Musket Formations

[lexington]

What is the best way to represent a musket formation outside of the Mass Combat rules? I'm thinking a mob with a ranged attack that uses the Suppressing Fire rules but I'm not sure of the following:

Size (I know they were usually 2, 3, or 4 rows deep but how wide were they?)
Skill (How well trained with these soldiers? Not well I think.)
Morale (I assume people would rout before half of them died.)
Aim (Did musket lines really Aim in the GURPS sense?)
Range (How close did musket formations usually get before shooting?)

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by lexington

What is the best way to represent a musket formation outside of the Mass Combat rules? I'm thinking a mob with a ranged attack that uses the Suppressing Fire rules but I'm not sure of the following:

Size (I know they were usually 2, 3, or 4 rows deep but how wide were they?)
Skill (How well trained with these soldiers? Not well I think.)
Morale (I assume people would rout before half of them died.)
Aim (Did musket lines really Aim in the GURPS sense?)
Range (How close did musket formations usually get before shooting?)

All of these things vary widely with time and culture and type of troops. Check your local library for books on eighteenth-century and Napoleonic warfare by authors like Haythornthwaite and Bert S. Hall.

[ericthered]

We can help, but musket warfare has a long history among several differing cultures. Are we talking Napoleonic? pike and shot? or what?

Some of the troops will be well trained. Yes, They will fall back before half of them die. Almost all military units do. The training is all about getting them to keep their ground and replace causalities. Also, remember that they either have bayonets or supporting melee elements. Napoleonic troops did a lot of hand to hand combat. And in the american revolution, the British found their greatest advantage was in hand to hand combat.

Also, muskets generally weren't used for suppression fire. They were used to soften up the enemy formation before you charged it. Everyone would fire at once, in a volley. The hope was to mess up the enemy's formation so they were vulnerable when you hit them.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by ericthered

Also, muskets generally weren't used for suppression fire. They were used to soften up the enemy formation before you charged it. Everyone would fire at once, in a volley. The hope was to mess up the enemy's formation so they were vulnerable when you hit them.

The Suppression Fire rules are the only GURPS rules we have for area fire, which muskets were often used for. (Firing at the enemy formation, rather than at a particular man.)

They may not be intended to be used for all types of area fire, or well-suited to it, but they're what exists.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by lexington

Size (I know they were usually 2, 3, or 4 rows deep but how wide were they?)

As Polydamas says, it varies a lot with time and nationality. But, 4 is actually not an upper limit. 5, 6, or 8 rows were also used. In general, with troops that were better trained, and the time and technology went on (so producing more efficient equipment), troops could reload faster and so the number of rows in line would decrease. The depth is there largely to provide "continuous" (more continuous) fire despite the long reload time.

The maneuver elements (by various names) were roughly 1000 men, plus or minus a factor of two. So, the width in line would be 200-500 men, so an average front on the order of several hundred yards. Again, a huge generalization.

people would rout before half of them died

Yes. Remaining to fight with 50% casualties would be highly unusual. (For example, that's about the total casualty rate for the infamously disastrous Gallipoli fighting in WWI, where the defenders have machine guns and the attackers couldn't even leave.)

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Lexington

What is the best way to represent a musket formation outside of the Mass Combat rules? I'm thinking a mob with a ranged attack that uses the Suppressing Fire rules but I'm not sure of the following:

Size (I know they were usually 2, 3, or 4 rows deep but how wide were they?)
Skill (How well trained with these soldiers? Not well I think.)
Morale (I assume people would rout before half of them died.)
Aim (Did musket lines really Aim in the GURPS sense?)
Range (How close did musket formations usually get before shooting?)

Frontage (size) depends on the unit size. The two basic units were the company, commanded by a captain, and the battalion, commanded by the major captain [later shortened to just major]. In British service a company seems to have been standardized fairly early as 100 men, not counting the captain and band , presumably the lieutenant wasn't counted as part of the 100 either but sergeants and corporals were. As such, a 100 man company would have a frontage of 25 men in four ranks, 33 men in three ranks, 50 men in two ranks and 100 men in a single rank. For unrifled muskets (most firearm-bearing units up to the Napoleonic era), the men in a rank would have been dressed shoulder-to-shoulder, giving an average width per man of about 18". Thus the frontage of a company would be: 37' 6" in four ranks, 49' 6" in three ranks (51' for the rank with the odd man out), 75' in two ranks and 150' in a single rank. A skirmish line (usually a single rank with at least an arm's length dressing would cover about 300' if an entire company were used. Double the frontage if an arm's length dressing is used for retiring ranks to the rear for reloading. It was more usually the case that all ranks fired in unison, front rank kneeling, second and third ranks crouching, rear rank standing.

British battalions initially had ten companies and mostly fired under company control. Companies had intervals between them but I'm not certain how large the interval was, certainly no more than company width between companies and likely less. Battalions decreased in number of companies to eight, c. the American Revolution. However battalion frontages were likely less than that as the two flank companies were "specialist" troops, one being light infantry and the other grenadiers. Both flank companies were often detached from the battalion to form battalions of like specialists and the ordinary battalion's frontage would decrease accordingly.

Depth of a unit was usually one pace between ranks in close order which varied with the unit involved (Canadian drill manuals as late as WWII had pace variances of as much as 6" depending on the infantry unit involved, with highlander, rifle and light infantry units having longer paces than the now-standard 30"). If firing in open order, there would be an additional three half-paces between each rank. For standard pace companies, depth of the unit would be 10' 6" in four ranks, 8' 6" in three ranks and 4' 0" in two ranks in close order. Depth in open order would be: 24' for four ranks, 17' 6" for three ranks and 8' 6" for two ranks. A single rank would have a depth of 9".

Most of the musketmen would easily have a point in Black Powder Weapons (Musket), given that they drilled daily for easily four to eight hours a day depending on what else they might be given as tasks. Long-serving musketmen would obviously have higher skills in the drills for their weapon, sand at this point in time, musketry was almost entirely about the drills, which carried you through loading, firing and preparing the weapon for reloading on the battlefield as well as the evolutions for maneuvering as a unit on the battlefield. Anyone with a year's service in the ranks would easily have 4 points in the skill and a veteran with five years' device could easily justify having 20 points in skills and techniques, if any.

The Highland drill Regulations of 1758 would cover whether or not Aiming in the GURPS sense applied. I don't have my copy at hand but, IIRC, no, they didn't aim in the GURPS sense as part of their firing drill, aiming amounted to being broadly pointed at the body of enemy troops.

Certainly at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (1759), the ranges at which firing occurred were no more than a hundred yards and for unrifled muskets that was still true as late as the Napoleonic Wars. Rifled muskets could reasonably expect to fire volleys at 300 to 400 yards range with the expectation of producing some casualties by the time of the Napoleonic wars.

[Adversary]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Most of the musketmen would easily have a point in Black Powder Weapons (Musket), given that they drilled daily for easily four to eight hours a day depending on what else they might be given as tasks. Long-serving musketmen would obviously have higher skills in the drills for their weapon, sand at this point in time, musketry was almost entirely about the drills, which carried you through loading, firing and preparing the weapon for reloading on the battlefield as well as the evolutions for maneuvering as a unit on the battlefield. Anyone with a year's service in the ranks would easily have 4 points in the skill and a veteran with five years' device could easily justify having 20 points in skills and techniques, if any.

Most of what I know about musket formations I learned reading Bernard Cornwell's series of novels about the Napoleonic Wars (the Richard Sharpe series). From that I take it that a large part of musket skill/drill was improving your speed at loading and firing. Experienced, well-trained troops could get off more volleys in a minute than raw troops could.

Keeping your cool under fire (or as you saw the enemy's bayonets getting closer) while loading rapidly and not making mistakes (forgetting primer, leaving the ramrod in the muzzle) was most of it. Not sure how to represent this in game terms...make a skill roll to load with penalties for speed? Rapid loading as a technique? Make loading a series of skill checks (fast-draw cartridge, etc.)? Or simply institute skill break points: Musket at DX=2 shots/minute, Dex+1=3, Dex +3=4?

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Adversary

Keeping your cool under fire (or as you saw the enemy's bayonets getting closer) while loading rapidly and not making mistakes (forgetting primer, leaving the ramrod in the muzzle) was most of it. Not sure how to represent this in game terms...make a skill roll to load with penalties for speed? Rapid loading as a technique? Make loading a series of skill checks (fast-draw cartridge, etc.)? Or simply institute skill break points: Musket at DX=2 shots/minute, Dex+1=3, Dex +3=4?

Will roll, or will based soldier. Skill with a musket won't help. Leadership rolls can give boosts

[lexington]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Frontage (size) depends on the unit size. The two basic units were the company, commanded by a captain, and the battalion, commended by the major captain [later shortened to just major]. In British service a company seems to have been standardized fairly early as 100 men, not counting the captain and band , presumably the lieutenant wasn't counted as part of the 100 either but sergeants and corporals were. As such, a 100 man company would have a frontage of 25 men in four ranks, 33 men in three ranks, 50 men in two ranks and 100 men in a single rank. For unrifled muskets (most firearm-bearing units up to the Napoleonic era), the men in a rank would have been dressed shoulder-to-shoulder, giving an average width per man of about 18". Thus the frontage of a company would be: 37' 6" in four ranks, 49' 6" in three ranks (51' for the rank with the odd man out), 75' in two ranks and 150' in a single rank. A skirmish line (usually a single rank with at least an arm's length dressing would cover about 300' if an entire company were used. Double the frontage if an arm's length dressing is used for retiring ranks to the rear for reloading. It was more usually the case that all ranks fired in unison, front rank kneeling, second and third ranks crouching, rear rank standing.

