Should 2 forces set to defense posture fight?

[mikee64]

Don't remember seeing this before, but not sure, see attached.

[wiltaz]

Maybe they were sitting across the field from one another hurling insults and more Union guys got their feelings hurt than confederates.

[mayonaise]

i would interpret it as a precipitous action, where neither side intended for there to be a conflict but overzealous subordinates or misinterpreted orders caused a conflict to happen. with two armies within striking distane of eachother things can definitely get out of control, no matter their "stance"

[mikee64]

Don't get me wrong here guys, I am not saying it should not happen or is not WAD. I just have seen it happen in 1.06g all of a sudden and do not remember it happening recently before that. In fact it happened again on the same turn resolution, I just missed it in a quick review of the messages trying to get it back to my partner - see attached.

[McNaughton]

Looking at the casualty rates, they seem to be very low (low for a battle in my opinion). It may be, that such defensive postures result in minor skirmishes, and half hearted attempts at conflict, rather than a full scale battle you might see when one or both are on offensive stance. Loosing 1000 men (this is KIA, Wounded, MIA and stragglers) isn't a very large amount. Also, it appears that most 'damage' was done at range, meaning that there were probably long-range rifle/artillery duels, with very little close combat.

[Pocus]

If one of the two side has a small stack in offensive, he could have triggered that without reporting the whole side as being in offensive, if you understand what I mean.

[mikee64]

Makes perfect sense, thanks!

[johnnycai]

Also, a battle can be triggered by a stack moving into a enemy-controlled region with <5% control by your side. Moving into a region you dont control 'forces' you to offensive posture with significant penalties.
Happened to me, and was explained by Pocus as the cause.

John