Did soldiers ever go prone in order to minimize exposure and/or use it for ambushes?

[RaphaelDeFusco]

I'm wondering if it could be justified to add a prone position to the game, so I was wondering if anyone could perhabs historically justify if it should be added or not.
I could easily imagine skirmishers gone fully prone near their line infantry in order to pop-up on the flanks of the enemy line infantry, as their own forces charge in.
Gameplay wise I would imagine if you were to shoot in a prone position, that reloading would take longer and you wouldn't be able to use a bayonet.

[Larson]

I Agree

[Dman979]

I'm wondering if it could be justified to add a prone position to the game, so I was wondering if anyone could perhabs historically justify if it should be added or not.
I could easily imagine skirmishers gone fully prone near their line infantry in order to pop-up on the flanks of the enemy line infantry, as their own forces charge in.
Gameplay wise I would imagine if you were to shoot in a prone position, that reloading would take longer and you wouldn't be able to use a bayonet.

It's near certain that soldiers lay down during battles at some point during the Civil War. The night when Union soldiers were stuck on Mayre's Heights comes to mind, as does the shelling of the Union center during the prelude to Pickett's Charge.

However, we need to look at this from a gameplay perspective. It was an edge case during the war for soldiers to go prone; will the inclusion of a prone stance be used to take cover from artillery, or be used to crawl in front of the enemy when players should be in formation? How will adding another stance affect the control scheme? What is the potential for abuse? What does the inclusion of prone add to the type of gameplay the developers wish to encourage? Is it worth the time for programming and animation, especially when you consider that there are so many things players will want to do while prone?

After considering all these questions, and some more factors which I don't wish to go into detail about here, I think it would not be justified to add a prone stance, and I think the developers and many on the forums agree.

Best, Dman979

[brentcarter]

Just read the books about the first Manassas. Orders to lay down and shoot/ shoot from the kneeling position where given by both sides. And plenty battles after that

[brentcarter]

What book(s), and which page, describes orders at First Manassas to shoot from the prone position?

The first battle of Mannassas: An end to Innocence
Page 62 within 100 yards of the Federal Line of battle – the line stopped. Jones ordered the men to lie down and open fire
Page 60 Lie Down, 71st, and let the Rhode Islanders pass to the front
Page 21 Walrath made the expedient move and ordered his men to lie down and fire
Stonewall Jackson's defense of Henry House Hill during the First Battle of Manassas where he ordered his soldiers to lie down below the crest of the hill in order to avoid Union artillery

---------------------------------------------------------
Return to Bull Run The Campaign and Battle of Second Manassas
page 346
page 326
page 422

--------------------------------------------------------
Landscape Turned Red: The Battle of Antietam
Page 191 Dunker church
Page 186 Dunker Church
page 209 Dunker Church



-------------------------------------------------------------

Gettysburg: The Second Day
page 257
page 274
page 384
page 100
page 395



From Hardee's Manual

120. Skirmishers will be habituated to load their pieces whilst marching; but they will be enjoined to halt always an instant, when in the act of charging cartridge, and priming.

121. They should be practised to fire and load kneeling, lying down, and sitting, and much liberty should be allowed in these exercises, in order that they may be executed in the manner found to be most convenient. Skirmishers should be cautioned not to forget that, in whatever position they may load, it is important that the piece should be placed upright before ramming, in order that the entire charge of powder may reach the bottom of the bore.

------------------------------------------------
That is what I could find in the limited time I had. There is plenty more in the books I have from the different Battles and Campaigns.
Hope that helps.

[thomas aagaard]

120. Skirmishers will be habituated to load their pieces whilst marching; but they will be enjoined to halt always an instant, when in the act of charging cartridge, and priming.
121. They should be practised to fire and load kneeling, lying down, and sitting, and much liberty should be allowed in these exercises, in order that they may be executed in the manner found to be most convenient. Skirmishers should be cautioned not to forget that, in whatever position they may load, it is important that the piece should be placed upright before ramming, in order that the entire charge of powder may reach the bottom of the bore.
.
Yes, skirmishes should do this.

This was not to be done when in close order and the drill books give no instruction for how to load and fire from a kneeling position in close order.

The instruction for how to fire and load kneeling in school of the soldier, have the soldier move out of formation, kneel, fire, load, standup and return to the ranks.
(number 292 in Hardee's revised)

Kneeling only make any sense if both ranks do so, and that make loading harder since you wast time trying not to hit each other with weapons and ramrods.
And the rear rank need to be very close to the front rank. so it is actually not that practical.

Likely why the drill books don't tell us how to do it or give any order for it.*


And two ranks can't go prone and shot at the same time.

So if both ranks do kneel, The result is a loss of firepower. And if an disciplined enemy go in with the bayonet, you need that firepower.
But obviously if the enemy stop to take the firefight, having both ranks kneel do make a lot of sense... and this was clearly done.

Also in many cases a regiment on the defensive would have to cover a bit more ground than they are suppose to, so the formation often where less tight. and then you start to get the needed space to kneel and take cover.




* looking outside the acw, the danish 1863 drill book do have one case where two ranks kneel... and that is when part of a 4 rank square.
In that formation only the two rear ranks are to fire... unless you really need to. And If the two front ranks have to fire, they are first ordered to stand up, then fire and then most likely kneel with out loading. That formation is so tights that there is no room for loading.

The british army did have a system for loading and firing kneeling in two ranks. with one way to load when in the front rank and another when in the rear rank.
But that is also for use in a skirmish formation.
They just did their skirmishing in two ranks... unlike the french/US system of one rank.

[McMuffin]

I'm just saying that if you add prone, as historically or unhistorically accurate as it may be, a lot of people are going to get modern FPS and arcadey vibes no matter what you do and most will say that it's stupid and complain about it, cite all the sources you want. It would feel incredibly out of place, and a lot of people would dislike it. That's how this sort of super super niche stuff that you find in a few pages on a drill manual being added in always goes or is received on the forums.

[brentcarter]

I never stated it should be added to the game.

But as an answer to the question: Did soldiers ever go prone in order to minimize exposure and/or use it for ambushes?
Yes they did.


Should you implement it in this game?
I would not recommend it

[John Cooley]

I never stated it should be added to the game.

But as an answer to the question: Did soldiers ever go prone in order to minimize exposure and/or use it for ambushes?
Yes they did.


Should you implement it in this game?
I would not recommend it

Agreed ... and this coming from a scout/sniper cav style unit commander.
While it would not only be historically accurate and a boon to my Troopers I would NOT be in favor of its addition to WoR.
The change in battle dynamics and overall feel of this game would be altered greatly and I am not certain it would be for the better.

[Bleddyn]

Another voice against this.

It did happen a few times, sure. However it was far from common in the general strategies at the time. As others have stated it would be very disruptive to this game. If people want to lay under a bush and snipe at others there are literally hundreds of games for them, there are very few games that try to represent line battles and even fewer that do it well. Let's not spoil what makes this game unique.

[brentcarter]

Thanks for your references, brent! Carman mentions units laying down at Antietam to avoid fire on a few occasions, and this isn't particularly unusual, but only once does he say a group was ordered to lay down and continue firing. I believe this was a Georgia regiment at the edge of East Woods.

Very Welcome Bradley.