Search Mods for Sound

[Jack ONeill]

All,

I have written about this somewhere else in this forum but I will reiterate this again. Volley Fire in the ACW was problamatic at best. Based on my own research, and with a generous helping of Paddy Griffiths information, these are my conclusions -

Volley fire by ACW units on both sides was generally reserved for a first volley situation only. Most Diaries of Officers on both sides which actually mention it, tend to confirm this. The general rule of thumb was A) crank off a first volley into the enemy then, B) switch to "Fire by File" for the rest of the time the unit was in action. Any ideas why? Because you can't hear a damn thing once the action commences. Anyone who has been a reenactor or even visited an event can atest to the sheer volume of noise present on a battlefield. (Tank, I'm sure you can atest to this in your ECW events.)
Example: Out here in California, the big event is in Fresno at a historic mamsion at Kearny Park. We can generally put about 500-600 Infantry/Cavalry/Artillery per side on the field at any given time there. During one event, I was commander of an USV Infantry Battalion. There were 3 such battalions on each side, plus a battery of Guns. At on point the Foot closed to almost point blank range. The sound was incredible, just one big crashing sound, punctuated by the boom of a field piece. At one point, I looked aroound and saw my Brigade Commander giving orders to one of his Staff Officers. They were no more than 15-20 feet from me. It was obvious the Colonel was literally bellowing to be heard over the noise. I couldn't hear a word he was saying, even at that short a distance and looking right at him. Makes it bloody hard to give orders. I had to run down the line and literally yell into the ears of my Company Commanders to change Formation or get them to cease fire to prepare to advance or withdraw. AND, this is with blanks, not live ammo. Anyone who has not done anything like this, (or been in real combat, for that matter), really has no idea how much noise there is out there. It IS deafening.
So, while volley fire might be nice, in reality, (my two cents), the record bears out it was bloody hard to achieve once the two sides closed and everyone opened up. What we have in the game is "Fire by File", which apparently was the most used firing command anyway.
(Note - Back East the events are HUGE, with THOUSANDS of reenactors on each side. Talk about noise and confusion! I did the 125th. Anniversary at Gettysburg - DAMN! - 5,000 soldiers on each side. Now, that is considered a medium-sized event, for a Major event, that is.)

Jack B)

Note - Hey Beef! Nice to see you again!

[Jim]

Jack has it correctly. Volley fire was pretty much a one time event. I have found several instances where it was used in an ambush situation. Here is a description of this type of use from an eye witness:

"The 6th Vermont lay behind a little rise of ground, awaiting the Rebel host. Although the enemy was at least three times their number, for there was a whole brigade of them, the gallant Vermonters let them come on within a few feet of them, and then, rising, poured in a volley which literally decimated the foe. They fled hastily and the Sixth Corps was saved. It was now our turn and the Vermonters followed by the 26th New Jersey, pressed forward on the flying foe, until we reached the hill from which they had come. As we went we took a great number of prisoners."

The 6th VT used this same tactic to good effect at the Battle of Cedar Creek the following year.

-Jim

[Beef Stu]

Jim i hope your example wasn't meant to deter people from wanting volley fire because thats every reason why i want it.

It wasn't used except by the commanders that knew how to use it. One volley into a mass charge like we have in MP every night might be what we need to send those boys back to where they come from. Wasn't volley fire used heavily in falling back operations, you know.. volley,retreat,halt,load,volley,retreat.. I don't want full attention on this subject (there are more pressing matters) I just don't want it tossed out.

[Michael Slaunwhite]

@Norb: Does the game engine allow for plugins/extensions to extend the current code?

[Saddletank]

Jim i hope your example wasn't meant to deter people from wanting volley fire because thats every reason why i want it.

It wasn't used except by the commanders that knew how to use it. One volley into a mass charge like we have in MP every night might be what we need to send those boys back to where they come from. Wasn't volley fire used heavily in falling back operations, you know.. volley,retreat,halt,load,volley,retreat.. I don't want full attention on this subject (there are more pressing matters) I just don't want it tossed out.

I would like it as well Beef, but ONLY if it was restricted to historical use, which would be a FIRST volley fired by a unit in a battle, and possibly, if it was pulled back and didn't see any action again for 10 to 15 minutes, when it was put back into combat another FIRST VOLLEY could be fired off. After that, fire by files would be used.

