Combat AAR with some observations

[justacaveman]

Massed formations marching slowly toward the enemy were developed when the enemy was firing unrifled muskets with an effective range of 50-75 yards. By the time of the Civil War rifled muskets firing Minie Ball ammo with an effective range of 300+ yards were common, making such massed formation attacks suicide.

The solution, was to travel in smaller groups, spread-out, using covering- fire, and using the terrain to screen your forces from enemy fire. Not walking slowly forward in large groups so the enemy can get a REALLY good shot at you. This is well within the capabilities of the weapons and materials of the day. There was NO attempt at beginning of the war to adapt battlefield tactics to the weapons of the time. The officers who commanded these men thought it was cowardly to do anything but a frontal attack.

 

[Eisenmann]

The problem with spreading out is that it dilutes fire power making it difficult to impinge against the opposing force's center of gravity. And they did use terrain to their advantage as well as combat engineers and other support positions. They weren't ego driven dullards.

Again, covering fire is extremely difficult, nearing impossible using the weapons of the day. I say this having experienced it in the modern day.

Obviously there were no radios. Once everyone is brought close enough for coordination communication you're right back to mass formation.

Again, we're looking back at the era, over 150 years without taking all of the materiel issues into consideration. Simplification and modern interjection is easy to do when looking back.

 

[rust]

The belligerents were no dummies. They weren't out to get their own men killed.

Of course not, but the basic concept of too many of them was to fight the
enemy in an open field battle against his main force and hope that their
side would win the slaughter.
At least in my view "March up to the enemy and try to overrun him" is not
the most convincing demonstration of tactical skill.

This was in no way a problem of the American Civil War only, others did
the same before and after.
Good examples are the battles of Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt during the
Hundred Years War, where the French nobility managed to lose three de-
cisive battles with the same brute force approach, caught in their concept
of war and unable to come up with any different tactics than frontal as-
sault.

 

[Eisenmann]

...At least in my view "March up to the enemy and try to overrun him" is not
the most convincing demonstration of tactical skill.

This was in no way a problem of the American Civil War only, others did
the same before and after...

I don't think that the belligerents of the ACW can be directly compared to the french nobility of the 100 years war. While a general correlation can be made the differing sets of tactical evolution are too disparate.

"March up to the enemy and try to overrun him" is how it's still done in maneuver warfare. It's just that maneuver has grown more intricate, complex, and high speed with advancements in technology.

 

[rust]

"March up to the enemy and try to overrun him" is how it's still done in maneuver warfare.

It is one of the available options, but there are many others that do not
include a direct attack on his strongest forces and positions. To attack
where the attack is expected and the enemy has prepared for just this
attack is much like voluntarily marching into an ambush in the hope that
the advantage of the enemy forces is not big enough to win the fight.

 

[Eisenmann]

"March up to the enemy and try to overrun him" is how it's still done in maneuver warfare.

It is one of the available options, but there are many others that do not
include a direct attack on his strongest forces and positions. To attack
where the attack is expected and the enemy has prepared for just this
attack is much like voluntarily marching into an ambush in the hope that
the advantage of the enemy forces is not big enough to win the fight.

Of course there are options; wrapped up in "more intricate, complex, and high speed." In the end it is about displacing the enemy, taking ground.

I gotta chime in and apologize for thread-jacking. This is one of my favorite subjects.

 

[rust]

I gotta chime in and apologize for thread-jacking. This is one of my favorite subjects.

Yep, but let us go back on topic, we will hardly come to an agreement
without derailing the thread completely. :wink: