Cavalry and BB+vassals

[unmerged(21239)]

Does cavalry have any impact on battles in forests or mountains or even sieges?

They seem to suffer casualties but I am not sure they are actually fighting.

Also does my BB rating have any impact on diplo-vassalizing provinces? My reputation is slightly tarnished as Austria and I would like to vassalize Genoa.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Thistletooth]

Does cavalry have any impact on battles in forests or mountains or even sieges?

They seem to suffer casualties but I am not sure they are actually fighting.

Also does my BB rating have any impact on diplo-vassalizing provinces? My reputation is slightly tarnished as Austria and I would like to vassalize Genoa.

Thanks in advance!

Cavalry always fights in any pitched battle (not an assault). They suffer a penalty to their attacks in forests, swamps, and mountains, but, especially early on, their combat ratings are usually still higher than infantry's. Having more cavalry can still randomly give your whole army a combat bonus, regardless of terrain.

Your BB rating impacts all peace negotiations, and as diplo-vassalizing at perfect BB is pretty dicey, BB makes a sizable difference. But unless you have a higher DIP rating and a much, much stronger economy, you should never expect anyone to give in to a diplo-vassalation.

 

[Chaingun]

I think the rule is that if you have twice as much cavalry as you opponent you get a shock bonus. They do get penalties in rough terrain so preferred places for fighting with cavalry armies are plains and deserts (forests are reasonably good also).

Early on you generally keep all out cavalry armies when possible and if you can afford them. (Like mentioned, you cannot use cavalry to assault and infantry is the cheaper and equally effective alternative for sieges.) Cavalry starts off way better than infantry but their stats remain relatively constant while infantry improve throughout the game. This means in the middle and latter stages of EU2 (assuming you keep up in land tech), your armies should instead consist of a mainstay of infantry with only enough cavalry to get the shock bonus.

There is one last crucial advantage for cavalry though; an all out cavalry army is twice as fast as any army containing infantry. This makes cavalry excellent for pillaging, scouting, rebel control, pursuit of fleeing enemies and other situations where speed can gain the day for you.

 

[DSYoungEsq]

Having more cavalry can still randomly give your whole army a combat bonus, regardless of terrain.

This is incorrect, and there is nothing "random" about the system. You do not receive the bonus from having twice as many cavalry as your opponent unless you are fighting in either Desert or Plains terrain.

 

[unmerged(45766)]

Cavalry always fights in any pitched battle (not an assault).

They do not fight in an assault, but they do receive their share of the losses. (as if they were dismounting to replace a part of the losses of infantry ).

 

[unmerged(38752)]

There is one last crucial advantage for cavalry though; an all out cavalry army is twice as fast as any army containing infantry. This makes cavalry excellent for pillaging, scouting, rebel control, pursuit of fleeing enemies and other situations where speed can gain the day for you.

This is incorrect I think. A pure cavalry army is 5 days faster than a pure infantry army, not twice as fast.

 

[unmerged(3931)]

This is incorrect I think. A pure cavalry army is 5 days faster than a pure infantry army, not twice as fast.

Cavalry is generally twice as fast for someone trying to always avoid movement attrition. Without attrition, infantry can usually move one province per month. Cavalry can often times move two provinces per month. Technically infantry are 1.5 times slower in movement when compared to cavalry.

 

[unmerged(38752)]

Cavalry is generally twice as fast for someone trying to always avoid movement attrition. Without attrition, infantry can usually move one province per month. Cavalry can often times move two provinces per month. Technically infantry are 1.5 times slower in movement when compared to cavalry.

Hmmm well 1.5 is also a good possibility. I generally calculate when my armies will arrive for plains provinces (very important with the cavalry in the shock phase) and I know it takes infantry 15 days to enter a plains province and cavalry 10 days.

 

[unmerged(3931)]

I have listed a FAQ in my signature about the troop movement times.

 

[unmerged(38752)]

I have listed a FAQ in my signature about the troop movement times.

Thanks. I knew I'd read that one before but couldn't remember where I saw it. Will be bookmarked.

 

[unmerged(21239)]

Thanks all...

I have not been using cavalry at all in woods or mountains. Anyone know by what percentage cavalry effectiveness is reduced in woods or mountains?

I will wait for my BB to drop before attempting to vassalize Genoa. I don't want to invade Corfu so I would rather vassalize.

 

[unmerged(45766)]

Thanks all...

I have not been using cavalry at all in woods or mountains. Anyone know by what percentage cavalry effectiveness is reduced in woods or mountains?

