Orel wrote:How might the presence of cavalry help?![]()
le Anders wrote:Plus the extra detection value.
germanpeon wrote:This is why I do it. I just recently found out about the screening bonus, which is great.
A good rule for including support units into divisions is to include them when their ability(s) apply only to a 'unit' (read: division) rather than a stack. For example, including tanks or motorized cars into a division is a good idea because the armored support ability is wasted outside a division, but benefits all constituent elements in a division. Conversely, engineers do not need to be inside a division because their ability applies to an entire stack. So even if you only have one division in a stack, the engineer ability applies to all units and frees space for other elements to be included inside a division.
germanpeon wrote:My ideal division is 3 large infantry brigades (with several inf regiments and an arty apiece), 1 tachanka, 1 tank, one elite inf, one cav, and 2 arty.
germanpeon wrote:I'm less concerned about flexibility between fronts and I just want more powerful divisions (by constructing fewer but denser and more powerful divisions).
Orel wrote:Here is what I use for the Southern whites elite divisions:
2 or 3 elite regiments(if there are 2 one is a regular), 152mm battery, howitzer(76mm or 105mm) battery, 1 tank battery, 1 armored cars platoon, and 2 infantry brigades.
for cavalry divisions: 6 cavalry regiments, two horse artillery batteries(or cavalry brigades) and an armored cars platoon.
cavalry is not included in infantry divisions since there is neither the room nor the presence of cavalry in sufficient numbers.
OneArmedMexican wrote:I have wrote my thoughts on division composition as a part of an AAR recently: Who put the stranded admiral in charge? - Siberian White Short Campaign PBEM
Most of it comes down to the thoughts germanpeon has laid out here so well:
An added thought: engineers are pretty squishy, from my experience they fare better outside a division.
I almost completely concur.I am not sure if one cavalry regiment per division is needed, though. Shouldn't one cav reg per corps suffice (for the detection as well as the screening bonus)? In my opinion, cavalry regiments are needed to provide a screen, do reconaissance and secure/raid railways. Except for a few cavalry divisions (sometimes handy as fast moving attack forces), I therefore use most cavalry regiments outside of divisions. If you still have enough cavalry to spare one for each division, fine, otherwise I think a sufficient number of scouts and raiders comes first.
Moreover big divisions are a major advantage: most importantly it reduces the risk of losing elements (bad for NM). Also it seems to me that big divisions generally fare better in battle.
Tanks and armoured cars within the same division is a waste. They provide the same advantages. Armoured cars are the poor man's tanks (since the lack the trench disrupter ability).
Armoured cars in cavalry divisions doesn't make much sense either. They slow the whole division down and the infantry support ability is wasted on cavalry.
Orel wrote:The cavalry divisions need the armored cars since I somewhere here have heard that they produce a similar with infantry effect with their "armored support" special ability on cavalry.
Orel wrote:And the armored cars have no effect on the speed of cavalry simply because cavalry divisions I use also have horse artillery with the same speed coefficient.
OneArmedMexican wrote:Is this reliable information? The discription of the ability states its effect is limited to infantry. If you are right, I have to thank you for teaching me something new.![]()
OneArmedMexican wrote:Same coefficient but different movement type: tachankas move like medium cavalry, armoured cars are "wheeled".
Orel wrote: the speed coefficient, which is outrageously low for the tachankas making my cavalry travel as fast as the Volunteer army shock divisions with heavy artillery.
ERISS wrote:Makhnovist tatchankas (and horse artillery), move the same as medium cavalry (Cavalry, 150).
Maybe Whites didn't know how to really use them, and their low speed is for their tactic (they use them as bad tanks, to give fire power to infantry).
Think about France 1940, who had the best tanks (of the world?, even for a 'guerre-éclair', french blitzkrieg lol), but didn't know how to react with...
Orel wrote:I asked the question here:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=23911
OneArmedMexican wrote:Delicious. This is a wonderful example of how rumours get started. Durk referred you to an AAR written by a certain Bornego who tries to explain his thoughts on division composition. But Bornego never claims that the armoured support bonus applies to cavalry. Feel free to check again, but I should know since Bornego is my user name at the Paradox forum.
![]()
OneArmedMexican wrote:Most of it comes down to the thoughts germanpeon has laid out here so well:
OneArmedMexican wrote:An added thought: engineers are pretty squishy, from my experience they fare better outside a division.
OneArmedMexican wrote:I almost completely concur. I am not sure if one cavalry regiment per division is needed, though. Shouldn't one cav reg per corps suffice (for the detection as well as the screening bonus)? In my opinion, cavalry regiments are needed to provide a screen, do reconaissance and secure/raid railways. Except for a few cavalry divisions (sometimes handy as fast moving attack forces), I therefore use most cavalry regiments outside of divisions. If you still have enough cavalry to spare one for each division, fine, otherwise I think a sufficient number of scouts and raiders comes first.
OneArmedMexican wrote:Moreover big divisions are a major advantage: most importantly it reduces the risk of losing elements (bad for NM). Also it seems to me that big divisions generally fare better in battle.
Narwhal wrote:Question I was wondering : would it be useful to, say, add transmission elements or other "useless in combat" elements to an incomplete combat brigade to "suck up" damage ? I rarely use the bonus in CP.
Return to “Revolution Under Siege”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests