Scourge of War Boards

I increased the rifle and rifled muskets range to 300 yards. Some rifles and rifled muskets have a range greater than 300 yards but most have a shorter range of 275, 250, and 225 yards. To make sure that artillery would not be outgunned the range for canister increased to 350 yards but the minimum range for other shell types is 300 yards. The range for canister was taken from the game manual. I am not an expert on the American Civil War but it is most likely that the close ranges of engagements were created by the tactics used by the commanding officers, training the solders got, and by the terrain that prevents the combatants from seeing each other. The accuracy and range of rifled small arms allowed the solders to engage their targets at extremely long range for the 1800’s. Further; the lack of effective increase of firepower as the range gets smaller in the game allows bayonet charges and hand to hand combat to be more effective than it was historical. But the question is; are the ranges that I made more or less historical or I am deluding myself?

Nick wrote:

But the question is; are the ranges that I made more or less historical or I am deluding myself?

You are deluding yourself. Paddy Griffith and others have done in depth studies of this topic. The average engagement range was ~120 yd. So the stock range of 160 yd. is fine.

The effective range was much shorter. Even though the peek range was 250 to 300 yds, company commanders would never sanction firing at such ranges as it's tantamount to wasting ammunition due to extreme inaccuracy. They could exhaust an cartage box of 40 rounds and be lucky to hit a single man. The ranges Marching Through Georgia cites are accurate for effective combat.

Thank you. But how about the failed Confederate charges at Shiloh, the Sunken Road at Antietam, and other bayonet charges explained? Is there any mod that would take care of the excessive melees? I have the Peninsular War mod and there is less melees there then in the original SOW.

There have been long discussions on the forum concerning melees in the game. You are right, that the game does not model this in a historic way. Until Norb fixes it, it is just something we have to put up with.

So the ranges of engagement were dictated by the tactics and training. And to give the troops the maximum range of engagement would not be historical because historically during 1863 they did not use the maximum effective range of their rifled muskets. Would the changes I made be historical if the battle was the Battle of Spotsylvania or Cold Harbor?
Also the effectiveness, accuracy, and range of the rifled musket were and are underestimated. Especially taking into account the tactics that were used; individual solders were aiming into a line two men deep not into individual solders, this certainly would have caused considerable casualties at ranges longer than 200 yards.Because of that most tactics that the commanders used during 1861-1863 were obsolete. The thick skirmish line, field works, defensive positioning, slow advance, long ranges of engagements of 1864 were more applicable to troops armed with rifled muskets. Sadly, most commanders did not understand that, and we just have to replay their mistakes in the game.

If we had an accurate physical model of the civil war era, I think it would be boring to play. Everyone would be spread out and in foxholes or hiding behind some kind of cover. It wouldn't feel like the civil war as we imagine it.

Nick wrote:

Also the effectiveness, accuracy, and range of the rifled musket were and are underestimated. Especially taking into account the tactics that were used; individual solders were aiming into a line two men deep not into individual solders, this certainly would have caused considerable casualties at ranges longer than 200 yards.Because of that most tactics that the commanders used during 1861-1863 were obsolete. The thick skirmish line, field works, defensive positioning, slow advance, long ranges of engagements of 1864 were more applicable to troops armed with rifled muskets. Sadly, most commanders did not understand that, and we just have to replay their mistakes in the game.

Muskets weren't underestimated at all. They fired low velocity rounds. Beyond 100 yd. the bullets were being lobed in. At 300 yd. a soldier had to estimate the distance to within 25 yd. in order to hit anything. Given that neither side practiced shooting, the chances of hitting a man at that distance with open sights is practically nil. Consequently, most casualties occurred at 50-100 yd., not much different than in Napoleon's time.

By 1864 both armies were demoralized. They were mostly veterans, more interested in staying alive than giving their all for the cause. Only green troops do that. So they dug in and did not give much effort to carrying the enemy's works. Since they wouldn't advance, they tended to shoot their ammunition off at longer distances. The average engagement range in 1863 was 127 yd. By 1864 it was 141 yd., (Battle Tactics Of The Civil War, Griffith, P., p.147).

If you are interested, there are several books which show that rifled muskets were an incremental advance in weaponary, not a game changer as is believed by many. Besides Griffith's book also see; The Rifle Musket In Civil War Combat Reality And Myth, Hess, E.J. and Brent Nosworthy's hefty tome, The Bloody Crucible Of Courage.

Probably the biggest problem people also have with the Civil War (besides thinking the rifled musket was incredibly "game-changing") is that the troops fought in lines two ranks deep. Those were formations, used for movement. And although infantry manuals said troops could kill more effectively in a line formation, do you think individual men are interested in standing shoulder to shoulder getting shot? No, the men would spread out, clump up behind trees and rocks, around the regimental flag.

This means that it is significantly harder to hit a person because they are taking advantage of the natural cover. So until you can actually see each individual enemy (certinally less than 200 yards away) you are pretty much firing blind...thus a very small casualty rate at distances of 300 yards.

Thank you. But you cannot disagree that the rifled musket was a new generation of an infantry weapon. And it certainly did its part to put range and accuracy into consideration. Because it was a new generation of a weapon its use would certainty demand a change in tactics. And this happened in the American Civil War, but it happened more at an individual and at a lower command level. Also I am not saying that the men did not change the way they fought, but the commanders committed a mistake when they put their men into a two rank deep –shoulder to shoulder. And it is quite possible that the excessive melees in the game are because we are forced to commit the tactical mistakes of the commanding officers without suffering the full consequences for them.