[DISCUSSION] NO FIRE BY RANK IN NAPOLEON TW!!!

[flexter]

I simply cant belive it, there is no fire by rank at all in the game ! unbelievalbe it was my favourte thing in empire such a dissapointment, this is a major appeal to darth and hip plz if theres any way to add fire by rank into napoleon plz do it.

thanks

[Jihada]

Apparently it was removed to allow units to fire when they were still reforming but all the same it sounds terrible.What will my poor British line do if they can't fire historically at the terrible French columns. Well we'll find out tomorrow.

[flexter]

to be honest i dont mind waiting for them to line up hell i'l wait 10 mins i just want my rank fire back I wish creative assembly would at least give people the choice to use it or not.

[BURNY26]

This i did not know yet , this is something that has to be reimplemented by the great master in the 'hopefull' not so far future . Remember this boys,remember this...

EDIT : but thank god i can repair my ships on sea now...

[flexter]

God i hope our dark lord will be able to help us

[Admiral Nelson]

Actually I'm with CA on this. Sources indicate that fire by rank was considered obsolete by the Napoleonic wars.

[flexter]

It was far from obselete i know for a fact the british used it , not 100% sure about the others but im confident they used it to. 1 rank firing only is just insane , and with fire and advance what happens if u dont want to advance maybe ur on the defensive and advancing will ruin ur battleplan, not a fan of F&A at all.

[Jihada]

It was probably more platoon fire by British regiments anyway but certainly more than one rank fired.Some comparisons of the different armies in this site

http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napole...itish_army.htm

Other nation links at bottom of page

[Streen15]

Please cite your sources. There was a big debate about this on Versorger's streaming video. We all came to the conclusion that it was debatable at best to say that rank by fire was or was not obsolete during this period. I believe CA's reasoning was moreso gameplay than historical. Don't panic though, as rumor has it that CA might re-include this feature. Who knows.

One thing is for sure, units are MUCH more responsive now. My lines don't wait for the 2nd line any more to fire. As soon as the first line is seemingly lined up, my units fire. It is definitely more responsive. Whether or not rank by fire f'ed this up, I have no idea. Hard to believe it did, but who knows.

[Streen15]

NOTE: Look at the trailer for NTW. When Napoleon speaks of his campaigns into Eastern Europe during winter, you visibly see a unit doing rank by fire. Perhaps it was just an error that they did not include it?

[massimorocca]

Attention! There is a giant historical debate about the real use of fire discipline in the hot of battle. Just read the page of Chandler, Nosworthy, Griffith, Duffy. The general consensus is that, but few elite units with superior leading, only the first (or very few) volley would be fired according the manual rules, as by rank, by platoon, or by file with the third line only reloading and passing the musket to the two ranks ahead. Then, casualties,fear, adrenaline, smoke and loudness in the line overcome any discipline and the fire at will started. French general StCyr told that 20/25% of the casualties in a firefight between two unit in lines was due to third's line friendly fire shooting the first two lines in the back!

[Grouchy]

The British regulations, specifically directed that the infantry be organized in three ranks. But also directed that if the company strength fell below a specific strength the third rank was to be incorporated into the front rank to maintain its frontage [this was the same for a majority of European Nations, including the French]…….. A battalion with 660 men could meet the requirements of the minimum frontage of 20 files per company and three full ranks [the additional 60 men are file closers, musicians and officers]. By the same analysis, if the strength fell to 400 men the battalion would absolutely have to be in two ranks if it were to maintain the minimum frontage.

In support of the regulation three-ranks, Wellington himself wrote, in a letter dated 20th November 1833, the following:
"The rear rank of the cavalry does not strengthen the front rank, as the centre and rear ranks do the front rank of the infantry".
This letter appeared in 'Cavalry it's History and Tactic's' written by Nolan [of Balaclava fame], and first published in 1853, and seems to suggest that Wellington considered the norm for infantry to be front, center and rear, or three-ranks. He was forced to adopt, and authorize the use of two-ranks [and elect to stand on the reverse slope], because his units were under-strength and only capable of forming in two-ranks, in accordance with the requirements of British Army Regulations.

[Tango12345]

I simply can't believe FBR was obselete-who would only want one rank firing when 3 could? Faced with a French column I know exactly what I would do...

[T-Duke]

I can even understand toggling off fire by rank...the real shame is the t now only the first rank fire !
That's completely unhistorical and unbearable in napoleonic warfare, and also very ugly to look at...
The second rank (and only that one) must fire with the first one. Darth, you know we need you...

[Vizze]

Look here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2_kkd6VdCQ It's Fire and Advance . And it works very well.

[JFC]

Very very interesting topic:

Infantry Tactics and Combat
during the Napoleonic Wars.

Basically, Fire by rank was well and truly on the way out as an effective form of shooting.

[massimorocca]

Excellent link. I will quote this passage because the text is long enough to discourage some readers

""

The experience showed that the niceties of regular volleys were impracticable on the battlefield. Quite often the musketry took place outside of the real killing zone. The sight of enemy continuing his advance was enough for some and they began blasting off as soon as they had loaded their muskets. It was contagious. Once individual soldiers fired their muskets (without the order from their officers) the others began firing too. Within moments the entire battalion was covered with smoke. The fast firing relieved anxiety and occupied troopers' minds and bodies. Some soldiers were so stressed that they loaded their rifles time after time but they never fired. (After one of the battle of Gettysburg the discarded 37,574 rifles were collected and sent to Washington to be inspected and reissued. Approx. 24,000 of them were still loaded, and 75 % of them had 2 to 10 rounds in the barrel" .

Gettysburg data is awesome in the % or rifles overloaded, more important than those simply loaded causte those could be only dropped by casualties or stragglers before being discharged

[Nanny de Bodemloze]

Absolutely fascinating article. It brings to mind many possibilities for increasing realism in a mod.

For instance, if you have a unit with little/no experience, they may start firing once the enemy is at the outmost range (even if you have clicked off "fire at will"...with experience, they will more likely follow your command to fire when you want. Or, as the article suggests, perhaps after so many shots, the rate of misfire could increase (or, if that stat can't be manipulated, reduce the effectiveness of the shots). Anyways, good link!

Nanny

[T-Duke]

Look here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2_kkd6VdCQ It's Fire and Advance . And it works very well.

Fire and advance, fire by rank and having the second rank firing standing behind the first one are different issues. I can understand we have no longer "fire by rank", I can accept or even appreciate any form of "fire and advance" but I can't simply bear a seconde line not firing in a napoleonic battle.

[Versorger]

I agree its one thing to remove it, I can live with that, but to not even attempt to put in something to replace it because lets be honest fire and advance is NOT a replacement, well its just depressing.