User avatar
Wraith
Sergeant
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:51 pm

Corps Composition

Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:35 pm

So, a random observation between myself and my PBEM mate: generally, only one division in a corps seems to have participated in any particular engagement. So, is it better to have just two divisions in a corps, or is having more divisions in a corps advisable (all of course assuming having sufficient leadership)?

User avatar
Jim-NC
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:21 pm
Location: Near Region 209, North Carolina

Mon Sep 24, 2012 5:32 pm

The number of troops that participate is based on "frontage". You get the most troops engaged in clear terrain in clear weather, with a great general (Lee or Grant).

As to which is better, if the odds are too heavily stacked against you, you retreat. So if you have 4 divisions in a corps, and your enemy has 2, you can usually push him aside with your larger force without combat (not always however).
Remember - The beatings will continue until morale improves.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

User avatar
Jerzul
Captain
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2010 10:10 pm
Location: Germantown, MD

Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:09 pm

Jim-NC wrote:The number of troops that participate is based on "frontage". You get the most troops engaged in clear terrain in clear weather, with a great general (Lee or Grant).

As to which is better, if the odds are too heavily stacked against you, you retreat. So if you have 4 divisions in a corps, and your enemy has 2, you can usually push him aside with your larger force without combat (not always however).



I think my friend was looking for more detailed analysis. I understand frontage but from experience what is the general position on Corps size. Obviously bigger corps in the east where there is more open terrain but what about the west? Also, is it better to have two large corps or four smaller corps in general? Obviously its situational but we're looking for the generalized opinions of the forum.

Thanks guys!
I have heard, in such a way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the army and the government needed a dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can be dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.

-Abraham Lincoln, 1863, in a letter to Major General Joseph Hooker.

User avatar
Jim-NC
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:21 pm
Location: Near Region 209, North Carolina

Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:36 pm

My personal take then is corps with 2 divisions each as the CSA, and at least 3-4 divisions as the USA. This allows me the maximum amount of land coverage. The game tends to bog down in the east with trench type warfare becoming the norm. The USA player needs to try to outflank the Rebel player, and the Rebel player needs to prevent being outflanked. Thus there is a general lengthing of the lines from an impassible barrier to some location. For example Fredricksburg makes a great end to a line, as the territory to the east (in the peninsula) can't be attacked by land from the north, and the land to the nort can't be attacked from the penisula. Then the armies general move to the west towards West Virgina from that location. In the western theater, 2 or 3 corps + an Army each consisting of 2ish divisions is about all I hope for.

I must say that the above is not a hard and fast rule for me. If I notice that my enemy has 1 or 2 monster corps, I try to match him. If he has lots of small (say 4 or 5) then I match that.
Remember - The beatings will continue until morale improves.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

powcarrot27
Corporal
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 3:16 pm

Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:28 pm

I generally try to triangle method consisting of 3 corps containing 3 divisions. If I have the manpower to spare, I might go to the square method. (4 corps containing 4 divisions)

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3490
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Sat Sep 29, 2012 5:04 pm

Bigger is always better, especially if you are on offense and you try to make a breakthrough. Dont worry abot the frontage in clear and woods. You would have to field armies close to 100.000 men to fill that (if you have a good leader).

User avatar
FENRIS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1463
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:02 am
Location: Marseille (France)

Mon Dec 10, 2012 10:26 pm

just a post to erase the xrunner
[color="#FF8C00"][/color]Eylau 1807

"Rendez-vous, général, votre témérité vous a emporté trop loin ; vous êtes dans nos dernières lignes." (un russe)

" Regardez un peu ces figures-là si elles veulent se rendre !" (Lepic)[color="#FF8C00"][/color][I]
[/I]

General Disaster
Civilian
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 1:54 pm

Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:01 pm

One of the advantages of the Corps is that it should be able to fight on its own until supported. I'm not sure a small 2 Div corps can do that very effectively. I usually try to go with 3 Div corps if I expect them to do the fighting. You could use a 2 Div corps as a reserve though.

Return to “AACW Strategy discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests