minipol wrote:From all of the above (and my own experience), some points:
- Independent force: use 'standard' div: Inf/some Cav/SS/4 art
- Div in a corps: more inf is possible, cav can be retained or use a cav div in the army.
6 lbs and 12 lbs in Div, 10 lbs and 20 lbs guns in the Corps.
- Army: some units to absorb hits, 10 lbs and 20 lbs guns in the Army.
planefinder wrote:Divisions on the other hand, as long as they retain at least one element (I believe), will eventually get replacement elements for their losses.
Gray Fox wrote:Great GS! We agree to disagree. That's what discussions are for. We both love a superb game from a struggle that is largely overlooked, even though the battles have their 150th anniversary. Play the game any way that brings you pleasure. Try Heavy Infantry Divisions, or don't. As Grant said, "Let us have peace."
minipol, I never said it was going to be a free ride. "Some assembly required" You either want an army that can take out the Union capital in '62 to win the game, or you can fight the war historically. I think that most historians agree that plan didn't work out too well for the South.
minipol wrote:There is one downside to the whole thing. You have to keep the Corps and army in the same or adjacent regions.
My style has Armies and Corps sometimes spread by 2 regions, sometimes more. Then the cav div in the army is no good. In such a case, it's better to have some cav in the divs in the corps, as well as a sniper.
As for arty, you could place those heavy guns with the corps.
As the CSA you are bound to have mixed divs because you don't have the luxury of buying exactely the art you need at the start. You need some art to stop the immediate threats. Later, it gets harder to avoid units without 6 lbs or 12lbs guns. These get in the mix as well.
How would a 3 NY brigade C/I/I/I/6 with sharpshooters and a 12 pounder hold up? In an ideal world, I suppose I would rather see less "mixed" brigades as construction options and just recruit individual elements.
GraniteStater wrote:My only real dissent is that if there is little, very little to be gained from integrated Arty, or Cav, for that matter, in a Div, and 'loose' Art or Cav (within stacks, corps or otherwise) can rule the day, then why bother building Divs at all, other than CPs? I see gray Fox ending up with 16 Inf & a Mortar, or something like that. why bother with command structure or combined arms at all? Just build tons & tons of six Inf reg'mt, one Big Boom-Boom & a Cav element, lead 'em with two or three single stars and you're off to the races.
I read your post with great care & think I see your points, with one caveat - if the inf gets to close range - what, unhurt? That's what DivArty is for- go ahead, assault me -
range is a product of unit type not oob structure. So a long range unit in a division will fire at the same range as a long range unit in a corps. But ... the key is target selection. Everything in a division will fire at the target of that division, which means you may (probably will) waste the advantage of longer range fire due to to target allocation algorithm.
Narwhal from the AJE Targeting thread
Note, for non-AJE purposes, that the “unit” is taken at the division level ; so having artillery in your division makes sure that that artillery actually shoot at enemy combat division and not support division
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests