I can understand why a unit would be unhappy bout being surrounded, so the morale bit i get - but im curious why a unit on your flank firing at you causes more damage than a unit right ahead of u...
Must be harder to hit a regiment that you can hardly see side-on than one spread out in front of u??
tnx
Flanking fire so effective? Why?
-
montecristo1981
- Reactions:
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 4:39 am
-
Marching Thru Georgia
- Reactions:
- Posts: 1769
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:56 pm
Re: Flanking fire so effective? Why?
The regiment doing the flanking is not being fired upon to any extent. For them it's target practice. If you were a defenseless target, what would you do?
I can make this march and I will make Georgia howl.
-
Little Powell
- Reactions:
- Posts: 4884
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:25 am
Re: Flanking fire so effective? Why?
Yes, and a flanking regiment can aim a whole lot better, inflict more damage when they aren't dodging bullets.
Re: Flanking fire so effective? Why?
So a better approach would be to decrease a regiment's firepower proportionately to the amount of fire (measured in casualties) they have taken in the last X seconds.
Last edited by Garnier on Thu Feb 07, 2013 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
NY Cavalry
- Reactions:
- Posts: 530
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:49 am
Re: Flanking fire so effective? Why?
You need to learn something about linear combat.
Among many things, discipline was very important to maintaining proper alignment, rates of fire, etc. This was how order was maintained on the battlefield. Troops didn't have freedom of action to make changes on their own. In a linear formation officers had few options to being flanked. They would call up support, refuse a portion of their line or fall back. When you fired at a linear line from head on you could hit one or two guys, that is the first or second line. When you fired at a linear line from the side you could possibly hit any one of a hundred men depending on the elevation of the rifle. The hit percentage was greatly increased. Also, troops receiving fire from the flanks became unnerved very easily and would not stand for long in that type of fire.
Among many things, discipline was very important to maintaining proper alignment, rates of fire, etc. This was how order was maintained on the battlefield. Troops didn't have freedom of action to make changes on their own. In a linear formation officers had few options to being flanked. They would call up support, refuse a portion of their line or fall back. When you fired at a linear line from head on you could hit one or two guys, that is the first or second line. When you fired at a linear line from the side you could possibly hit any one of a hundred men depending on the elevation of the rifle. The hit percentage was greatly increased. Also, troops receiving fire from the flanks became unnerved very easily and would not stand for long in that type of fire.
Re: Flanking fire so effective? Why?
Interesting - I didn't know this either and had wondered about it.
Re: Flanking fire so effective? Why?
"im curious why a unit on your flank firing at you causes more damage than a unit right ahead of u..."
This is a principle that applies to combat today as well (interlocking fields of fire). Think of it this way- if you are shooting at a line parallel to you, your bullet either hits the man in front of you or misses completely. Now if you are shooting at a line roughly perpendicular to you, your shot might hit your target, or it might miss and hit the man to his right (behind him from your perspective) or the man to his right, and so on and so on. Your chances of hitting some part of the line with any given shot are far better when you are facing them at an angle. Its the same deal today- you are better off with two machines guns straight in front of you than you are with one at your 10 and one at your 2. Thats a kill box.
This is a principle that applies to combat today as well (interlocking fields of fire). Think of it this way- if you are shooting at a line parallel to you, your bullet either hits the man in front of you or misses completely. Now if you are shooting at a line roughly perpendicular to you, your shot might hit your target, or it might miss and hit the man to his right (behind him from your perspective) or the man to his right, and so on and so on. Your chances of hitting some part of the line with any given shot are far better when you are facing them at an angle. Its the same deal today- you are better off with two machines guns straight in front of you than you are with one at your 10 and one at your 2. Thats a kill box.