AI and terrain features?

[Hancock the Superb]

The complaint I've had about defensive bonuses is that to use them, the firing time would have to be as fast as a two year old can. It you are crouching down behind a stonewall, you can't fire quick at all.

In fact, at Fredericksburg and Gettysburg, Union soldiers did not "hide" behind the stone wall because they couldn't fire fast enough. At both battles they stood up and had their comrades in the rear load the gun and pass it forward to be fired, then another comrade would hand them a different gun, etc. But that is when they had 2000 more troops than they needed at the point of attack, which is impossible to recreate in SOW.

[Saddletank]

Rates of fire were generally extremely slow anyway, around 1 shot a minute, often less, so kneeling and loading in that time behind a wall is do-able. Even if troops stand up behind the wall you still get two significant effects - 1) all the wounding and crippling knee- and lower leg hits that won't be putting a soldier out of action and 2) the morale effect of the wall itself. Hard to measure but I'm sure troops behind a wall felt 'tougher' than those facing them in the open did. A unit that feels more confident can do wonders with its aim and pace of firing and ability to stick around when things get hot.

Simplifying these effects into a defensive fire bonus for troops in such cover works okay for me.

[Hancock the Superb]

Even if soldiers fire at one shot per minute in battle (which may or may not be accurate), they would undoubtedly take much longer to reload if they were crouching behind a stone wall. It is a relatively "simple" task to reload a musket standing upright. Not so much if you are lying down.

In terms of casualties, the wall defensive bonus should only be the height percentage the wall is to the average male soldier. So the two foot rock wall on Cemetary Ridge should give a 33% bonus, not a 65% bonus. It doesn't make sense to say, oh, there is a wall, so extra bullets will be deflected by thin air. Your troops should take the same amount of belly and head wounds as they would not behind a wall.

Now breastworks should have some impossible bonus. If they are built to regulation height, there would be a 80% bonus or so. Behind breastworks, soldiers can keep a relatively rapid rate of fire without fear of being hit (as seen on Culps Hill).

In my opinion, defensive bonuses should add up. So soldiers at a stone fence firing at some soldiers in the woods should have to take into account the bonus of the field in front of the wall (but not the wall, that would be silly), the fence that borders the field (this shouldn't have much of a defensive bonus), then the depth of the woods the enemy is in. So if the enemy is WAY in the woods, the defensive bonuses get added up for each yard or so. But if the enemy is just at the edge of the wood, it should be more like they are out in the open.

Of course, this would result in quite a code-over for SOW to implement.

[Saddletank]

But would it give you a more realistic end result? Would anyone notice?

I believe in design-for-effect. If the effect can be got from a far simpler bit of code, then go with the simple code, even if its abstract.

As I said there are other benefits troops behind a wall gain other than a pile of stones that stop bullets.

And you are not loading lying down, but kneeling or crouching or sitting, or just ducking down a bit. Having been a musketerr re-enactor there's a fair difference.

In my view stone walls need to give troops a significant advantage and right now the rules grant this.

[garyknowz]

Stone walls have a defensive value of 65%, wood fences 45%, breastworks 85%. The values are in the map csv file.

Really? For some reason it seems lower to me. I’ll check under the hood and see if it got changed somehow. FWIW,I think 65% is a good average between a fine sturdy wall and one in minor disrepair.

As to the wall on Cemetery Ridge, if it’s only two feet high, other than for aesthetic purposes, should it even be represented at all? It seems more like a tripping hazard than a defensive position. Perhaps two texture file representing wall, albeit distinct enough as to not confuse players? Damn, I really need to learn how to do some modding. Just not sure where to begin.

Rates of fire were generally extremely slow anyway, around 1 shot a minute,

That's for a flintlock musket, I believe. After the percussion cap, a trained soldier was expected to pop off 3 shots or more a minute.

[Hancock the Superb]

Most stone walls were actually about two feet high. This is because it is damn tricky to find enough stones to make a wall much higher than that. You would need a gigantic rock quarry to make a stonewall one hundred yards long and two feet high, so just imagine how much rock you need to make a longer and higher stonewall.

Yah, I agree, that is more of a tripping hazard than a defensive bonus. Of course, it would be difficult to scale the wall to appear to be just two feet high.

Rates of fire were around 1 minute or more per shot because in the smoke of battle, you can't see anything. So good soldiers would wait until the smoke cleared or they could make out the enemy's flag before they fired. The three shots a minute is for really close ranges when the soldiers are fresh and just point and shoot.

It is interesting to note that most rifles were sighted at 100 yards, so unless the enemy was exactly 100 yards away, if you looked down the barrel and shot, you would very likely miss (the shot goes too high or too low). As a person who shoots on occasion, aiming at a 90 yard target with 100 yard sights will make you miss.

[Marching Thru Georgia]

garyknowz wrote:

After the percussion cap, a trained soldier was expected to pop off 3 shots or more a minute.

That was parade ground rate of fire. Combat rates were much slower. For instance in The Rifle Musket In Civil War Combat, Hess, E.J., p100-104, the author reviews a number of combat reports and diaries. His findings were that the rate of fire varied from 1 round/30 sec to 1 round/4.6 min. The average was 1 round/2 minutes. These firefights lasted 30 minutes to 6 hours.

[garyknowz]

Most stone walls were actually about two feet high. This is because it is damn tricky to find enough stones to make a wall much higher than that. You would need a gigantic rock quarry to make a stonewall one hundred yards long and two feet high, so just imagine how much rock you need to make a longer and higher stonewall.

Yeah. I always felt the game represented too many stone walls for that very reason. But they look very nice.

His findings were that the rate of fire varied from 1 round/30 sec to 1 round/4.6 min. The average was 1 round/2 minutes. These firefights lasted 30 minutes to 6 hours.

I don’t dispute that. Over the course of a battle, the average curve tend to drift downward due to many factors (haze of battle, cessation of immediate combat, maneuvering, etc.). Besides that, sustained firing over 10 minute would be highly dangerous. 30 rounds rammed one after the other, popped off every 20 secs? That barrel would be smoking hot. So pacing your fire was very important for your own safety too. I was stating capability, not necessarily practicality. But in a pinch, a good soldier could pop off pretty quickly in short bursts.

[Saddletank]

Going off topic, unfortunately...

Rates of fire were generally extremely slow anyway, around 1 shot a minute,

That's for a flintlock musket, I believe. After the percussion cap, a trained soldier was expected to pop off 3 shots or more a minute.

Was expected to, yes. In reality, no. Looking at the technical data of ammunition expended over several major civil war engagments from Griffith, the actual battlefeild rate of fire for units engaged was considerably slower than what was technically possible and for a percussion cap armed unit of troops was actually about equivalent to a flintlock armed unit of 50 years earlier.

[Jim]

Couple of points.

- The tendency of a commander to stay on defensive terrain is heavily influenced by their overall aggressiveness. JB Hood will blow on over it on his way to attack whereas a very defensive general will sit their all day.

- The aggressiveness of the enemy CO's is increased as difficulty levels go up. CO's on grog level are quite agressive.

- Rates of fire were situational. Two lines a hundred yards apart might be firing at a round every minute or two. However if one line started advancing the rate of fire from the opposing line could go up and if the advance got close would go to max possible for that unit. This is a feature on our future wish list but right now we only can handle a single rate of fire.

-Jim