When combat width is 24 I usually run 12/1 stacks and combine for battles. For 25 CW I add an extra infantry. When considering cost, should I be running 1 more or less cav, or keep the same comp? In other words, would adding 2 more cavs to a battle save more money than not adding them?
Army Comp Question
- Thread starter bly08
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
4 CAV is standard in early - mid game Europe. If you don't have any CAV bonus and full CW, you should have 2 cav at each flank so your enemy doesn't flank you out.
Since shock damage is so important early game and cav have higher shock damage you should make use of it.
You can drop the CAV in lategame, but 'till then 4 to 6 cavalry is Meta.
Since shock damage is so important early game and cav have higher shock damage you should make use of it.
You can drop the CAV in lategame, but 'till then 4 to 6 cavalry is Meta.
Better go for 10/2. If you combine 12/1, the cav will be not used. Since they'll start at backrow/reserve. Also when caught offguard, the smaller stack has a better fighting chance due cav on both side
Wait what, I thought all the cavalries goes in front first and the excess infantry goes to backrow.
iirc inf get deployed first, then the cav. If you go full micro lvl, you'll go inf =their frontrow numbers and 4cav
Before fire really kicks in I don't see why people use to little cav.
Taking it up to 50% if you can afford it or going even higher can be really beneficial when shock is really golden. Even in later periods one can run shock armies supported by artillery.
Taking it up to 50% if you can afford it or going even higher can be really beneficial when shock is really golden. Even in later periods one can run shock armies supported by artillery.
Was the bug where units other than cannons do damage from the backrow fixed? In 1.22 this bug made deliberate back-row infantry a viable choice.
This is probably boring AF but I just go full combat width infantry and reinforce with yet more infantry. More cost effective, and in later years the initial fire damage makes it even better. Sometimes though it is fun, when playing a rich euro nation, to cav heavy armies.
This 'algorithm' is not precise and often wrong. We did some extensive deployement logic testing in 1.22 but couldn't come to conclusive results. I may pick it up again now, as I'm working on updating and expanding my guides. (And most of the warfare information is horribly outdated in the wiki)
Last edited:
Should I still run a bigger frontline than the CW in that case besides to make up for attrition before the battle?
Even though 4 cavs deal more damage, they need to do more damage or prevent more casualties than having 10 infantry. I don't know if that's ever the case so I usually only use the cavs at the start of the game since deleting them would be lighting money on fire. I'm learning towards keeping the same comp in this case if the wiki is wrong about deployment.
I do notice the difference when I always 4 cav flank but the micro requirement is exhausting. As a result I prefer not caring about cab unless I have CCA NI, sometimes not even then.
It seems that I'm the only one who's going to say, go with 33% Cav. So if you've got width of 24, it's tech level 6. Which means fire is shite, and Cav rules in Shock, I'll go with 16/8. More efficient use of manpower.
yes, fixed.
Early on, for rebel hunting or wars in general you should try to make stacks that have equal amount of infantry then the combine inf+cav of enemy stack, then add 4 cavalry to that amount.
example: if enemy stack has 16 inf and 4 cavalry, you should go for 20 infantry and 4 cavalry.
YOUR cavalry will flank then, and THEIRS won't.
its micro heavy, but enemies and rebels MELT if you take time tomicro stacks before doing a battle.
more then 4 cavalry is situational useful (hordes, nations with cavalry bonus combined with rolling in dosh).