PLEASE give us some proper firing-drills, CA!!

I'd so like to get a historical standard firing-mode in N:TW: 1st rank kneeling, 2nd and 3rd firing (all ranks firing simultaneously and only the 3 front-ranks firing!)


But I'm afraid there won't be any changes here, cause I've seen at least 1 screenshot showing soldiers doing the "rank fire" from E:TW... (I'm not claiming that this is totally unhistorical, but the standard drill should be as described ^^ . )

Well as said before a lot of the stuff in the pics are just placeholders

Originally Posted by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart

Well as said before a lot of the stuff in the pics are just placeholders

Yes Herr Mozart, that's right. There's still hope. (Anakin Skywalker and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart in one thread... keeeewl!!! )

Hoping is all we can do at the moment I guess

Actually the third rank seldom fired. Maybe in the prussian before 1806. During the napoleon period was considered very dangerous for colonel to make kneel the first rank as it would need lots of efforts to make them standing again and move forward (this was the thoughts of Marshal Ney for example in his drills). Only very drilled troops could accomplished that movement.

Btw I'd like to see different types of firing (working possibly): by rank, by platoon, by whole battalion but I gave up to see those included in NTW as CA showed to have little clues on what a musket era battlefield was.
No column bonus, square forming at warping speed, ninja tiralleurs resisting to charging cavalry...I lost faith time ago

Originally Posted by LEGIO_Desaix

Actually the third rank seldom fired. Maybe in the prussian before 1806. During the napoleon period was considered very dangerous for colonel to make kneel the first rank as it would need lots of efforts to make them standing again and move forward (this was the thoughts of Marshal Ney for example in his drills). Only very drilled troops could accomplished that movement.

Possibly, but still many instructions from Napoleonic times show all 3 ranks firing with the first one kneeling... (when in square formation sometimes even 4 ranks firing, with the first two ranks kneeling down.)

Originally Posted by General A. Skywalker

Possibly, but still many instructions from Napoleonic times show all 3 ranks firing with the first one kneeling... (when in square formation sometimes even 4 ranks firing, with the first two ranks kneeling down.)

Standard French practice was for the third rank to deploy as skirmishers OR to reload muskets for ranks one and two. Third rank fire wasn't considered safe.

Originally Posted by General A. Skywalker

I'd so like to get a historical standard firing-mode in N:TW: 1st rank kneeling, 2nd and 3rd firing (all ranks firing simultaneously and only the 3 front-ranks firing!)


But I'm afraid there won't be any changes here, cause I've seen at least 1 screenshot showing soldiers doing the "rank fire" from E:TW... (I'm not claiming that this is totally unhistorical, but the standard drill should be as described ^^ . )

This sir, was the first thing that was really upsetting me, in ETW.

First you have to constantly micro overstreched line infantry units (so at least half of them actually fire), and later you get the ultra slow fire by rank which is in time of crisis time consuming (not to mention it fails mostly to distrupt suicidal cavalary charges).

I dont want all 3 ranks firing at the same time because the reciving unit will only get their first row taken out (opposing 1st rank catches all the bullets). where as the 1st, then 2nd, then 3rd row firing has potential to kill more men, but I deffinetly think it should be an option though. It could be usefull in certian situations.

The enemys front rank is never decimated from individual rank fire, never ever, even from point blank range the effect is laughable, so this statement about "3 or more leads hitting the same soldier and wasting ammo" is false.

When you want to keep the initiative, and the enemy out of balance, you dont have time for the fancy and time consuming fire by rank which has roughly a 1.5 second of delay between each rank fire, not to mention the initial zombie stance when the unit stops. Sometimes i just want to fire a bunch of lead into the enemy (back or flank) and charge with bayonetes.

Fire by rank should stay as option for continuous fire, for fast attacks and hitting fast moving units its impractical .

I'd be happy if they stuck with most popular standard firing drills as described by Nafziger.

e.g.
French first two ranks only standing voluntary fire.
British two ranks standing firing by platoons.
Squares four ranks, first two ranks kneeling, inside ranks ranks firing over their heads.

Pretty sure fire-by-ranks was not used to any great extent by this time period as it left the battalion defenceless between volleys.

The biggest thing they need to sort out though is the skirmishing, which just can't function the way it did in ETW, its just too important to be left in that state. (and the friendly fire cuased by the 'fire at will' system of course)

Originally Posted by Didz

I'd be happy if they stuck with most popular standard firing drills as described by Nafziger.

e.g.
French first two ranks only standing voluntary fire.
British two ranks standing firing by platoons.
Squares four ranks, first two ranks kneeling, inside ranks ranks firing over their heads.

