Was is really difficult to make soldiers in WWI get out of the trenches against the enemy entrenched line when 100 years before, columns of soldiers would walk up towards each other and shoot at each other without cover?

by [deleted]

I have to admit that the way rifle and musket shooters would walk up to each and just shoot, without protection, cover or anything is difficult for me to understand. It defies all logic doesn't it? Wasn't it better to just charge or go back to bows and arrows for quicker shooting? If I remember my history correctly, the French took quite a beating at Crécy due to the slow Lombard crossbow shooters.

The whole way of doing battle at the end of the 18th, and the beginning of the 19th century, make absolutely no sense to me. It also made me reconsider how much convincing a soldier in WWI really needed to get out of the trench and get shot. After all, it's not that much different from how war was fought 100 years ago no?

EDIT: Grammar.

elos_

Well you just asked a few big questions, so I want to clarify. Are you asking about why line formation made sense in the 18th century and early 19th, are you asking why men bothered shooting at each other and didn't "just charge or go back to bows", or are you asking what the difference was between 18th century warfare and trench assaults ("After all, it's not that much different from how war was fought 100 years ago no?") or are you asking how hard it was to get men out of trenches? Or all the above?