Grouping Question

[Pemberton1]

What is an effective grouping under an officer? I've tried to keep every division, and thus every corps, grouped with a good variety of units. For instance, my average division consists of several infantry groups, a sharpshooter unit, a cavalry unit or two, and an artillery unit or two. I am curious if this is the best way to go about it, as several of the battle and region scenarios have divisions of only infantry and corps of only cavalry. In the East Coast '62 scenario, E. P. Alexander starts out in control of most of the artillery in Virginia. What is the purpose of this? Does artillery work better concentrated this way? Thanks.

[Major Tom]

What is an effective grouping under an officer? I've tried to keep every division, and thus every corps, grouped with a good variety of units. For instance, my average division consists of several infantry groups, a sharpshooter unit, a cavalry unit or two, and an artillery unit or two. I am curious if this is the best way to go about it, as several of the battle and region scenarios have divisions of only infantry and corps of only cavalry. In the East Coast '62 scenario, E. P. Alexander starts out in control of most of the artillery in Virginia. What is the purpose of this? Does artillery work better concentrated this way? Thanks.

I don't think there's any right or wrong answer to this, but here's my take --

You've got the right idea -- mostly infantry, one or two cavalry, one sharpshooter, and some artillery. Most people would go for more than 1 or 2 per division though. I shoot for 3 or 4, and some players like lots more than that.

I can't imagine what use a cavalry corps would be, but there are good uses for independent divisions of just cavalry and horse artillery.

From my understanding of the frontage rules and the way units are committed to battle, I think it's best to have your artillery split up among your divisions, with maybe a few at the corps level, though some might disagree. The problem with putting a lot of them directly under the corps is that they eat up command points that could go towards adding whole divisions.

For corps and army stacks, it's a good idea to add a medical unit and signal unit if you can afford them -- Union can easily, CSA not so much.

[Major Tom]

In the East Coast '62 scenario, E. P. Alexander starts out in control of most of the artillery in Virginia. What is the purpose of this? Does artillery work better concentrated this way? Thanks.

I haven't played the scenario, but in general, no, you don't want to concentrate your artillery. You certainly don't want it in a separate stack. If it's at least in the same stack as the rest of your force, it should engage along with the force, but if it's a separate stack you can have problems with one stack engaging the enemy and the other avoiding combat.

[Banks6060]

Just a note about using Cavalry in a Corps formation. As with all other Corps...having a Cavalry Corps available, you can extend the reach of your army and maintain support throughout the entire formation.

A couple of examples

1. Extend the flank of your army with a cavalry Corps and thereby prevent the enemy from attacking your cavalry...because they know it would likely cause much of the rest of your army to MTG. (In many cases).

2. Guard the region to the rear of your army...again by way of MTG.

Plus...when you have too much Cavalry for a division...the next level would naturally be to form a Corps.

[Major Tom]

Banks -

Good point about marching to the guns - somehting a corps can do but an independent division can't. Given that, yes i can see the value in a cavalry corps. Also, given their fast move, I guess they can march to the guns faster than a mixed corps.

I've just never made a cavalry corps because I've never had enough cavalry. I guess I don't usually buy much cavalry, and what I do have I like to spread out as scouts, with some concentrated for raiding and chasing raiders.

[Banks6060]

Banks -

Good point about marching to the guns - somehting a corps can do but an independent division can't. Given that, yes i can see the value in a cavalry corps. Also, given their fast move, I guess they can march to the guns faster than a mixed corps.

I've just never made a cavalry corps because I've never had enough cavalry. I guess I don't usually buy much cavalry, and what I do have I like to spread out as scouts, with some concentrated for raiding and chasing raiders.

I don't buy much either. Usually.