Not precisely, but a big one. In mountains, cavalry are useless, point. Especially once infantry gets a fire phase.

In forests, cavalry can win the day, early on, in big numbers. But again, once infantry gets a fire phase, cavalry is very quickly doomed (but very high numbers can still matter).

I will wait for my BB to drop before attempting to vassalize Genoa. I don't want to invade Corfu so I would rather vassalize.

Corfu ? or Corsica ?

Do you have any coast ? If not (or if yes, but of only a few provinces), go to war against Genoa (with a siege leader and/or artillery, as Liguria is hard to besiege). Take Liguria, and wait. Genoa, if they still have ships, should send small armies to reclaim Liguria, and in time you can build up your warscore quite high.
But this strategy needs time and patience.

 

[unmerged(6147)]

Nah, cavalry is not useless in mountains. Early on they are not that bad and later on they can still be useful.

I remember some games where I towards the end have to attack the Knights in Rhodes. As befits them they often have many "knights" as one is used to see them, i.e. cavalry. Even if it is the 18th century. And I now and then lose to them in my first attack. Despite having overwhelming strength in the fire phase. I lose on moral. Of course, they have defensive bonus and mountain bonus and so on, but the fact remains, a 50k all cavalry army can still beat an invading say 60/0/100 army. I have seen it happen although I do not remember the exact army compositions.

 

[unmerged(21239)]

Cavalry

From the comments I am reading, it seems cavalry improves morale of the army? Any FAQ's on cavalry/infantry morale out there where I can do some reading?

 

[unmerged(45766)]

Cavalry and infantry have the same morale. I don't know where you saw otherwise.

Go in the subforum on MultiPlayers. Go to the stickies, and search the links for Ryo ken79's guides (there's one on economy, and one on strategy and tactics). Both are very good. Designed for MP, but useful (a lot) in SP too.

 

[unmerged(3931)]

IIRC, by the old board game rules, cavalry have half the shock and fire in mountains and forest. Man for man, that still makes them better at shock than infantry even in mountains. When the fire phase is first introduced into the game, it is good to have some infantry in battles, otherwise you lose battles. Regardless of whether you win the battle, cavalry are the best at chewing your enemy up. Cavalry are faster; they can retreat from those high attrition zones. I make use of almost all cavalry armies.

Infantry are mostly useful for a small composition in battle to have fire phase activity. They are also useful for assaults and are a cheaper way of maintaining some siege forces. Actually cavalry can usually bounce between sieges, keeping two going at once with two cover forces. So cavalry can be cheaper to maintain in terms of number of sieges in progress.

Where you have seen references to cavalry improving morale is in using cavalry to improve the morale of men coming off of a failed assault. After a failed assault, the infantrymen's morale is broken. Merge the infantry with high morale cavalry, separate the infantry once more, and the infantry are ready to return to the assault with higher morale.

The cavalry are not much use to assaults otherwise, so they can be used as morale boosters for infantry with low morale. Cavalry may similarly be used confidently in an assault to slightly boost morale, but only to just tip the balance when an outcome is about to be had. Troops moving through a province under assault are not part of the assault until stopped.

 

[DSYoungEsq]

Your recollection about the tabletop game's version of the rules is correct, Tom. They were also halved in marshes.

Interestingly, in the tabletop game, the fire power values for artillery in the mountains and the forests were halved, as well. I have never looked to see if that is true in either EU or EU2.

 

[unmerged(45766)]

Cavalry has exactly the same penalties in forest and in mountains ? I believed the penalty was heavier in mountains. My wrong.


DSYE, would the boardgame's rules be freely downloadable anywhere ? I've never seen it here in Belgium, and apparently it's interesting in understanding the inner workings of the game...

 

[EvilSanta]

Could someone pleace explain why I cant annex Houginots.I have vassalized them about 20 years ago,I have relations of +200,land border with them and alliance with them.They through are reformed and I am catholic.I was able to diploannex France and loads of others but these darn Hugeonits or whatevers
resist the might of my Burgyndian empire.Id like to have their nice 30k army for use against Orleans that has made itself a true might controlling half of France.

 

[unmerged(45766)]

They through are reformed and I am catholic.

You answered yourself. Until the Edict of Tolerance big event (not France's one, but the one firing aroune 1650-1680), you can't marry a reformed or protestant country if you are catholic (or CRC), and so you can't diplo-annex them*.


* understand this as follows : you don't need to actually have a RM to DA, but you have to be able to conclude a RM with their religion