Pretty sure fire-by-ranks was not used to any great extent by this time period as it left the battalion defenceless between volleys.

The biggest thing they need to sort out though is the skirmishing, which just can't function the way it did in ETW, its just too important to be left in that state. (and the friendly fire cuased by the 'fire at will' system of course)

I'd like to have control personally. Rank fire, platoon fire or mass volleys would all be great if they were controlable.

There is the common image of British troops always firing by platoons, but the reality (At least in the Peninsular where light infantry tactics began to be heavily used again for almost the first time after the American Revolutionary War despite Dundas and the Duke of York's attempt to stamp out the "loose files and American scramble") was often a single volley followed by a charge. So I'd like the choice to either whittle my enemy down or go for the shock factor.

you can only have two ranks (standing) and one posiably two kneeling firing at once

Originally Posted by Marcus Licinius

you can only have two ranks (standing) and one posiably two kneeling firing at once

The difference between what was physically possible and what actually happened was determined by the training and drill given to new recruits to the various armies. In the stress of battle soldiers react as they are trained and conditioned to react, so generallly speaking the French fired voluntarily from the first two ranks of their formation (except square) and the British likewise fired standing up, but in platoon volleys. By this point in history most armies had concluded that the fire from the third rank was practically useless, and merely increased the risk of injury to their own men.

I do hope they change the firing drills in this version.

Because it worked better for the way of fighting, and the standard way the french french fought was to march into the opposing guns en-mass, except at Waterloo, which would have been a stalemate had not the prussians arived at ~8:30pm, our lines were holding (only just) or if Napolion was feeling better, then it would have started slightly earlier, and with huge cost to Wellington

I suspect the French adopted the voluntary fire system because it was much easier and quicker to train men to load and shoot as fast as they could, than trying to teach them the complexities of a fire control system. It also had the theoretical advantage that those veteran soldiers with the ability to load and fire rapidly were not held back by new recruits fumbling to find their cartridge box.

The disadvantage of course was that when you give the individual the power to fire as and when he deems appropriate, it actually becomes more difficult to stop them firing when you don't want them too, or to get them to stop again after they have started. Hence, the stereotypical image of the French officer capering back and forth in front of his men screaming 'En Avant!' to try and keep them moving forward.

Originally Posted by Didz

I suspect the French adopted the voluntary fire system because it was much easier and quicker to train men to load and shoot as fast as they could, than trying to teach them the complexities of a fire control system. It also had the theoretical advantage that those veteran soldiers with the ability to load and fire rapidly were not held back by new recruits fumbling to find their cartridge box.

Thats true but you cant ignore the huge blow to morale that a well timed volley could cause. Imagine marching forward with men falling sporadically out of your line of march then imagine the whole front line falling in one go.

To the original question i think we need more firing drills for skirmishers as people have already posted.

Originally Posted by StormTheBreach

Thats true but you cant ignore the huge blow to morale that a well timed volley could cause. Imagine marching forward with men falling sporadically out of your line of march then imagine the whole front line falling in one go.

Well from what I've read the personal perception of men in the ranks on both sides was pretty limited, even if you happened to be in the front ranks. So, the likelihood is that the moral effect of a volley would only be judged by the effect it had on you and the dozen or so men around you. That would be achieved just as surely by the discharge of the the 30 muskets directly opposite your position as it would by another 270 that were 50 to 100 yards away.

Likewise the actual effect is greatly increased as a result of firing by platoons simply because subsequent volleys hit after those struck by the first shots have dropped. More to the point the morale effect of having survived a full battalion volley is that you are free from danger for at least 20 seconds during which you get up close an blow someones brains out. Whereas, with platoon fire you are under constant danger as the next volley will follow the first within seconds, and the next after that, and the next after that, so if the first doesn't get you its only a matter of time.

Originally Posted by Didz

Likewise the actual effect is greatly increased by firing by platoons simply because subsequent volleys hit after the men hit by the first shots have dropped. More to the point the morale effect of having survived a full battalion volley is that you are free from danger for at least 20 seconds during which you get up close an blow someones brains out. Whereas, with platoon fire you are under constant danger as the next volley will follow the first within seconds, and the next after that, and the next after that, so if the first doesn't get you its only a matter of time.

When i read your post you were talking about a voluntary fire system. I'm assuming this is the same as firing at will. If we're talking about platoon firing then i agree with you that it is a superior tactic than a massed volley but firing piecemeal as your other post was implying is not the way to go.