Army Design: Best Inf/Mixed Div. Composition???

[Blathergut]

I've experimented now with various infantry division compositions.

>light infantry reg. + artillery reg. + hussar reg. + inf. support reg.

This had very good fire power, but, the inability of the artillery (even as veteran) to prolong forward, meant the advance either stalled or moved ahead without the artillery. I liked the hussars in behind the artillery. They have such a long range, they keep infantry well back from the artillery.

Other observations by souls out there on effective infantry division compositions and tactics?

[hazelbark]

why can your artillery battery not prolong forward?
Do you mean dice failures?

I think this is a decent composition for a mixed infantry division.

[Blathergut]

ya...dice failure...seems to be my curse

[viperofmilan]

That is a mixed division, not an infantry division.

Kevin

[Blathergut]

True! Fixed :0

[panda2]

Too few grunts for my taste! I'd add another unit of line infantry, unless you are planning to use the division in conjuntion with others that can supply them.

Its got a good amount of medium range firepower, but untimately IMO you'll need some more bodies to assault/get into close range to break the enemy. The difficulty is that whilst you may get an enemy down to wavering, they'll have a chance to recover before you can assault and break them. IMO its therefore best to plan on the basis of assaulting the enemy whilst they are disordered, otherwise you can end up having to wait around until they fail a CT test to recover, by which time you could have lost elsewhere or they could have reinforced the position.

In summary, its a good division for defence, quite capable of using its firepower to break up an enemy offensive, but you need a fair bit of luck or patience to use it offensively against a division of the Austrain horde you ussually face, unless it had support from elsewhere.

Andy D