A concern on Rifle accuracy changing game play

[Millander]

Hello folk.

 This thread is about a concern/suggestion that I have had for a while but up until now never felt like I had any historical case to back it. The concern is cheafly about the musket accuracy in BCoF. As all of you know NW has always revolved around linebattle events. These are what draw most people to the game and are definitely what keep most people going. The current gameplay works perfectly for these events and is the main cause of NW's success.  As said before the gameplay system of NW is perfect for Linebattle events. However I fear that with the introduction of the Rifled Musket it will cause lines in events to be obsolete radically changing how events are played for the worse.

 For this reason I believe that the accuracy of the average Rifles in BCoF should be no greater or only slightly better in terms of accuracy than the Muskets used in NW. The two main arguments for this are historical accuracy or Civil War rifles accuracy during battle as well as the sake of gameplay.

 The effects  that drastically higher accuracy will drastically change gameplay from what we play in NW. These predictions are mainly drawn from the best example that most of us have played, the North and south mod. Although the mod is great (33rd Virginia!) it isn't very practical to make lines in it and everybody generally dives for cover. This type of events doesn't appeal to a vast majority of NW players and a fear that events in Battle Cry of Freedom would be similar to this if the accuracy is to high. As well if accuracy is to high it could likely cause a lack of melee. Although bayonets caused some 2% of deaths in the civil war a vast majority of players *myself included* really dig the melee system and consider it an important part of events.

 Although not as important as the gameplay there is as well some historical facts that back up this proposal. I have recently been reading the book titles "The Rifles Musket in the Civil War - Myth and Reality" by Earl J. Hess. The book  brought some really interesting points that completely make me rethink civil war combat. It mentioned in detail how the effectiveness of the Rifles Musket was severely hampered on most cases in battle. This was mainly due to two things. Civil War soldiers on both sides almost universally were not trained in marksmanship. These was due to the rapid training most volunteers received. As well as in the heat of battle especially with smoke soldiers could not directly point out individuals and could often barely make out the enemy line. This was one of the causes of so many flag bearers dying. With this lack of training combined with battlefield conditions in most fighting during the war the civil war rifle was far from being as accurate as it was on paper.

 In short I feel that raising the musket accuracy will harm gameplay in events with making lines obsolete and in gameplay in general causing melee to be more difficult to get into. Although historically accuracy is totally my jam I feel that it shouldn't intrude on gameplay in the way that it will if accuracy is any greater than what the musket currently in NW are. What do you guys think?
 

[Coconut]

Yeah I think the accuracy should be the same or there will be some annoying hill humping trench warfare going on.

[AntonioTheWorstAtMelee]

I feel like some of the less accurate weapons of BI strike a good balance, not pinpoint accuracy but can hit things more accurately then a musket (pistols in BI are a good example)

Gotta find a balance that distinguishes this new era of weaponry from NW, but doesn't drastically change the way we play.

[TheBoberton]

Something that needs to be made entirely clear right now is this;

Battle Cry of Freedom should not be Napoleonic Wars with Union and Confederate skins. Melee should be a last resort, used to push an enemy from a position, or to hold your own, not what everyone defaults to five minutes into the game.

As well as in the heat of battle especially with smoke soldiers could not directly point out individuals and could often barely make out the enemy line. This was one of the causes of so many flag bearers dying.

You know, there's a great way to simulate this in game without decreasing the accuracy of the rifles; Visual effects should cause these issues, without the game forcing inaccuracy upon you.

[Wismar]

Millander, you seem to forget that this is not NW or a sequel to it. This is an entirely new game.
FSE wants to make a historically accurate game and not a NW reskin. Think about it. The maps are huge so it would be really wierd if the accuracy was shit.

This thread is stupid. It's pretty much you saying that you want an NW:2

There will still be lines if people want them. They just have to be further apart.

[Onii]

Pretty much agree with Boberton and Wismar.
I think BCoF should be quite different than NW. Would make it feel fresh to go to a different kind of linebattle.

