Scourge of War Boards

I see troops marching in column of division, but not shooting. I think shooting in column of division happens in napoleonics quite often:
"Though Guibert intended the column as a means of moving rapidly to the point of attack, where it would deploy into line to engage the enemy with fire, followed with a bayonet advance, it was often driven straight at the enemy lines."
taken from
http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napoleoni ... tics_4.htm
Here is also a good overview.

Fire from a column for division was not a good event, it means the column stopped to move and the men tried to reply to the fire. One of biggest error done by the french commander in Spain was exactly stop the columns too near to the british and try to form line in order to fire too near, creating a chaos, also when continue to close combat was probably best, Barrosa probably was the best example of this especially because at the start the french were on the high ground.

Skirmishers were the fire support of assault columns, Duhesme in light infantry manual was critic about the tendency of form lines to fire in assault at place of use only the voltigeurs to fire and proceed with the columns.

In terms of game, if the column stops and the attack is not forced, the line is formed, without making shot the columns.

As far as I know French columns of division never fired, nor were they intended to, the frontage is too narrow to deliver enough firepower, the great majority of the troops cannot shoot and the target is very deep, increasing casualties from enemy fire.

The column either deployed into line when close to the enemy if it was thought firepower was needed to drive him from his position - or it went in with the bayonet if the enemy was thought to be already wavering.

Its a 2 company Front instead of a 6 company Front when in line formation. Thats still quite aa bit of firepower. And it makes the battle look more like the pictures from the period.

If they have the good advantage yes (fearcheck >= 2)

Its a 2 company Front instead of a 6 company Front when in line formation. Thats still quite aa bit of firepower. And it makes the battle look more like the pictures from the period.

Having 2/3rds of your muskets unable to shoot is not wise. Paintings are not trustworthy historical documents. They show all kinds of odd things. Officers and troops reports from battles are really the only reliable sources. Even drill books give us only what the troops were trained to do, not what they actually did.

Even drill books give us only what the troops were trained to do, not what they actually did.

Even so, they must had been considered a great source of inspiration for the game's movement system imho.

On the battlefield organized units tended to do what they were trained for.

It was their only chance to survive as a whole and to avoid confusion and panic under enemy fire.

Overlapping and changes of formation in kinda circular-shapes are simply unwatchable from an historical standpoint.

... you could avoid lots of it by having units a high check against cohesion and eventually not transforming into line but staying in column by division, making a volley (counting 1/3rd) and after a check charging or staying in position.

Any commander, at whatever level in the OOB hierarchy, must imho - at some point (order execution, becoming under fire, being outflanked, cavalry spotted, etc. NEVER continuously!) and with just some differences - perform basic checks against formations DB and the environment.

Just to name a few criteria:

- Fire power (how much firepower would I need against how much I can deliver with a given formation);
- Shock power;
- Melee power;
- Direct / indirect (considering a change of formation) vulnerability to musket/artillery fire, infantry/cavalry melee, etc.
- March speed;
- Manoeuvrability (ostacle avoidance importance according to the pathfinding result, wheeling, etc.);
- Control (close quarter combat, morale/cohesion/etc.);
- Geometrical constraints (max frontage available in the higher-level organization, road width, etc.).

Utility theory should come to the rescue here.

Of course some formations applied at higher level exclude other at lower one (battalion's square + company's columns).

Is formation selection more or less performed along these dynamics in the game, Mitra?