How much cavalry should my early game army consist of (Europe)?

[BlitzNexus]

I've heard that 4 is the ideal number but I've seen people who do world conquests and ♥♥♥♥ with 7 and they do rly well so idk.

[Kashone]

2 is enough per stack early game - not sure what country youre playing as - as having cav modifiers can change this. I find cannons not that great till about tec 16. You should always try to hit max combat width first with 2 cav unless you can afford 4.

Other factors are a good general with shock modifers - Shock is strong early game

[erneiz]

If combat width is (x) then the ideal composition is (x-cavalry+6) infantries and 4 cavalry. Add 2 more cavalry at mil tech 18 and 23. For example, if you have 24 combat width at tech 6, then you want 26 infantry and 4 cavalry. If you are Poland or other nation with huge cavalry boost, you can add 2 more cavalries. As you can see this often this results in a huge army (compared to supply in a province at the time) so split them to half stacks.
Before mil tech 16, only bring 1 artillery per how many stacks you're planning to siege with. From mil tech 16 onwards bring as many artilleries as the combat width allows. Again, this will result in a huge stack so split them to half stacks.

[AlienWired]

Early game I always build 1 for 1... and then 1 for 3 later in game..

IE: 1 infantry 1 horse, and then later 1 infantry 1 horse 1 cannon.

[drcox321]

Early on 2 is the most bang for the buck. This increases by 2 at tech 18 and again at tech 23 I believe. Having more then this Can be nice but can be expensive. Its basically a case of diminishing returns. Some countries with strong calvery national ideas (poland as an example) should have a higher concentration of calvary. Never have anywhere near half your force be calv for most nations as inefficient support will kill you. I usually go fairly light on calv so I can spend that money elsewhere but I always try to have at least 2 in the early game per stack.

[chazla20]

Usually I keep INF/CAV at 2to1 or a little less until artillery arrives. Then I start decreasing the ratio for CAV. By MIL lvl 12 I would do a 25k army as the follows: 15INF 5CAV 5ART later game I will max CAV out at 6 even with a 50k army. Of course the arguments above for CAV friendly nations should be heeded and an increase in CAV should be done.

[Snakejuice]

Originally posted by AlienWired:

Early game I always build 1 for 1... and then 1 for 3 later in game..

IE: 1 infantry 1 horse, and then later 1 infantry 1 horse 1 cannon.

This is too many unless you are a horde. You don't really need more than 6 cav per army no matter how big.

[tiberiansun371alexw]

Have at least 3 cav.

[Davi]

I always make stacks of 10,20,30 and 40 very late game.
10 - 6-2-0
20 - 12-4-4
30 - 18-4-8
40 - 22-2-14
I increase the stack as soon as the supply limit allows it in 80% of the territories on map.
Been doing it like this for the past 500hours I played EU4. I mainly play european nations. Seems to work really well.
Sometimes I even have a stack of 20 mercenary infantry or 16-4 so I don't lose manpower.

[Marsh]

Originally posted by BlitzNexus:

I've heard that 4 is the ideal number but I've seen people who do world conquests and ♥♥♥♥ with 7 and they do rly well so idk.

A lot of conflicting answers here, but the real answer is that its all situational. If you're a small nation, with a small economy, then you won't be able to field as many as someone like France.

Early game, the combat width is low twenties. Having 4 cavalry here is great, but only if you need it, and can afford it. Check your rivals, and the places you plan to invade. Make sure you can match their front lines with infantry. Then your cavalry won't get hit, and you can do a lot with a little.
(If combat width is 20, you want 16 Infantry, and 4 Cav for a perfect width. If 22 = 18 +4, etc.)

Realistically, since cavalry have a flanking range of 2, you can do perfectly fine with just 2 if you manage your infantry well, and don't have massive, max width battles. But, if you can afford it, 4 will dominate the flanks, and minimize loses.

[BlitzNexus]

Originally posted by Douchebag:

Originally posted by BlitzNexus:

I've heard that 4 is the ideal number but I've seen people who do world conquests and ♥♥♥♥ with 7 and they do rly well so idk.

A lot of conflicting answers here, but the real answer is that its all situational. If you're a small nation, with a small economy, then you won't be able to field as many as someone like France.

Early game, the combat width is low twenties. Having 4 cavalry here is great, but only if you need it, and can afford it. Check your rivals, and the places you plan to invade. Make sure you can match their front lines with infantry. Then your cavalry won't get hit, and you can do a lot with a little.
(If combat width is 20, you want 16 Infantry, and 4 Cav for a perfect width. If 22 = 18 +4, etc.)

Realistically, since cavalry have a flanking range of 2, you can do perfectly fine with just 2 if you manage your infantry well, and don't have massive, max width battles. But, if you can afford it, 4 will dominate the flanks, and minimize loses.

If you can afford it would 5 be good just in case one cav dies in battle?

[veryhungryperson]

Originally posted by BlitzNexus:

I've heard that 4 is the ideal number but I've seen people who do world conquests and ♥♥♥♥ with 7 and they do rly well so idk.

As everyone above has posted the correct values required for optimal flanking values. There are times however where having more cavalry can be worth the extra cost of maintaining them.

While cavalry costs more they also start out with an additional pip compared to infantry so they will basically always win against an infantry unit. You can use Chevauchée to deal massive flanking damage or Western Medieval Knights to drive enemies off the feild much faster from techs 3-5.

On top of this cavalry excell in the shock phase of combat, which in the early game is much more important as infantry don't have many fire pips to counterbalance it and cannons are more like peeshooters

The basic reason for taking more cavalry early as a western nation is that the extra cavalry will face against an infantry unit, that it's going to beat, which will lead to the enemy combat width shrinking faster and allowing you to gain a flank advantage that your cavalry can carry the day with. Having a general with a great shock roll will help make this work better and it loses it's effectivnes as infantry get better fire pips that allow them to weaken cavalry to the point where the shock phase doesn't result in complete victory. If you were going to pursue this route I'd recommend a maximum of 8 cavalry that you don't change all game.

[AlienWired]

Originally posted by Whuuuut:

I always make stacks of 10,20,30 and 40 very late game.
10 - 6-2-0
20 - 12-4-4
30 - 18-4-8
40 - 22-2-14
I increase the stack as soon as the supply limit allows it in 80% of the territories on map.
Been doing it like this for the past 500hours I played EU4. I mainly play european nations. Seems to work really well.
Sometimes I even have a stack of 20 mercenary infantry or 16-4 so I don't lose manpower.

Exactly........ Except I never use mercs....

Originally posted by Snakejuice:

Originally posted by AlienWired:

Early game I always build 1 for 1... and then 1 for 3 later in game..

IE: 1 infantry 1 horse, and then later 1 infantry 1 horse 1 cannon.

This is too many unless you are a horde. You don't really need more than 6 cav per army no matter how big.

Which is why I rarely lose games....

Everybody has their own ways to play, I found a way that works good for me. I've conquested the world as Aragon several times using my own strategy and what many folks deem efficient, gets them killed and well, that's their business, not mine.

Don't know why people insist on believing that it is necessary to claim that one way of playing is better, no, it's not better, it's just different, you efficiency leaves you vulnerable and weak.

Which is the Euro way of thinking, which is why you live in Sweden, and we live in America.

[runequester]

People get overly focused on the flanking range but especially early game, having some cavalry in your main line can do very well.

A lot of your infantry will have extremely limited combat ability.

I always get the feeling that people just repeat what they saw on the internet without hesitating or actually understanding what they are saying.

[runequester]

Originally posted by AlienWired:

Which is the Euro way of thinking, which is why you live in Sweden, and we live in America.

Having lived half my life in Scandinavia and half my life in America, I am curious what "euro way of thinking" is.

[Ficelle]

Never understood this 'Cavs is just usefull for flancking and early game', so 2 or 4 is more than enough...
Parrotting i guess...

Shock phase is half the battle.
Granted, fire phase is first, but nonetheless, shock is still there until end game.

No or very little Cavs in armies just means poor shock phase.
I pretty much always do the 2 1 2 (unless very specific nations) and never had a problem.

Time and time again, ive tried to see if less Cavs was that much better...always worse results.

Only real downside of Cavs is cost, shouldnt be a problem past mid game.