[ClearlyInvsible]

I've got to agree with Onii, Boberton and Wismar here,

BCoF is not and should not be like NW, melee should be an afterthought and you should be able to nail someone at the appropriate range with a rifled musket. The thing that made the ACW so deadly was the fact that outdated tactics were used with modern weaponry. Breech-loaders, repeaters, trapdoors, revolvers and even came into this day and age (Hell even Grenades were modernized in this war).

This is a new game, on a new engine, with a new system of play. Yeah, events are going to be different, but that makes perfect sense. If FSE was making a World War I game would you want there to only be single loading bolt action rifles from the Anglo Zulu War? The game has to meet the era, and this was the era of mainly skirmishing armies and light tactics.

Also, all of the LBs I've had in North and South were... really fun. I liked ordering my regiment's Pioneer to build fence cover for our line, I liked having to hide behind walls and in forests to save myself from an early grave, it was much more fun than standing in a line waiting to be shot like you do in NW.

I welcome this change of game-play, a new pace is needed.

[kpetschulat]

I'm really tired of people complaining about melee. That's the one thing I hate about NW now, is the stupid "bum rush into melee own pwn pwn." There's no real essence of line battles in NW since regiments shoot one volley, if that, then Y0L0 charge as the kids and idiots call it across a field the length of a football field.

I think it's good that rifles are very accurate, it gives a better feeling that your life is worth more than just stupidly running across a field for melee.

[ClearlyInvsible]

I'm really tired of people complaining about melee. That's the one thing I hate about NW now, is the stupid "bum rush into melee own pwn pwn." There's no real essence of line battles in NW since regiments shoot one volley, if that, then Y0L0 charge as the kids and idiots call it across a field the length of a football field.

This. I mean come on, the amount of melee in most NW regiments aren't even remotely sane. Probably because the muskets are much more inaccurate than they should be.

[Wismar]

Indeed, the smoothbores are actually way more accurate irl.

[Coconut]

You think that is going to be a perfect scenario where its a huge flat map and multiple lines are firing on eachother from large distances but it wont be. The maps will be somewhat hilly and you probably wont be able to see your enemy from one side of the map to the other so It's just going to be people sitting on hills because the moment they expose themselves they will get sniped by a rifle

[ClearlyInvsible]

You think that is going to be a perfect scenario where its a huge flat map and multiple lines are firing on eachother from large distances but it wont be. The maps will be somewhat hilly and you probably wont be able to see your enemy from one side of the map to the other so It's just going to be people sitting on hills because the moment they expose themselves they will get sniped by a rifle

You realize maps are going to be huge right? Like 5 times the size of NW maps.

[AntonioTheWorstAtMelee]

You think that is going to be a perfect scenario where its a huge flat map and multiple lines are firing on eachother from large distances but it wont be. The maps will be somewhat hilly and you probably wont be able to see your enemy from one side of the map to the other so It's just going to be people sitting on hills because the moment they expose themselves they will get sniped by a rifle

You realize maps are going to be huge right? Like 5 times the size of NW maps.

so people will camp a hill, and run KM away to another one so they don't get overrun and can snipe to their hearts content

[Coconut]

You think that is going to be a perfect scenario where its a huge flat map and multiple lines are firing on eachother from large distances but it wont be. The maps will be somewhat hilly and you probably wont be able to see your enemy from one side of the map to the other so It's just going to be people sitting on hills because the moment they expose themselves they will get sniped by a rifle

You realize maps are going to be huge right? Like 5 times the size of NW maps.

It doesn't matter if a map is huge, Because you won't be able to see someone over a hill unless you are in close proximity. Around the range it is in NW

The only thing it will change is the amount of time you have to walk to engage the enemy

[ClearlyInvsible]

I'll imagine that most of the maps won't have hills.

Hell we don't even know if BCoF is going to have a random map generator.