Still not understanding Army Width

[Andasen_]

Hi. So i read a lot about battle mechanics of eu4 but army width is the most confusing of them all. I mean i understand that if you have 24 cw you can have 24 inf+cav in the front row and 24 cannons in the back but all of the thread i've read always assuming you have fully fill your combat width.

So, here's the situation when i am fighting the Ottomans, i checked their army composition and it's 18000 inf, 2000 cav, and 18000 artillery while having 24 i belive cw and they did not have any artillery casualty, which makes me question my knowledge about combat width again, (and they absolutely wrecked my army btw).

And here's the question, does the amount of artillery just need to be at least the same or less than the amount of inf+cav to be *ENTIRELY* be placed in the back or there's still some of the artillery that will be placed in the front to fill the cw?

 

[Kapi96]

Artillery deploys to the 2nd row by default. It would only appear on the 1st row in order to prevent the 2nd row from being larger than the 1st. You're not penalised for having a balanced army below the combat width (unless they other army is bigger, then you kind of are).

 

[Andasen_]

Artillery deploys to the 2nd row by default. It would only appear on the 1st row in order to prevent the 2nd row from being larger than the 1st. You're not penalised for having a balanced army below the combat width (unless they other army is bigger, then you kind of are).

I see, so for example i have 12 cw, qnd i fill it with 6 inf and 3 artillery. So there's going to be 2 row with front row populated by 6 inf and back row with 3 artillery? Because if it is, then it's going to be revolutionary for my games. I always trying to fill my front row first with inf before adding any artillery, if that's the case then i could just do 20/0/20 army composition no matter what

 

[Destaloss]

It's always good to have some infantry extra to the combat width in case of casualties.
This way the 1st row won't be filled up with artillery.
If you match or exceed the combat width cavalry is usually also great damage-wise.

 

[JoãoII]

I play eu4, hoi4, imperator rome and i didn't understand the army width in any of them lol

 

[Kapi96]

I see, so for example i have 12 cw, qnd i fill it with 6 inf and 3 artillery. So there's going to be 2 row with front row populated by 6 inf and back row with 3 artillery? Because if it is, then it's going to be revolutionary for my games. I always trying to fill my front row first with inf before adding any artillery, if that's the case then i could just do 20/0/20 army composition no matter what

Yep, that's how it works. It would be 6 on the front and 3 artillery at the back.

Although maximising your front row is still the best idea. If the combat width is 24 and your 20-0-20 army comes up against a 20-4-24 army they're going to be at a distinct disadvantage.

I'm not 100% sure but I believe cavalry is more effective against armies that don't max out the front row too, makes it easier to flank.

 

[Blackmoore]

Yep, that's how it works. It would be 6 on the front and 3 artillery at the back.

Although maximising your front row is still the best idea. If the combat width is 24 and your 20-0-20 army comes up against a 20-4-24 army they're going to be at a distinct disadvantage.

I'm not 100% sure but I believe cavalry is more effective against armies that don't max out the front row too, makes it easier to flank.

Contrary to some discussion on the web, cavalry is always powerful and should be in all of your "main" armies -- i.e. armies used to attack other armies, rather than reinforce or siege forts.

Cav is even better now that the AI will more optimally populate combat positioning (no more back line cav).

That being said -- YES, any time you have cav and your combat width is greater than their combat width, your cavalry will be melting faces. Cav can attack directly in front of them, and one unit to the side (except for special cases like Kazan that has extra cav flanking ideas).

 

[Kapi96]

Contrary to some discussion on the web, cavalry is always powerful and should be in all of your "main" armies -- i.e. armies used to attack other armies, rather than reinforce or siege forts.

Cav is even better now that the AI will more optimally populate combat positioning (no more back line cav).

That being said -- YES, any time you have cav and your combat width is greater than their combat width, your cavalry will be melting faces. Cav can attack directly in front of them, and one unit to the side (except for special cases like Kazan that has extra cav flanking ideas).

I know cavalry is powerful, but doesn't it lose out to infantry on a bang for your buck basis (assuming you have no ideas boosting cav)? So if you've got the money, definitely use it. But if you're hard up for cash getting to your force limit with infantry would be better than being below your force limit using cav though, right?

 

[Blackmoore]

I know cavalry is powerful, but doesn't it lose out to infantry on a bang for your buck basis (assuming you have no ideas boosting cav)? So if you've got the money, definitely use it. But if you're hard up for cash getting to your force limit with infantry would be better than being below your force limit using cav though, right?

I can come up with scenarios where it makes sense to drop cav for infantry, right. For example, I could have a small force limit, but I need to Siege a Lvl 3 fort to win my first war. That means I need realistically 10 regiments to maintain a siege. If my force limit is only 12 because I'm an OPM it make no sense to put Cav in my army.

However, all things being equal, Cav out damages infantry by a significant margin until late tech where infantry starts to close the gap a bit. A good bit of this is because of the flanking.

In addition, it isn't just ideas that give bonuses to Cav. For example, Eastern Tech group has more Cav pips than Western Tech and you can also build Cossack Cav units, which are elite Cav with more shock damage (not terrain limited like Horde). Moreover, even moderate estate loyalty and influence with Cossack Estate will get you +10% cav combat ability, bump it up a bit more and you can get -10% cost discount on cav too.

 

[leefnmajors]

Just to clarify; artillery will go to the back by preference, not by default. If you engage an army that doesn't fill the front line, sometimes you will see artillery deployed into the front row to allow it to be able to flank (keep in mind, artillery has the ability to hit 1 extra target compared to cavalry) with full attack power from the front line. This usually isn't an issue because battles against such an inferior force will typically be fast, but it can upset your lines if the opposing army gets reinforced. So watch the bait stacks.

As re-iterated above, unless it's really late game (like tech 26 and above), the emphasis should be on filling your combat width first before you purchase a single cannon outside of a few for sieges.

And the real problem with cavalry is fire phase comes first; it begins at tech 13 (cannons get more fire/morale pips and can make large contributions to the front row) and is really noticeable at level 17 (artillery gets a full +1 to fire). Since that first phase is always fire, in a match up of two armies fighting at full deployment/width with equal modifiers, the cavalry units (with poor to no fire pips depending on unit/tech group) will always start with less manpower before they ever get a chance to do real damage in the shock phase. It's not even about the cav vs the infantry 1v1, it's because the artillery runs them off the field. You need tons of bonuses to keep your cav durable enough to not be a complete waste after a few rounds of fire, and you would be better off combat and econ wise just going for infantry/artillery/fire bonuses instead.

 

[Shiny Dog]

And the real problem with cavalry is fire phase comes first; it begins at tech 13 (cannons get more fire/morale pips and can make large contributions to the front row) and is really noticeable at level 17 (artillery gets a full +1 to fire). Since that first phase is always fire, in a match up of two armies fighting at full deployment/width with equal modifiers, the cavalry units (with poor to no fire pips depending on unit/tech group) will always start with less manpower before they ever get a chance to do real damage in the shock phase.

Cavalry are extremely allergic to cannons in particular. That extra fire is devastating on their pips. Nomads are the only ones with a halfway decent fire defense.
The only saving grace is that cannons start in the center while cavalry start on the sides. A fully decked out Inf+Art stack will turn your horses into mincemeat.