Okay that's a little bit smaller than I assumed so good to know. I thought that there was a delay between each volley in order to provide time to reload. Front rank fires, then kneels to reload, after a few seconds the second rank files then kneels to reload and so on.

Is that a total misconception or was it just an uncommon?

The widths suggest that the face of the line would have an SM between +8 and +11.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Depth of a unit was usually one pace between ranks in close order which varied with the unit involved (Canadian drill manuals as late as WWII had pace variances of as much as 6" depending on the infantry unit involved, with highlander, rifle and light infantry units having longer paces than the now-standard 30"). If firing in open order, there would be an additional three half-paces between each rank. For standard pace companies, depth of the unit would be 10' 6" in four ranks, 8' 6" in three ranks and 4' 0" in two ranks in close order. Depth in open order would be: 24' for four ranks, 17' 6" for three ranks and 8' 6" for two ranks. A single rank would have a depth of 9".

That is a lot of variation. I think I'll assume relatively close formations rather than deal with multiple ranks of soldiers that have to be accounted for separately.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Most of the musketmen would easily have a point in Black Powder Weapons (Musket), given that they drilled daily for easily four to eight hours a day depending on what else they might be given as tasks. Long-serving musketmen would obviously have higher skills in the drills for their weapon, sand at this point in time, musketry was almost entirely about the drills, which carried you through loading, firing and preparing the weapon for reloading on the battlefield as well as the evolutions for maneuvering as a unit on the battlefield. Anyone with a year's service in the ranks would easily have 4 points in the skill and a veteran with five years' device could easily justify having 20 points in skills and techniques, if any.

So arguably a faster skill progression than suggested in Tactical Shooting, their effectiveness being limited more by the weapon than their own abilities. Points in Guns and Soldier are both a must. Reload times were at least as important as Guns skill, is a toned down version of Quick Reload possible for elite units?

[EDIT: I see a lot of people suggesting a Rapid Reload variant, that's probably more realistic.]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

The Highland drill Regulations of 1758 would cover whether or not Aiming in the GURPS sense applied. I don't have my copy at hand but IIRC, no they didn't aim in the GURPS sense as part of their firing drill, aiming amounted to being broadly pointed at the body of enemy troops.

So probably the Suppression Fire rules make sense.

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Certainly at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (1759), the ranges at which firing occurred were no more than a hundred yards and for unrifled muskets that was still true as late as the Napoleonic Wars. Rifled muskets could reasonably expect to fire volleys at 300 to 400 yards range with the expectation of producing some casualties by the time of the Napoleonic wars.

I usually head "fifty yards" quoted as typical which sounds about right given what you're telling me. Did later lines actually pull back or just become capable of engaging at a greater distance?

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Lexington

I usually head "fifty yards" quoted as typical which sounds about right given what you're telling me. Did later lines actually pull back or just become capable of engaging at a greater distance?

Generally, they were capable of engaging of engaging at greater distances and this seems to be due to the adoption of the rifled musket [later simply rifle], as the firearm in use. Most modern militaries still generally engage with rifles at 400 yards. You can fire at greater ranges but barring specialist, tricked out weapons, such as a sniper's rifle, there isn't the expectation of fire being effective at those greater ranges. Post-Napoleonic Wars the big changes become cartridges, breech loading and magazines mounted on the weapon (as opposed to being storage buildings) all of which reduced the reloading times and made possible prone firing.

Mechanical machine guns and lower reloading times made tight musket formations between rifle-armed troops dangerous by the time of the U.S. Civil War. Tight formations remained usable against less well-armed troops as late as the Battle of Omdurman (1898).

Looser formations for engagement with the enemy began to be used in military practice about the time of the plains Indian wars in the U.S. (c. 1870).

The other development over time with rifled muskets has been the adoption of better sighting systems which negate penalties, such as the Starlight scope for nighttime darkness penalties.

As for firing by rank and reloading, it varies with the time period. Volley by the entire unit was the order of the day at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham. By Rorke's Drift (1879), firing by rank was the norm. I would suspect that the break point for firing as a whole unit vs. by rank would be the adoption of the breech-loading cartridge. That said, I've heard a story that I'm unable to substantiate that the American commander during one the American Revolutionary battles (Battle of Breed's Hill?) did employ firing by ranks (or at least withholding part of his fire) to defeat the British who thought the Americans had exhausted their fire and needed to reload, charging into a fresh volley at least twice. If true, and again I haven't found any substantiation for the story, it may well represent the first use of fire by rank, as the British apparently had no notion of that as a firing method [according to the story].

As a sidenote, rifle for rifled musket as an exclusive term seems to have developed about the period of the Sudan War/Boer War. Before then a rifle might refer to a rifled musket or a rifled cannon. Hence The 9-lbr. Rifle as a booklet in the Canadian War Museum Historical Series, a weapon used in Canada c. 1870.