Patch Progress

[Amish John]

The huge number of melees in SOW is the single most unhistoric piece of the game IMHO.

I agree about too much hand-to-hand in the game. Instead of the game engine calculating who will win the melee, maybe it should look at the attacker and defender and decide which of the two retreats first during a charge and have some other criteria to make melees a rare occurrence.

In the game if one side is charging, will the defenders on some occasions, retreat before the attackers (during a charge) reach them? I should know this but can't remember an occurrence right now.

I'm not too worried about some of these things though, because if anything, Norb and crew seem to look at the game (and subsequent games) and an evolving, constantly improving process. Seems like if NSD agrees a certain aspect of the game needs changing, and it's doable, it will eventually be changed.

[Garnier]

In multiplayer melees are very rare, because players wisely pull their troops out before the charge reaches them.

[Davinci]

The huge number of melees in SOW is the single most unhistorical piece of the game IMHO.

You do know that there is a setting in the drills.csv that will prevent any unit from engaging in melee.

Basically, it will usually take the unit with the lesser amount of morale and cause that unit to retreat.

Sometimes, both units will retreat when they are in this sort of close proximity.

The setting is moddable – check the N Column – I have mine set at 100 – and have not had any units engaged in melee for months.

davinci

[Little Powell]

The huge number of melees in SOW is the single most unhistorical piece of the game IMHO.

The setting is moddable – check the N Column – I have mine set at 100 – and have not had any units engaged in melee for months.

davinci

I wonder if this could be set to allow them to melee, but on rare occasions. I think turning it off completely is a little unhistorical. I know there was some meleeing going on when Barksdale attacked the Peach Orchard.

There was also a significant ammount of melee combat in the Wheatfield. Got this info from one of the experts over at MHO:

Colonel Jeffords, 4th Michigan, was fatally bayoneted in the Wheatfield when he engaged Confederates in hand to hand combat. Apparently, Jeffords had just used his sword against a rebel who had seized the regimental colors, and was cutting this fellow down when he himself was bayoneted. His Lieutenant Vreeland ran to help, firing his revolver at the rebels, and was clubbed down with a musket butt. There must have been a significant amount of close quarters combat : I believe that Barksdale's men did bayonet some yankees....they were thirsting for revenge after some of their own had been bayoneted ( allegedly during the act of surrender) at Marye's Heights when Sedgwick's men had stormed the position a couple of months earlier.

More examples:

There is another episode that I'm sure indicated intense hand to hand fighting. I think it was Colonel Oates - sorry, can't be sure - who witnessed one of his men thrust his bayonet through a yankee's head in the LRT sector : it might have been DD or somewhere near...there were definitley boulders mentioned in the incident.

July 1, middle RR cut, later the flag of the 149 PA, included hand-to-hand combat. East Cemetery Hill at dusk on July 2. Of course the Angle on July 3.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say that melee combat should be in the game...

[Marching Thru Georgia]

Little Powell wrote:

I think turning it off completely is a little unhistorical.

I agree. The problem is there's no morale check made to either the charging or defending unit before contact is made. If there was, then most of the time, the charge would either stop midway with the attacker deciding to shooting it out, (which was the most common result), or the defender retreating. I don't remember if I put this on the list. I'll have to check.

[SouthernSteel]

Yeah, I think it's safe to say that melee combat should be in the game...

I don't think there's any dispute about melee combat being in the game, I think it's a must; rather, the other seem to be concerned about the amount of melee combat that seems to occur in battles.

Garnier, I'm not sure how correct you are - I am fairly certain there is melee in almost every single game we play of your mod. Often, units charge without orders, and so you're going to wade into melee whether you want to or not.

One of the big problems I have found is the retreating before melee ensues: if player 1 hits charge, and just before he makes contact player 2 hits retreat or runs his unit away, player 1's regiment is stuck in charge (unless he himself hits retreat, which is a huge blow to morale) for however long player 2 wishes to lead that unit around. Sometimes it is possible to stop a unit that is charging, but it is quite rare. I can also say I have broken charging enemy units with musket fire - That is a mighty fine feeling :cheer: (and we have all seen charging units eat cannister until they retreat).

I believe that our 250 yard muskets already help cut down on the instances of melee. The increased distance between units firing at one another automatically cuts down on a player's willingness to cross that gap to give the enemy the bayonet. I'm not sure how accurate the firing model is to simulate sharply increased casualties once an enemy unit is within, say, 50 yards, but if that were true, I think even fewer melee battles would occur.

Still, I don't have too much of a problem with the amount of melee currently in the game. We have it as a troop stat, so sharply reducing the amount of melee would make it almost useless (at least in my mind). I have a bit of an issue in Garnier's battles we've been playing with late column charges (not technically, I know those have ben fixed) to trip objectives by engaging an entire division basically in melee to overwhelm the objective counter, but that could really be an entirely separate issue.

[KG_Soldier]

Yes. . . it was a mighty good feeling last night when I captured one of your regiments after melee.

:woohoo:

[Little Powell]

Yes, I was just referring to Davinci's mod about removing it completely. I hope there's a way to reduce the likelihood of it.

Another interesting tidbit of info:

"One thing about the CW bayonet. If you stick into your opponent's body, it sticks and you can only remove it with great difficulty. It passes thru and then the body tissues will close around it. Many soldiers loaded their guns then fixed bayonets. After you stab, you then pull the trigger, blowing your opponent away. This may be one reason why medical records have very few referrals to deaths by bayonet compared to gun shot deaths. - john hayward"

[Garnier]

I am fairly certain there is melee in almost every single game we play of your mod. Often, units charge without orders, and so you're going to wade into melee whether you want to or not.

Perhaps there is, though I rarely see it. The point is, there doesn't need to be any melee, the side that expects to lose can always run their men away without melee. I never charge against people who I expect will do this, for the obvious reason just stated. I don't necessarily like it this way, but it is what it is.

Charging can work against artillery because they aren't able to instantly get away. Not that it's a good idea, usually you'll just get canister.

If I need to take a position, I'll usually just run the men up in column to a good spot right next to the enemy, then form into line and double quick again so they form line faster. Then just shoot until the enemy runs away.

[SouthernSteel]

Yes. . . it was a mighty good feeling last night when I captured one of your regiments after melee.

:woohoo:

I was busy whipping the other wing of your army and capturing half of Seal's Division, so it was really AI. Musta sucked when that same brigade beat you to the objective to win the game though. :pinch: