Volley Fire: When to use it and when not to?

[WanderingWizard]

As far as my understanding goes, historically volley fire was used best when muskets were so inaccurate that it hardly mattered exactly where a soldier was aiming their gun (as long as they had it generally pointed in the right direction). A line shooting at once allowed for a wall of lead and a bunch of hits despite the inaccurate weapons. Volley fire was also more effective at destroying the enemy's morale than fire at will. If a line of guys in front of you drops all at once--- well, that's intimidating. It also makes it clear that you're facing a disciplined enemy if they can sustain volley fire which is also intimidating.

However, it seems to me like an obvious downside is that you can't aim very well in volley fire. When the officer says fire, you fire. It doesn't matter if you lost your sight picture-- you fire. Anyone who has shot at all before knows that you pull the trigger when you have the target in your sights. Sometimes you're ready to shoot, but you have to wait another few seconds because you don't have the target lined up in your sights. Now this hardly matters if you have a gun that is so inaccurate that it won't shoot where your sights are anyway, but the guns we're using in War of Rights are actually relatively accurate if you know how to shoot them.

I would think that by the Civil War era volley fire's only real advantage over careful, aimed firing at will was in breaking the enemy's morale and cohesion and that it probably actually resulted in fewer hits most of the time.

Based on my experience in the game, it also seems to me that volley fire is usually not a better tactic than individual fire in War of Rights. During volley fire, players that are committed to firing on command are just not aiming as carefully as they would otherwise. Volley fire may look pretty, but players are just trying to maintain their sights on the enemy as well as they can until they hear the command to fire and then they click--- regardless of whether or not their sights had slipped at the moment the officer said to fire. It seems to me like I'm always able to shoot more well aimed shots per minute with individual fire, and that therefore I'm always doing more damage to the enemy.

Also, since War or Rights is a game and nobody actually dies, one of the main advantages of volley fire is completely irrelevant. As deadly as musket wars could be (The Revolutionary war, Napoleonic Wars, Civil War), battles were won or lost when one side broke and ran. Defeated armies weren't massacred to the last man. Volley fire may have been great at breaking the spirit of the enemy, but you can't simulate that here.

In the game, I understand that volley fire can suppress the enemy (cause their screens to shake). Volley fire might also help so that the smoke can clear between shots. Neither of those advantages seem to make up for the loss of accuracy.

So my two queries would be whether volley fire actually led to more hits during the Civil War and whether it leads to more hits in War of Rights. I would suspect that the answer to both questions is no.

[salad fork]

Fire by file was the standard way of firing although there are several documented examples of devastating volleys during the war mostly at close range, 25-100 yards from behind cover surprising the enemy.

Iverson's brigade took 500 casualties from one volley at Gettysburg from troops who were hidden prone behind a stonewall.

Some Confederate regiments in the Cornfield at Antietam laid on the ground prone and delivered a point blank volley into advancing Federals who did not see them.

[WanderingWizard]

I would have the same objections to fire by file--- that it's not really aimed fire. The two examples you give are volley firing on an unaware enemy. That makes sense that you would want to fire all at once so that you can hit as many of the enemy as possible before they can take cover. That could work in the game in a similar situation.

[salad fork]

Originally posted by WanderingWizard:

I would have the same objections to fire by file--- that it's not really aimed fire. The two examples you give are volley firing on an unaware enemy. That makes sense that you would want to fire all at once so that you can hit as many of the enemy as possible before they can take cover. That could work in the game in a similar situation.

Yea volleys in the Civil War were mostly used from cover and ambush.

Fire by file makes more sense when you have regiments of 500-1000 men doing them by company, it's an endless wall of fire much like a machine gun, even if they are all just firing as fast as they can reload. Drill manuals at the time did stress the importance of giving each soldier the proper time to aim and pick his target carefully.

" 77. The instructor will recommend to the captain to make a short pause between the
commands aim and fire, to give the men time to aim with accuracy." - School of the Company

In general I agree with you that fire at will is much more effective with smaller scale numbers, as it's similar to fire by file in that every soldier reloads at a different time so the fire would be continous regardless. Individual accuracy and the initiative matters alot more than a good looking volley. Holding your fire to wait for the rest of the group to reload while standing 50 yards away from the enemy is just pure stupidity.

The size of a company in the Civil War was 100 men so the battles in game wouldn't even amount to a full skirmish line in terms of scale. Respawn tickets helps offset this though and flag respawns.

[Necramonium™]

Even if it did not hit someone, it also had a demoralizing effect, an entire row of muskets shooting at you is a frighthening sight, especially from a well organized army. Take a look at this video of the 2015 Waterloo reenactment when one single line engages in a volley fire, now imagine all the lines doing it:

https://youtu.be/QScvi6AlmcQ?t=740
(at 12:20)

[Booger]

Any volley I've been a part of has been very successful when done right before a charge. The smoke and chaos generated by the volley provides natural cover for a charge.

[Swordsaint Leo]

It would be nice to see other tactics more commonly used. What about an ambush from behind a line of trees? In the movie Patriot, they were shooting red coats that way and it seems to make sense. Would that not work in this game? Many maps have pretty dense woodlands.

[Necramonium™]

Originally posted by Swordsaint Leo:

It would be nice to see other tactics more commonly used. What about an ambush from behind a line of trees? In the movie Patriot, they were shooting red coats that way and it seems to make sense. Would that not work in this game? Many maps have pretty dense woodlands.

That was still a movie. One dude and his two kids could not take out a squad of British soldiers.

[WanderingWizard]

Originally posted by Sgt.Nightfire:

Even if it did not hit someone, it also had a demoralizing effect, an entire row of muskets shooting at you is a frighthening sight, especially from a well organized army. Take a look at this video of the 2015 Waterloo reenactment when one single line engages in a volley fire, now imagine all the lines doing it:

https://youtu.be/QScvi6AlmcQ?t=740
(at 12:20)

I agree with you about the demoralizing effects. That just doesn't seem to translate into the game.

[WanderingWizard]

Originally posted by Boog:

Any volley I've been a part of has been very successful when done right before a charge. The smoke and chaos generated by the volley provides natural cover for a charge.

My experiences have been the exact opposite. We fire a volley which does nothing, and then run at the enemy who will mow us down if they've held their fire until we get close. I can almost always kill at least one enemy soldier if I save my shot for the charge, and then run in, shoot someone at point blank range, and then anyone I can bayonet is just extra.

[Booger]

Originally posted by WanderingWizard:

Originally posted by Boog:

Any volley I've been a part of has been very successful when done right before a charge. The smoke and chaos generated by the volley provides natural cover for a charge.

My experiences have been the exact opposite. We fire a volley which does nothing, and then run at the enemy who will mow us down if they've held their fire until we get close. I can almost always kill at least one enemy soldier if I save my shot for the charge, and then run in, shoot someone at point blank range, and then anyone I can bayonet is just extra.

Interesting. Maybe the volley needs to be support by a large number (30+) to be effective?

[IRDCAM]

A lot of the major battles were open field linier combat. Each side in line and either advancing or defending. The rifled muskets of the era were 200yrd rifles as compared to the smooth bore predisesors, the issue of Napoleonic trained officers thinking in the 75 yard range rather than the 200yd standoff range. Usual attack was advance, 3 volleys of rifle fire and advance bayonet.
Understand these rifled muskets fouled at 12 -13 rounds where the carbon fouling of the barrel meant rounds were impossible to load.

Volly fire for the defender should begin at the 250yrd mark, and continue till 75yrd and then prepare to defend bayonet. Battle drill we designed for the attack defender dynamic. Companies (100-300 men) should be in two rows and mass volley to be effective, one row firing the other loading keepin up a volumn of fire.

Understand the tactics were Napoleonic and the weapons were far more advanced and culd engage at 5X the distance. Sights on the 61 and 63 were a flip type, 100 and 400 yards.

[Jim]

Originally posted by WanderingWizard:

Originally posted by Boog:

Any volley I've been a part of has been very successful when done right before a charge. The smoke and chaos generated by the volley provides natural cover for a charge.

My experiences have been the exact opposite. We fire a volley which does nothing, and then run at the enemy who will mow us down if they've held their fire until we get close. I can almost always kill at least one enemy soldier if I save my shot for the charge, and then run in, shoot someone at point blank range, and then anyone I can bayonet is just extra.

You shouldn't be engaging in melee so often, it's usually an 'all or nothing' affair. It's a complete waste of tickets, and usually the ground is given up again shortly after. If your volleys are not hitting, you're misjudging the distance and firing short/long.

[salad fork]

The rifles in the Civil War were definitely accurate in the right hands, most shooters would be hard pressed to make these shots with a modern rifle like the M4 or AK at 300-500 yards with irons.

https://youtu.be/pW6UQyzaGZc

https://youtu.be/ejxByA-siSs

[Vault-Tec Salesman]

Main reason why you dont see differnt uses of volley fire or different tactics used very much right now in game is because its very hard to organize that sort of tactic in a public game, Im sure if you're in a company you have time in the drill camp to train on different scenarios but in public games we're just there to have some fun fire some volleys and hopefully win. If I could organize 40 or so people to fire from files that'd be awesome but its just realistically not going to happen.

[salad fork]

One of the biggest gripes I have with this game is that you cannot load while moving, this makes it difficult to utilize cover properly or to fend off bayonet charges.

It's very easy to load a 3 band percussion musket at the quick time.

The Prussians were able load on the march with flintlocks in formation many years before the Civil War..with a percussion rifle it is 10x easier.

Most professional armies abandoned the practice of volley fire all together by the turn of the century 1800, because it was just not as effective as platoon fire, half platoon fire, fire by file and fire at will. Volley fire left you succeptible to cavalry and bayonet charges, and bayonets had been long obsolete by the time of the Napoleonic Wars because of these advances in fire systems. It was simply suicidal to bayonet charge in most circumstances in the Napoleonic Wars and Civil War while a line was employing these fire systems because there was a constant rate of gunfire always directed at you.

Napoleonic War bayonet casualties were less than 2%

Civil War bayonet casualties were less than 1%.

TLDR - Regimental Volley fire and bayonet charges became mostly obsolete by the 1790's.