Shouldn't I keep mounted units even after tanks etc. are fully researched ?

[Eichenthal]

Title sais it all. Even after all late-game-unit enhancing techs/ inventions are through, mounted units are still superior in flanking ability.

If manpower and upkeep aren't an issue, why shouldn't I keep them for the extra bonus against small enemy forces ?

Am I missing something?

 

[delra]

They can be replaced with airplanes.

 

[Eichenthal]

for recon purpose that is true. But what about flanking (superior maneuver values)?

 

[DominusNovus]

If manpower and upkeep aren't an issue, and you're fighting small enemy forces, shouldn't you be crushing them anyway?

 

[grommile]

for recon purpose that is true. But what about flanking (superior maneuver values)?

With late-game combat frontage, flanking becomes... rather less of a concern.

 

[Closet Skeleton]

1 hussar and engineer brigade per stack of mobilised farmers for occupying territory is a lot cheaper than planes and tanks. You should only need one army of expensive units per front as a hammer.

 

[GAGA Extrem]

With late-game combat frontage, flanking becomes... rather less of a concern.

This.
Late game frontage is very low, so it is highly unlikely that you will be able to flank the enemy.
You will rather see that most of the forces stand idle because they can't reach the frontline.

 

[Pkaem]

for recon purpose that is true. But what about flanking (superior maneuver values)?

Mix in guards. They are good as flanking units in late game armys because of their maneuver stat HoD gave them.