing damage at short range given the density of troops could do nothing and was quickly over-run.

Once again, I am not advocating for draconian changes in casualties, however we need to increase the morale and fatigue malus of units under artillery fire - especially those densely massed. We also need to decrease the deployment speed as units move in/out of different formations so players can't rush their troops quickly up and have the formation instantaneously switch in front of enemy lines while under fire. Additionally, defensive units in line on good ground should be inflicted steady and damaging fire especially on units that are in attack column. The rule of thumb during the ACW is that successfull assaults required a 3-1 numerical advantage...instead it is easy to win with a 1-1 advantage. The game has become much more favorable for a player taking the tactical offensive than what was historically possible.

I like SOW and play it because I want to play an American Civil War game using the tactics of the time. I don't mind playing a Napoleonic wargame but not one "wearing" ACW uniforms.

[X Navy Seal]

Why do you even care MTG? I have never once seen you play an MP game, and yet you are COMPLAINING about the melee feature being a-historical. And this is not the first time that I have seen you COMPLAIN about the subject. Are you really that offended by the AI attempting to charge you?

Ps. Willard I think you should go join Digby and his "historical" crowd. You would fit in perfectly. Just do not advocate jacking up your arty power too high.

[NY Cavalry]

XNS you need to go find yourself a girl, dude. You have way too much pent up frustration.

[KG_Soldier]

Why do you even care MTG? I have never once seen you play an MP game, and yet you are COMPLAINING about the melee feature being a-historical. And this is not the first time that I have seen you COMPLAIN about the subject. Are you really that offended by the AI attempting to charge you?

Ps. Willard I think you should go join Digby and his "historical" crowd. You would fit in perfectly. Just do not advocate jacking up your arty power too high.

Edit:

Nevermind. Some people are beyond hope. Seal is one of them.

[Sharpe55]

Could one way to fix this be to up fatigue a bit? I say this because one or two weeks ago I had to defend an objective on the Antietam map against about 1.5-2 divisions at the end of the battle. I was able to hold because I knew the attack was coming, was able to get constant fire on the enemy as they advanced, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, they were simply exhausted by the time they crossed several fences, shot at me, and then closed for melee. At least we can change this since we can't currently alter closer range weapon effectiveness.

Quite honestly, this was the perfect example of how I thought an assault should go against a prepared, rested defender. Unless some trickery is involved, great battle tactics, or an OVERWHELMING amount of force is applied, the defender should win in this situation.

This was the battle where Sspoom and Beef were on my team. Very good battle.

[Saddletank]

Why do you even care MTG? I have never once seen you play an MP game, and yet you are COMPLAINING about the melee feature being a-historical. And this is not the first time that I have seen you COMPLAIN about the subject. Are you really that offended by the AI attempting to charge you?

Ps. Willard I think you should go join Digby and his "historical" crowd. You would fit in perfectly. Just do not advocate jacking up your arty power too high.

So much rudeness, so much anger. What is the matter with you? Where did civility and politeness go?

Every player here has valid opinions, even those who play only single player (melee is too prevalent in SP as well as MP).

If you have no valid input to the discussion, please do not post.

Could one way to fix this be to up fatigue a bit? I say this because one or two weeks ago I had to defend an objective on the Antietam map against about 1.5-2 divisions at the end of the battle. I was able to hold because I knew the attack was coming, was able to get constant fire on the enemy as they advanced, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, they were simply exhausted by the time they crossed several fences, shot at me, and then closed for melee. At least we can change this since we can't currently alter closer range weapon effectiveness.

Quite honestly, this was the perfect example of how I thought an assault should go against a prepared, rested defender. Unless some trickery is involved, great battle tactics, or an OVERWHELMING amount of force is applied, the defender should win in this situation.

This was the battle where Sspoom and Beef were on my team. Very good battle.

The gameplay mod you guys are using is partly to blame here. First the troops tire less quickly under GCM, second as I understand it, crossing fences and walls is no longer a fatigue penalty, just a time penalty (at least on some maps).

Players are complaining still about the massed charge to melee problem, but the modded rules you are using make that tactic easier because the march to combat means the troops arrive fresher and more able to make such attacks.

You should disable the fatigue system you have in your games now and go back to stock fatigue levels. In some MP games I've played recently, during the approach march I had to rest my brigade for 10 minutes behind the fighting line in order to get them fresh enough to put them into combat. This seems quite realistic to me.

Shortening musket range to the same range as canister may help as well, reading battle accounts, it seems artillery could hold off infantry by the threat of their defensive fire, rather than the misconception that infantry could shoot gunners from long range.

[Garnier]

but the modded rules you are using make that tactic easier

(Assuming the tactic you refer to is the charge, or massed attack, or anything involving closing with the enemy.)

No it doesn't you've only mentioned a few aspects of the mod.

To clarify, in GCM:

Crossing fences is slower than stock but doesn't affect fatigue
All infantry move 25% slower at the front line, including while charging
Running and charging have a bigger fatigue penalty -- standing and shooting have less
Rifles have longer range and thus get a little more time to shoot at advancing troops
Rifles are more deadly per minute than stock
Canister is more deadly than stock once the enemy is in 200 yards
Flanking fire and artillery fire hurt morale more than in stock

It could be improved, particularly if there were more things to mod, but charging is less of a problem than it's ever been in the past.

[Little Powell]

Why do you even care MTG? I have never once seen you play an MP game, and yet you are COMPLAINING about the melee feature being a-historical. And this is not the first time that I have seen you COMPLAIN about the subject. Are you really that offended by the AI attempting to charge you?

Ps. Willard I think you should go join Digby and his "historical" crowd. You would fit in perfectly. Just do not advocate jacking up your arty power too high.

Let's keep it friendly Seal. Everyone has the right to complain about the game, and one of the good things about our community is that the designers listen, and every idea that is brought to the table is considered.

Again, please keep it friendly Seal, because as the forum rules state "We like to keep a friendly forum".

[Gudadantza]

I am relatively new to this game, so, my question is:

Are the melee/charge order affected in any way by the morale? I mean, is the charge option possible in any circumstance? On SM Gettysburg the charges were only possible when the regiment had enough morale and or cohesion. If not, the charge was not possible.

Could it be a solution?

Greetings.