AGEOD Forums

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)?

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).

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!

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.

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)

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).

just a post to erase the xrunner

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.