You would need a toggle button to 'Fire'/'Hold Fire' adding to the toolbar as well, so that fire could be withheld until a critical range.

So really it should not be something under player control unless (like in the example of the Vermont regiment) a player keeps a unit prone then stands it up to deliver a volley at close range. That would require extremely confident troops (fast stand up time).

By the way, Jack, plenty of volley firing has been done by musket armed troops, co-ordinated by shouted orders from officers and NCOs, since musket formations first came about in the 1500s. In the ECW musketeers performed all manner of weird and cunning volley fire drills such as fire by introduction and fire by extraduction which used very deep formations, up to 6 or 8 ranks deep. In Frederick the Great's time the Prussian infantry were drilled to fire by platoons with each platoon firing a measured interval (staring on the flanks) after the one to it's flank had fired until the whole battalion had fired and the fire was then opened by the flank platoons again.

What this required was intense drill to a robotic level, and a very slow and measured loading sequence all supported and driven by shouted orders from the sergeants and corporals walking back and forth behind the firing line. In the armies of the ACW there was nothing like the required standard of weapons drill in any regiment to do this and each man simply loaded and fired as quickly as he could. Or didn't. Or cowered in the back somewhere or slunk away 'helping a wounded comrade', or loaded and loaded and never put a cap on his percussion nipple, etc etc. All these maladies are firm signs of badly drilled troops.

Volley fire after a unit has blasted off its first volley is definitely possible for well drilled infantry, but not for ACW troops.

[Jack ONeill]

All,

Your answers are IN your answers.

Beef - You are right as far as you go. In retreat, volley fire was used. However, it was generally done as a "Fire by Company" drill, not as a Battalion. Odd and Even companies would retire alternately by Division, (2 companies), usually by the command "By the Right of Companies to the Rear" drill. One Company firing as the other fell back. I'm not saying it never happened, just taht it was rare enough to be notable when it happened. I'm also not saying, if it was easy to code it into the game, cool.

Tank - Yes they did. However, you answered the question yourself. Yes, the Prussians fired volleys, as you said, by PLATOON, not by Battalion. Much easier to control. The British and Hanovarians did it that way, also. It was introduced by Marlbourogh During the Spanish Succesion War (1702-1714). It was taken up, primarily because a battlion volley was so hard to coordinate. Also, as a replacement for the Firing by Ranks, which the French and Austrians retained forever.
ECW, (and 30 yrs. War Musketeers), did fire volleys on command. Again, though the fire and retire or fire and advance, (I'm paraphrasing here), was required due to the incredible slowness of the 16th. - 17th. Century muskets. (You know how long it takes, you're one of them). It took from the time the front rank fired and retired to the back of the unit and moved up to the front rank again just to load the bloody thing. Again, no battalion firing, primarily as they were not organized into Battalions on the field - I've seen references to "Sleeves" and "Companie Squares" for musketeer formations as they formup alongside the Pike units.

One more thing - I'd be very careful in saying something about ACW being not well-drilled troops. By the 3rd. year of the war, the surviving infantrymen were as "Professional" as any European troops. Most of the shirkers and runaways had been weeded out. Badly drilled troops do not stand toe-to-toe at Brawners Farm and blaze away for however long, (time estimates vary), taking huge casualties in the process, nor do they form up and march in the open, over a mile and a half, under ferocious artillery and then musketry to try to perform what many felt to be a doomed from the start assault. You can find accounts of the Foreign Observers from the european nations which bear this out.

Also, "fire by file" was in ALL the European drill manuals by the early 19th. Century. It was to be used at the unit commanders discretion. (This would be the equivelent of "loading and firing as quickly as you could"). The French used it throughout the Napoleanic Wars.

Jack B)

[Saddletank]

Battalion volleys were not used by anyone as far as I know because of the reasons given 1) extremely hard to co-ordinate by voice over the distance of several hundred yards of a battalion's frontage (much easier to co-ordinate volley fire by platoon) and 2) the battalion was defenceless in the minute or so it took to reload via the standard drill.

Jack - like many people you are confusing being 'well drilled' with 'being expereinced in war'. The two are not the same.

