Wounds in Napoleonic Battles (Notice Bayonet Wounds)

[[N]Avon Ulysses]

I think someone has raided Sloops wine cellar, what he is saying seems to make sense.

I agree about the problem of making weaker line battalions cheaper. The better answer may be to increase the numbers per battalion to compensate.
With the Turks this would be an ideal solution as their armies contained masses of ‘ill trained levee’ types. But even with the Russians it might not be too much of a stretch.
This would certainly give them more potential in the charge, being able to absorb the losses & then win with superior numbers.

[[N]Felix]

I think you've already dispelled your concern with the quotes at the top Clinch - Bayonet wounds were harder to inflict because of the difficulty in charging and making contact, but once in combat they were more deadly. Especially when some of those stats are of wounded veterans and not fatalities. Also remember many a musketball wound would have merely been flesh wounds, thus allowing the combatant to continue fighting, whereas bayonets generally go for the vitals which unfortunately are harder to put up with.

[[N]BdColonel]

I think you've already dispelled your concern with the quotes at the top Clinch - Bayonet wounds were harder to inflict because of the difficulty in charging and making contact, but once in combat they were more deadly. Especially when some of those stats are of wounded veterans and not fatalities. Also remember many a musketball wound would have merely been flesh wounds, thus allowing the combatant to continue fighting, whereas bayonets generally go for the vitals which unfortunately are harder to put up with.

I wonder if the ineffectiveness of melee was not mainly due to the type of weapon and the training the average soldier had with it. A musket + bayonet is basically a short, heavy, unwieldy spear, in the hands of an untrained man. It's pretty obvious that its attack moves are limited to thrusting its sharp point forward, or just using it as a club (not too easy when in a tight formation of men). Hardly an impressive weapon melee-wise. So as in ancient times, it would fare poorly as an offensive weapon, and only be really good as a defense against cavalry.

[[N]Sloop]

I would venture to guess that a modestly trained soldier vs a highly trained soldier would have little chance in a bayonet fight. If you include the effects of moral the chances for the lesser soldier would diminish greatly. Also there is physical prowess that would have some effect, and the more "elite" soldier might also posses this advantage. I have had minimal exposure to bayonet training and I will say that should I be confronted by a better trained and more determined soldier wielding a bayonet I would immediately run away. Should this fellow choose to emit a vocal response to accompany the event, I would be sure to increase my speed without hesitation...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxQKF2gkMgo