Question on battles: Large stack or reinforce?

[Beast]

Just wondering what people know about the difference between engaging with 1 stack of 50 units vs sending in 25, then reinforcing every couple of days with 5-10 troops to add up the morale. (Numbers are just for placeholders, could be a stack of 10 reinforcing 2 at a time)

Ive seen this work for me a few times, but I can't tell if its just lucky die rolls or if it really helps.

The reason why I think it might help is because troops in combat seem to lose morale even if they aren't the ones being fired at. So i figured bringing in fresh troops might help?

Follow up question: Why is it that if you outnumber the enemy 2 to 1... and your width of battle is huge (like twice the enemy), but still when the middle forces start to die off they arent replaced and instead disapear leaving your canons vulnerable? is this just a stupid broken mechanic? ( I can site more specifics if needed)

[Apotheotic Otter]

Whether or not you engage with a full or partial stack is dependant on the situation. For defensive baiting, you'd obviously want a tasty smaller stack to lure in the offending invaders, then reinforce; but for an offensive attack, you'd obviously want to engage using as much of combat width as possible. Past that, adding armies into the fray just to boost morale and keep the front line filled are on an "as needed" basis. In either case, once the battle is underway, you want to stay above combat width with enough infantry reinforcements to build a nice meatwall in front of your cannons.

As for your center units dying and leaving cannon vulnerable, I would surmise that this is simply because you do not have enough reserve infantry to fill the front line, as I believe (though I am not positive, so don't quote me on it) that flank units do not shift towards the center if there is a gap but no viable reinforcements.

[Ravon[17]]

it depends mostly on the combat width, but reinforcing is the way to go. By the late game the combat width is around 40 but its dependent on the terrian. One would say send in an army at the combat width but that would be alot of micromanagment. I personally go with 30 stacks and then half them for reinforcments.

It helps because the fresh troops add to overall army moral instead of sending in a pure stack of 100 and having the army run before most of them see any fighting.

as for your last part i can only speculate. In any army once your center is gone it is very difficult to close that gap even if you have reinforcements becuase it takes time to get stuff organized. But after a few rounds the gap should close, that or they bring the artiliery to the front to allow the fresh troops in. but its not like i know anything

[Beast]

Thanks for the responses!

@arctichound85:

Originally posted by arctichound85:

As for your center units dying and leaving cannon vulnerable, I would surmise that this is simply because you do not have enough reserve infantry to fill the front line, as I believe (though I am not positive, so don't quote me on it) that flank units do not shift towards the center if there is a gap but no viable reinforcements.

I was attacking an army 1/2 my size... there were about 15 infantry just sitting on the edges not firing at any enemies... and the center morale went poof and fled, and my lazy flanking infantry did not replace them... I had a general that was 4/1/2/1 if that makes any difference... It lost me the battle because then all of my artillary died and it was over.

( I am playing as aztecs, my military tech is still 5 behind but I figured with a stack twice as large I should win out... except for this happening.)

[Apotheotic Otter]

Originally posted by Beast:

Thanks for the responses!

I was attacking an army 1/2 my size... there were about 15 infantry just sitting on the edges not firing at any enemies... and the center morale went poof and fled, and my lazy flanking infantry did not replace them... I had a general that was 4/1/2/1 if that makes any difference... It lost me the battle because then all of my artillary died and it was over.

( I am playing as aztecs, my military tech is still 5 behind but I figured with a stack twice as large I should win out... except for this happening.)

Playing as a Native American would explain why your center got punched out so quickly by a smaller force, as a 5 mil tech difference can be very significant if it overlaps one of the Tactics gain/Troop type swap levels. As for your flank/wing units not attacking the center, units can only attack opposing units within a certain flanking range, generally just the unit on either side of their directly opposing unit; though cavalry gets a bonus for this.

[Beast]

Originally posted by arctichound85:

Originally posted by Beast:

Thanks for the responses!

I was attacking an army 1/2 my size... there were about 15 infantry just sitting on the edges not firing at any enemies... and the center morale went poof and fled, and my lazy flanking infantry did not replace them... I had a general that was 4/1/2/1 if that makes any difference... It lost me the battle because then all of my artillary died and it was over.

( I am playing as aztecs, my military tech is still 5 behind but I figured with a stack twice as large I should win out... except for this happening.)

Playing as a Native American would explain why your center got punched out so quickly by a smaller force, as a 5 mil tech difference can be very significant if it overlaps one of the Tactics gain/Troop type swap levels. As for your flank/wing units not attacking the center, units can only attack opposing units within a certain flanking range, generally just the unit on either side of their directly opposing unit; though cavalry gets a bonus for this.

Yeah, I always knew there is only so much flanking range a unit can have, and cavalry are better. What I don't get is why they don't fill in the center ranks rather than staying on the fringe doing nothing?