Shooting at a Melee is Stupid

[Ned Cookson]

So a brigade can't shoot through the back of another friendly unit, unless it is in melee. This seems to break charges because it gets the charging unit slaughtered by nearby units.  The AI regularly loses because all human units turn to shoot through their friendly unit into the melee.

Is there a rationale for this?

[Wright29]

Game balancing. Blob melee attacks are already terrible enough (see all the comments on suicide AI charges). I'd sacrifice realism for reasonable results from melee charges any day. 

[Hitorishizuka]

Moreso that with AI scaling, the AI gets absurd Melee for free in all of its units, so if it was allowed to melee wave attack without nearby defenders being able to shoot back the player would have a very tough time of things.

[Hobo]

I am OK with all of this.  I just want my defending Brigade to stay put when the attacking unit breaks off the charge instead of running after them in to a bunch of flank volleys from adjacent enemies.  And I really want the attacking unit to route back towards their lines instead of towards the back of my lines where I have to deal with them the rest of the battle.  Just fix those two items please.........

[Ned Cookson]

Yes it is indeed stupid, and running after your retreating enemy makes it worse.

As is the fact that as soon as 1 man touches another, everyone forgets how to fire a gun.

And why do so few people die?  Well, I suppose because no one is shooting anyone, but when 1000's rush at each other I kind of expect someone to get poked.

So you get this odd situation, where the bloody massacre that should be hand-to-hand combat is far less dangerous (considering only those units in the melee) than shooting.  Could some civil war buff chip in to say if this is accurate?  Did these guys run up and just glare at one another, or did they try to do the old stabby stabby?

[Koro]

34 minutes ago, Ned Cookson said:

Yes it is indeed stupid, and running after your retreating enemy makes it worse.

As is the fact that as soon as 1 man touches another, everyone forgets how to fire a gun.

And why do so few people die?  Well, I suppose because no one is shooting anyone, but when 1000's rush at each other I kind of expect someone to get poked.

So you get this odd situation, where the bloody massacre that should be hand-to-hand combat is far less dangerous (considering only those units in the melee) than shooting.  Could some civil war buff chip in to say if this is accurate?  Did these guys run up and just glare at one another, or did they try to do the old stabby stabby?

There is still fire and reload in melee. 

[Ned Cookson]

Thanks for the correction Koro.  I haven't seen obvious signs of shooting in melee so far.

[CaptainKanundrum]

I have had cases where two units are in melee and do not fire at one another, nor does anyone really die. Usually happens in wooded areas. Should i be reporting this with f11?