Note the overcoat and shelter quarter strapped to the top and sides of the bulky cowhide back pack.īy the spring of 1915, heavy casualties made reinforcing regiments to their prewar levels difficult. These soldiers are in full marching gear, about 60 pounds of equipment.

ø The Great War Association (reenactor info)Ī squad of Saxon soldiers in a group photo, circa August 1914.Rank Insignia of the German Army, 1914-1918.Organization of the German Army, August 1914.Reorganization of the German Army, 1914-1918Īrtist's Impression of an assault during the Battle of Verdun, 1916 I mean no offense, the devs have done a wonderful job so far of incorporating a WW1 experience into a game, but I think it could still be improved.Trenches on the Web - Special: Reorganization of the German Army, 1914-1918 It would also be harder for any single player (MG for example) to wipe out an entire enemy team (or most of it), whether attacking or defending, if the maps were fuller. And if attacking, there is plenty of space in Nomansland, and when you get to the enemy trench you are creating your own space by taking the trench. This would mean more pressure on the defenders, but fewer gaps in the defense, in which case one might not have to maneouver around so much. You are trying to spread out an entire battalion of casualties that would be over 200 yards of frontage into the narrow frontage ingame by sacrificing the troop density of the map.īy having more players, more would be attacking and defending at any given time. The reason the battles feel intense is because those deaths occur all in a short frontage over 15 waves or more. I think it should be the troop density of the maps, not the total number of deaths and respawns that determines the player size for the map. I doubt real attacks sent as many waves per time, since more men were needed to be effective in a single wave. That is probably typical for games (people want to play).

Now if as the player I am representing 15 waves of soldiers, fine. How wide are the maps? 16 men aside is a low number for the frontage.Īlso that is total death toll (combined Allies and Central)?Īn attacking battalion would attack in waves, and ingame that is somewhat respresented by respawning, limited to the size of the team (which is low), but happens more often (so the player can die more (500/32 = averages 15-16 deaths a player. Any increase is a good increase, I think for a more authentic WW1 experience. I would be okay with the devs implementing a squad at time to test the playability and communty reaction to an increase in players. increase players per match.) I also like a creative suggestion that the squads get an additional rifle role (squads of 5) so that specialized roles as MGs or NCO's are diffused a bit more and still have more players (also slightly closer to historical values since most soldiers were standard rifle equipped). I know people before have already screamed 'Unplayable' and that there might be concerns about networking or lag, or the amount of NCO abilities reigning (raining? ) havoc and chaos, but as the game performence has improved I would like to see if is possible to get closer to those values (i.e. Now I don't know how wide the trench frontage is for the maps in game, but for just 16 people a side currently to cover the whole tench seems low to me (even for Argonne). Only in the late war did it become possible to reduce the troop density to 1 man per 5-6 yards, due to the exhaustion of the German defences. I would estimate that earlier war troop densities were higher (near shoulder to shoulder) until the tactics became outdated. Now in actual practice attack manpower averaged 500 men per batallion covering 200-600 yards of front (1918 figures). Scrolling up gives some more figures but this says that official reccomended densities are 3-5 per yard (this includes reserves and support roles). Winning and Losing on the Western Front: The British Third Army and the Defeat of Germany in 1918 Here are some numbers:īattle Tactics of the Western Front: The British Army's Art of Attack, 1916-18 ĥ000 men per mile = roughly 2.8 per yard (probably includes support roles) Okay so I googled 'western front troop density' and found some book results. Similarly the defending trench would usually be filled as well with no gaps. Yeah the battles currently are intense and players sometimes bunch up as part of tactics, but the whole attacking line should feel bunched up. I have said before that Verdun to me as a WW1 game experience still feels quite empty compared to the actual war. Okay I finally found some research to back me up some.

Verdun battle size