Column and fire

**LEGIO_Desaix** · February 02, 2010, 07:00 AM

I read in a preview this line

He (Kieran) told me about columns being more resilient to fire, which I then experienced for myself

Can someone of the beta testers shed a light about this topic? Does more resilient means more fragile to fire (which would be opposite to reality where men in column were easier to kill due to high density of target) or does it mean more resilient regarding morale status ?

**Niesmiertelnik** · February 02, 2010, 07:11 AM

I ll check that for You mate and be back with answer in the evening.

It may cause some troubles without a mate on the opposite side, but i ll form columns and enter shooting area to check what s average loss number per volley, how AI is defining shooting area while column is approaching and how charging column is resilient to stress.

Personally i think that it is a morale aspect Kieran was mentioning about. According to previous titles mechanics units wirh deeper ranks were more stable.

**spanish_emperor** · February 02, 2010, 08:15 AM

I am guessing there is no loose column formation to minimize artillery casualties, increase speed? If so too bad. Also, can you check if columns advance faster than line, go through tough terrain better than line?

And, can units fire sideways without having to reform (the soldiers turn 90 degrees and fire)?

**Sol Invictus** · February 02, 2010, 08:40 AM

The way I understand that statement is that units in Column; a compact formation with more ranks than four most likely; will get a morale boost which will make the formation more resilient to enemy fire. This will allow them to more easily approach an enemy line in order to melee. What I am unsure of is whether the Column also gets a Charge bonus or a Speed bonus. I am fairly sure it doesn't get a Speed bonus but a small Charge bonus would be nice.

I just hope that it is indeed true since this will add some nice period tactical gameplay instead of having us always advancing in Line. I don't and never expected a detailed treatment of formations but some simple difference between Line and Column is almost required. I am a little sceptical about all of this though because I can't understand why CA didn't comment on this in the rather long Column post on the forums and we are only now hearing about this. I need more feedback from actual players who can verify this before I get my hopes up.

**Thoragoros** · February 02, 2010, 09:06 AM

Don't forget that there's the simple 'game' effect of the unit being more effective on impact, ragardless of bonuses, since in game a thin line is much less effective in melee than a thicker one.

Though an added charge bonus would indeed be nice, and realistic.

**NiccoloMachiavelli** · February 02, 2010, 12:10 PM

Actually I've found column to be worse for melee since the unit in line will just surround you and hit your flanks.

**Sol Invictus** · February 02, 2010, 12:35 PM

I guess that would be true for one unit in Line against one unit in Column but it would depend on the situation and the total forces involved. The Column will certainly need support.

**Niesmiertelnik** · February 02, 2010, 04:32 PM

I do not see big difference in losses caused by enemy fire.
There s also no speed difference between line and column.
Only difference i saw is effectiveness of melee when attacking in column formation.
Unit is taking losses on approach, butis very effective in melee.

In Med1 there was such a description of pushback action in a Strategy Guide:

Pushback:
In an attack, the striker has a chance of pushing back his opponent which gives him a strong combat bonus on the next strike.
Factors affecting the chance of pushback are: kill chance, advantage in supporting ranks, mounted vs foot.

i think that it has been unchanged as a TW game mechanics and the result of it is clearly visible as simple clash of units in line formation does not bring a pushback, but column charging enemy line is making a strong pushback and causing bigger casualties.
At least it looks like that after few tests i ve done.

**Sol Invictus** · February 02, 2010, 05:00 PM

Well at least that is something. As long as the game makes the player think for even a few seconds on whether he wants to advance in Line or Column it improves the gameplay imo. It would benefit by being a bit more detailed than that but at least there is reason to consider formations.

**RuleBritannia** · February 02, 2010, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by LEGIO_Desaix

I read in a preview this line

He (Kieran) told me about columns being more resilient to fire, which I then experienced for myself

Can someone of the beta testers shed a light about this topic? Does more resilient means more fragile to fire (which would be opposite to reality where men in column were easier to kill due to high density of target) or does it mean more resilient regarding morale status ?

Being a larger column means more people firing, better resistance against cavalry and troops, and higher morale. However, the negatives are typically higher casualties from gunfire and artillery shots, and friendly fire chances increase significantly.