The Lyon's Roar

How is this calculated? I assume that muskets are better than rifles in melee because of buck and ball ammo, making them into shotguns at close range. Rifles do worse because it takes (or should take) more time to load a rifled musket than a smooth-bore musket, however if that is the rationale shouldn't breech-loading or magazine fed rifles be even better in melee, since they take less time to load and fire? Melee's weren't all hand-to-hand combat (I've seen estimates that as few as 1% of all CW wounds were caused by bayonets, for example), there was a lot of close range shooting, and I feel the weapon ratings should reflect that better. Thoughts?

The "moat" is most certainly Stevens Run (or as we called it, "The Tiber") it's not much of a much, only a foot or so deep. Even during times of heavy rains it doesn't get much deeper than 2-4 feet at most.

I'd love to see British/French troops added to it, because Trent Affair gone horribly wrong.

Wilson's Creek, Ball's Bluff, Belmont, Roanoke Island, Pea Ridge are but a few that'd be good additions.

I'd like to see more prisoners be exchanged for additional recruits 1,000 seems a tad low when you can sometimes come away with 3-4k prisoners. Also, to have the ability to capture and exchange enemy leaders for additional recruits (a Colonel is worth 50 men, a Brigadier General worth 100, for example).

I believe the proper term is "nerfed". I agree that the bonuses given to units behind cover seems a bit too high. I was playing Fredericksburg and managed to outflank the Marye's Heights line on the Union left and even with units firing enfilade into the cover, they didn't do much if any damage and if I tried to melee into those areas (even from the flank or rear), my guys took horrendous losses.