I feel perfectly comfortable saying that ACW troops were not well drilled. In the European sense they weren't. That is quite different from saying they were not good, professional troops by the wars end. Two completely different things. The way European troops drilled in the 18th and early 19th centuries was a part of their tradtion, of centuries of development. Of going about the art of war in that particular way, peculiar to that time and place. You cannot gain those traditions and that obedience to measured drills in a few years of warfare using a conscript or volunteer army. The mindset of the men and their officers was quite different in 1860s N America.

I'm not being funny here, but "well drilled" does not make you "experienced in war", and being "experienced in war" does not make you "well drilled", it is two quite different subjects and troops being capable of standing shoulder to shoulder and blazing away for a long time (usually at the tops of the nearby trees) is nothing to do with being well drilled or not.

And yes, of course fire by files was in the European drill manuals. It was European drill manuals that all ACW troops used - at least in theory - though much of the fire and manouvre concepts of the zouave style were misunderstood (see P Griffith for all this).

The French used fire by files during the Napoleonic Wars because their peculiar social position after the Revolution placed them in a very similar situation to America in the 1860s. They too did not have well drilled troops nor the tradition and the experienced officers to lead them. They had thrown all that out with the royaalist trappings during 1789 and their raw conscript armies could not master the drill and the kinds of officers that were leading them did not think it necessary - an uncanny parallel to the way Americans went to war 60 years later. Like the Americans too, after a few years, the French became superb troops as well, despite dubious maaterial and ideas in the beginning.

[Jack ONeill]

Tank,

Agree with just about everything there, minus one.

I had to laugh when when you wrote I might be confused about something I have lived and breathed most of my adult life. I would guess the few folks on this forum who actually know who I am and what I have done for a living most of my adult life might have smiled ruefully, also. There are several. I am going to assume there is a discharge date in your RedBook from Her Majesties' Service. If so, I will cut you some slack. The date on my DD214 is October 3, 1992. I stood watch over my country, (not the government), for 12 years active duty in the US Marines, in the "Places we never went and things we never did" dept. I've have worked as a Consultant/Contractor for the Dept. Of Defense off and on for 20-odd years since then, doing roughly the same thing. I can't say more because of my NDA, and I am well aware this site is monitored. I know exactly what I'm talking about regarding discipline, well-drilled troops and experience of war. The difference between the full-on Amateur Armies at 1st. Manassas and the Teeth-Gritting close-range combat of Antietam/Chancellersville/Gettysburg is frightening. There must be drill and discipline to form up under fire, then try to assault a fortified position at Fredericksburg or being fired on from the flank in the Bloody Lane, while trying to hold the line. Bravery fails if Discipline and Drill aren't there to back it up. As you well know, even reenactors have to drill alot just to load the damned muskets correctly. I can't imagine the possibilites of disaster trying to load a 17th. century musket using the "12 Apostles" and a wooden ramrod. My hat is off to you. It must take great patience to get people to understand the danger there.
It is the requirement of the Professional to fight when he knows what to expect and then do it anyway. The Professional also knows the odds are better when he knows what he is doing, even in really crappy situations. I was one of those people. By mid-1863 I believe they were, too.

Jack

[redcoat]

its amazing how many ex armed forces there are around here! got 20 years myself.
and ive seen what happens with apostles when it all go's wrong,the fellow still has the scars.cheers

[Jack ONeill]

Red,

Yeah, we've had a few in reenacting out here, too. A close friend, (Captain of Marines, no less), dislocated his shoulder with an accidentally large load in his Enfield Rifle-Musket. Another time, a yankee from another company, (less well-drilled then ours), made the classic mistake of a) not realizing his musket had NOT fired and b) loading again and firing. This round threw him ass backwards out of the line and just about broke his arm. My favorite is when, during a scripted "we are being riden over by Reb Cav", I was hit by my buddy's horse, (on purpose), thrown to the ground and landed narrow edge up, on my canteen, breaking a rib. I could still move, so I finished the weekend. Sore as hell, the next day. Reenacting is NOT a safe hobby. :laugh:

Jack B)

BTW - the musket and cannon sounds from TC2M work nicely in SOWGB if you rename them. Louder, too.