tfw Conqueror's Blade can do a better job of battle tactics and formations than the sequel to Mount and Blade.
That wasn't my compliant, which was what you quoted out of the context of the post.The complaint was that after a difficult battle, you need to rebuild your army for a looooong time. You are kinda besides the topic here
Loose formation almost never made sense in IRL warfare and the fact that it's almost always the best option in BL is a factor of bad collision/animation physics more than tactics.
I'm tempted to reach out to Shad (Shadiversity) to ask specifically about loose infantry formations.A question... How does a Roman legionary throw a pilum, if he is standing shoulder to shoulder in a tight formation? You can try this yourself at home... try waving a broomstick above your head without knocking over furniture. The gladius is the close combat weapon for when formations tighten, and it's short for a sword.
In game I use loose formation for the same reason that IRL formations often allowed space prior to contact - to allow for effective deployment of weapons, and to allow for manoeuvre through ranks. Try withdrawing your archers through a shield wall - it works about as well as it would have IRL - 1/3 of the poor archers end up stuck running in a stationery position tangled up with the heavy infantry.
But I agree with you, some of the animation physics are crazy - I saw a horse fly 20 meters in the air the other day from an arrow.
However, I haven't seen anything in the historical record to suggest that legionaries ever defended against attack in loose formation. That's kinda goofy.