AGEOD Forums

We all know what sharpshooters do for a stack but what I would like to know is what do indians do in this game (they sure can't fight very well) unless they are just used to run around the desert as raiders.

Also Texas Rangers are irregulars also....what is thier specialty in this game.

Is there anywhere all the irregulars are listed with thier attributes?

Indians are good in an ambush,

Rangers are a faster militia/partisan troop

And very useful to break RR at little cost !
I like to send 3 or 4 Rangers in Illinois, Missouri and Indiana in order to slow down the reinforcement of the Union forces around St-Louis, Cairo or Bowling Green.

Know how to set an ambush but what is the best Posture to use?
Using v1.09a, with both rows of Postures buttons.

Thanks!

Texas Rangers are very useful as cheap cavalry (5$ 5mp). I always have a lot of them and sometimes form into a division under someone with cavalry bonus like McCulloch.

Indians are very costly in CPs when they join a regular troop / leader.

I believe only Watie can lead them properly. In case he is in command they cost 0 CPs!

All this troops can also be used as cheap 2nd line garrisons if you are interested in doing so...

Texas Rangers are classified as 'raiders' family, so I don't think a Cav leader will give them benefit. In fact, they even move a 'light foot', rater than as 'light horse'.

Indian units have a command cost of 0 anyway. They only cost more when in a stack without an indian leader
[this is the 'multi-faction command rule', wher an ability can be designed that allows a leader to command other factions. You may see the same syndrome if any f the Foreign troops sneak into yor army without a foreign leader]

lodilefty wrote:Texas Rangers are classified as 'raiders' family, so I don't think a Cav leader will give them benefit. In fact, they even move a 'light foot', rater than as 'light horse'.

Yes, i had noticed this, too. But their unit picture is misleading.
At first i used to stack them with cavalry like GlobalExplorer until i realized that they were slowing down the Cav stack on plain terrain and being slowed down by the cav on rough terrain like hills.
Now i used them mostly as independent raiders, specially in areas with difficult terrain.
Regards

arsan wrote:Yes, i had noticed this, too. But their unit picture is misleading.
At first i used to stack them with cavalry like GlobalExplorer until i realized that they were slowing down the Cav stack on plain terrain and being slowed down by the cav on rough terrain like hills.
Now i used them mostly as independent raiders, specially in areas with difficult terrain.
Regards

Everything that sits on a horse is not Cavalry....

arsan wrote:Yes, i had noticed this, too. But their unit picture is misleading.

somewhat ..

arsan wrote: .. until i realized that they were slowing down the Cav stack on plain terrain and being slowed down by the cav on rough terrain like hills.

Oh dear .. I did not know that

Anyway McCulloch must be a great leader, he is still doing well with his division

I wouldnt use Texas Ragers or Indians as assault groups, or rely on them in a battle. they are small units, and are best set to avoid combat. I usally use them to just ride around and soft cap cities from the Union, or as above, use them to destroy enemy rail lines in key positions.

stars&bars wrote:I usally use them to just ride around and soft cap cities from the Union, or as above, use them to destroy enemy rail lines in key positions.

I believe Rangers can't capture cities.

Yes they can.
Indians and irregulars (bullwhackers and the like) cannot and besides will burn depots automatically.
Rangers work like normal units in this regard.

arsan wrote:(bullwhackers .

bullwhackers are from spain (aka torreros)
and bushwackers are from the civil war

DirkX wrote:bullwhackers are from spain (aka torreros)
and bushwackers are from the civil war

But, wait, i can also play your game: its "toreros" not "torreros"
Regards

Olé !!! *cue spanish bullfighting music*

GlobalExplorer wrote:Texas Rangers are very useful as cheap cavalry (5$ 5mp). I always have a lot of them and sometimes form into a division under someone with cavalry bonus like McCulloch.

lodilefty wrote:Everything that sits on a horse is not Cavalry....

--Here's another new player question about the Cavalryman bonus. Does it apply to the horse artillery???(or must I add an artillerist to get a bonus?) What about the mounted partisans, the ones that have the light cavalry Nato symbol? The reason that I ask is because I get confused by the 'cavalry' description in various places to describe the various elements such as raiders/rangers.

While on the subject, should the ranger be considered as militia for a leader bonus(I'm thinking of militiamen like Price)?

lodilefty wrote:Everything that sits on a horse is not Cavalry....

What a great line!
I needed a good laugh. Thanks