Corps (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory: Emperor's Edition



Message

gexmex -> Corps (3/17/2009 2:31:57 AM)

Dumb question; why do corps cost more than armies? Since they're a smaller formation than an army wouldn't they cost less? Armies contain corps contain divisions etc.? Unless that's not the way military forces of the period were organized, I'm no expert of the period history...[8|]



Mus -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 3:16:42 AM)

Corps are better than Armies is the short answer. 

They allow you to put up to 20 divisions inside an army versus 8 for a standard Army container.  Corps also represent additional staff and support functions because units in Corps get bonuses in certain situations. Other people can probably provide more accurate details, or you can search the manual for Corps and read all the details.



gexmex -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 5:21:40 AM)

cool thanks mus.  i suppose that makes sense then, getting more for your money and all. [8D]



Ironclad -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 12:39:53 PM)

It was Napoleon's formal use of the corps system that was one of the reasons that made his armies so much more formidable than their rivals. To match the French most major foreign powers ended up adopting it. The ideal was that a corps of around 20-30,000 troops would be a self contained force, with infantry, artillery and cavalry (usually light) would be capable of fighting unaided against a much superior enemy possibly for up to a day, allowing other corps that were marching along other routes (to aid dispersal for supply and movement) but within support distance to come to its aid or to move against the enemy's flanks or rear.



Ironclad -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 1:10:05 PM)

Its worth noting that as armies grew larger, some corps increased in size too (the largest reaching 70,000 for the Russian campaign) and regular and even heavy cavalry were sometimes attached. There were specialist cavalry corps too, comprised of various types as well as horse artillery to provide a central mounted reserve that could be used for shock action on the battlefield or to enhance scouting and screening during a campaign, or undertake vigorous pursuit of a defeated enemy.



gexmex -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 2:25:40 PM)

I can see why a corps would be a valuable part of an army, but it just seems that, in my limited play time, building corps containers in the early going is extremely cost prohibitive, especially when one could have like 6 armies running around for the price of a corps. 



Ironclad -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 3:15:00 PM)

As already noted using corps enable you to greatly increase the number of divisions that an army can accommodate and wherever that army goes it will be accompanied by all its attached units including attached corps. Compare that to moving with several smaller armies where you cannot guarantee their joint arrival because of the outcomes of the separate movement initiative checks.

Corps also have added flexibility, since they can operate independently or be combined within an army or later detached if you so wish. Armies can never be combined.

In detailed battle the units in a corps move one after the other and also have some tactical advantages eg increased flank effect.



gexmex -> RE: Corps (3/17/2009 3:42:52 PM)

gotcha, thanks ironclad, much more clear now [:)]  sometimes i'm a bit sloooow



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.765625