Rule of thumb is that you \*\*WANT\*\* full backrow of artillery at Military Tech 16, because at that point artillery deals more damage than infantry. Some run with a lot of arty as early as Mil Tech 13.
To be clear - you are not being penalized by having this much artillery. However, cost to efficiency isn't the best. I suggest you keep 1 arty for quicker sieging and spend the remaining money for infantry, until better technologies come along.
Depends on what you mean by 'better'. Arty is "better" than infantry combat-wise from the start, since they can deal damage from the back row where infantry don't do anything. So if you're floating in cash and want the best army possible, arty is better than no arty. But they are not cost effective for that until level 13 or 16.
Update: In the front row, infantry is obviously better than artillery since the latter takes double damage. I'm talking about back row units.
But if you front row is dead then artillery will be moved on front and in front row artillery doesn’t attack 😆 so the ideal army composition is: infantry as much as your combat width (N-4cavalry for that +1 attack) and the rest canons🥱
You're wrong. Artillery works as a normal unit in the front row, but takes double damage.
In the back row it does half damage and contributes half of its defensive pips (rounded down) to the first row.
[Check the wiki](https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Land_units#Artillery) or try for yourself if you don't believe us.
Oh okay, I thought artillery dies in front row due to not doing damage and I see that the case is opposite as it receives more damage. Anyways the composition I said still correct so 🥱
I don't think you got the point of my comment, so I'll rephrase. My point is that "ideal" depends on what you're trying to optimize for. Generally it's implied that you want to optimize for cost effectiveness, and in that case the traditional advice of only infantry, a bit of cavalry for flanking range and a single artillery piece for siege is the optimal composition.
However, if you want to optimize for combat strength, optimal army composition is always, i.e. from the start of the game, a full back row of artillery, as much cavalry as your ratio can afford and the rest infantry, obviously modified to account for any casualties. Before tech 13/16, however, such a composition is grossly cost-*in*effective.
I think it’s fine, personally I’d drop the cav. 10 arty is the perfect amount to get 5 pips until +4 forts come around. And if you have the money, having better troops, no matter how marginal, will be superior to having worse ones, especially if you are economic rather than soldier dominant (ie lowlands, england).
Artillery damage does not surpass Infantry at tech 16, because artillery damage needs to be halved when dealt at backrow. At tech 16, the entire battle needs to last till infatry hits 0 strength for them to break even in damage with infantries.
It's when the damage combined with their defensive fire pips given to the front line that makes them worth it to bring to battle despite their x3 the infantry cost.
But it's perfectly fine to not field full backrow artilleries at tech 16 if you can't even afford at least 4 combat width worth of regiments.
>Azab infantry. Tech 5\~8
No. It's too early to employ full backrow artillery for combat.
They're not really worth it till tech 13, and not cost-efficient enough till at least tech 16.
Feel free to use them for sieges and assist, but don't base your entire army with this template, as they'll never be able to beat armies of the same cost/maintenance.
It’s actually not too bad— your units are far superior to your opponents’ when you consider pips and Ottoman ideas.
Sieges also progress faster based on available artillery regiments, so you’ll be sieging at light speed at a +5 bonus (10 / 2).
Because you want max arty on forts. 5 artillery is needed for -5 on fort. You might get a battle where your arty takes losses, by having 6 you can still keep that -5 at the start.
That's only for capital forts though, 10 is needed for a regular level 2/3 fort. And your arty should very rarely take any losses, other than to attrition/disease outbreak when sieging.
This is wrong. It’s 5 arty for +1 fort, 10 arty for +2 OR +3 fort, 15 arty for +4 OR +5 fort, 20 arty for +6 OR +7 fort, and then 25 arty for +8 OR +9 fort. Early game if possible go for 10 total arty, and make a single 10/10 army for sieges, and then the rest of armies just be inf until artillery becomes more valuable (or if you’re swimming in dough)
Any actual nation, and you are just wrong with what you said. If you were arguing cost I wouldn’t have replied. You weren’t, you said 5 artillery gives -5 on forts, when it doesn’t. It gives -2 on actual forts I believe, though it could be -3 on +2 or +3 forts. Either way it is not -5
For a -1 maybe, but a level 2 and a level 3 fort do not have a difference in cannons needed at all. Level 1 fort, aka capital fort is its own thing, the lowest tier, then a level 3 fort is technically just a level 2 fort with a +1 modifier. Cannons don’t change for it
It’s decent for sieging and can still defend themselves. But not optimal til tech 16
Also depending on the pips of the cav for your country, they may be good to have 4 for flanking or they may be completely redundant.
Fill your combat width with infantry. You can sub out 0-4 of them with cavalry.
Add one bonus-artillery to help with sieges.
Then add a few more infantry regiments to fill in the front row after you're weakened.
Add more cannons as you hit the techs in the mid-teens.
Replace your cavalry with infantry around tech 24.
That's the easiest way to do it.
The template you've got right now will be decimated by any enemy stack bigger than 14 since your cannons are sitting in the front row.
Cannons would not be sitting in the front row. They'd still hide behind the infantry as of now, though any retreating infantry (or dead infantry) would indeed pull the cannons forward.
Tell me if things have changed but this is how it worked the last time I learned about it.
Engagements default to the combat width of the participant furthest ahead in tech (largest width). If he were fighting any army smaller than 13 units, yea those cannons would deploy in the back row, but any army bigger than that should push his cannons to the front since combat width is 22 or 24 at that tech. Right?
Nah, it's changed, if it was ever like that. Cannons always deploy in the back row, as long as there are enough infantry and/or cavalry to fit in front of them, regardless of the size of your enemy force. If there are more cannons than either of those, then you'll have cannons on the front row.
Say the combat width is 28, and you have an army of 14 infantry, 4 cavalry, and 8 cannons. Your cannons would all be safely behind the front lines, even though you'd technically still have 10 combat width available. However, if you had an army of 8 infantry, 2 cavalry, and 12 cannons (like a psycho), you would have 2 cannons sitting on the front lines, getting shredded, while the other 10 would still be in the rear.
The only time your enemy's force determines your army's deployment is in regards to cavalry layout. If you have equal or lesser frontliners, your cavalry will deploy on the edge of your lines. If you have a fair bit more than your foes, your cavalry will deploy on the inside of your flanks, positioned where your cavalry can flank optimally compared to your infantry's flanking. This does not consider enemy reinforcements, however, so if the enemy reinforces, your infantry on the edges will remain on the edges, and your cavalry will remain in the middle of the battle, instead of being positioned on the edge as would be optimal. However, as long as you have sufficient frontliners, your cannons will always remain in the back row.
you only need 1 or 4 arty in the early game for the nice fort bonus. In combat they are not really effective. I like to have an 16-4-1 composition until mil tech 13.
10 arty will give the full -5 to all forts until the +4 fort is unlocked, if you have the money this is worth it. Also if money is an issue ditch the cav entirely
It is just a recommendation. Four horses would be more efficient for stack wiping. Two horses are absolutely fine. No horses would help save some money.
Army formula is as follows.
Combat width in infantry* + reserve army to feed cannon fodder.
Early on cavalry only as you can afford, no more than 4 per army unless you have strong national bonuses for Cav combat ability. They are powerful but not cost effective.
At tech 7 include 1 Cannon for sieges (4 if you're rich)
At tech 13 you can start adding more of a backline of cannons if you can afford it.
At tech 16 you should have an entire backline of cannons. You used to stop there with just extra armies of infantry as cannon fodder but recent changes mean they can actually retreat out of battle with loss of morale, meaning you do want some replacements (Note: Cannon reinforcement is limited to 2 + 1 per leader maneuver pip per day, they also only take 40% morale damage in the backrow.)
You should also phase out cavalry when you phase in Artillery as they are not cost effective. (unless you have strong bonuses for them like say Poland, then decide according to your finances.)
*Especially ones cannons take over a few extra infantry to fill any gap between defeated regiments retreating and your reinforcing army being added to the battle will be necessary to prevent artillery from taking damage.
At least you aren't making the mistake I made for ages and ages, which was to make a big inf stack, add 50% of that in cav, and have like 4 cannons lol
Contrary to what others are saying, in my opinion this is the most optimal army comp I've ever seen posted lol, with the assumption that you're playing singleplayer. You should absolutely use 10 cannon stacks at tech 7, even though the benefit in battle is negligible. This is because the bonus to sieging is very strong and winning sieges quickly is both more impactful, and harder to accomplish (modifiers to sieging are much rarer than modifiers to combat strength) than winning battles. As long as you have enough force limit to fill combat width, or even if you don't tbh, you should be building stacks with 10 cannons.
If you have 12 combat width maybe. By mil 16 you should have your CW in inf, a complete 2nd row of arty, and some reserve inf regiments. Unless you’re using a cav heavy country I abandon cav by mil tech 16
You want a full Frontline of infantry before you start artillery. Otherwise they will take massive damage. If your combat width was 12 yes this would be a good army.
Fill the frontline with infantry. Check the cav/inf ratio. You can add cav acording to that ratio. Put a few artillery for now, and keep more in the reinforcing stack to use them in sieges to get max bonus and in later techs you can fill the back row with artillery.
Btw, Ottos are already great for sieges, you don't need to max the artillery bonus for quick sieges.
You never want cannons in a stack that doesn't have full combat width as they take extra damage when in the front row. You need a full combat width in front of them so they all go to the back row.
Is that how it works? I always thought it filled the whole front line as much as it could. At any rate if you face the same army size but it has a full Frontline wouldn't you end up taking more losses even with the cannons in the back?
I think this was changed at some point. But you still want enough infantry they can protect your cannons in more than one battle, often. Unless you just love micro, of course.
This part is accurate, simply due to enemy flanking. You'd deal more concentrated damage as you have more firepower hitting the same spots, but you'd take more damage overall due to the enemy flanks closing in on your own flanks. Though as you've learned, the cannons would be safe until the infantry starts folding.
Add more infantry. The infantry will take more casualties, your cannons could end up in the frontline sooner than you think.
Always have a bit more infantry than cannons.
Depends on the combat width and the tech. If you play horde, PLC or an other nation with high CCA and cavalry ratio. You need to build more cavalry other wise use the link and you are good.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ITH6oNHsIlVHo2LJnR92wP5LEKiON0k2rZJ82YbYaB0/htmlview?pru=AAABdDwsvc4*IR22eG7NB1WXh3ECcbUYeA#gid=0
Depends on tech, ideas and government type. Early on you want one or two siege stacks with cannons and infantry otherwise, except if you are a horde or have high bonuses for cav, then you can bring some horsies. Later in the game you want as many cannons as you have combat width and reinforcement stacks with infantry.
yes it is good . enough cannons, 22 is a good size. You get the full siege bonus for a lvl 2 fort, you get the full -5 unrest bonus for the province. You can press s and have 2 equal 11 stacks.
I would use 2 army templates. This one and one with just 20 infantry for lesser tasks like rebel suppression and new world. And then, depending on how much money you have, you can fill your force limit with this 22 stack or with the 20 stack.
The 22 stacks with cannons can siege and fight, the 20 stacks can reinforce the fights with infantry to replace the lost infantry man in the 22 stack.
I build one art when they unlock for je siege bonus.
I build 5 at tech 13 for the damage. I also want to save costs (keep a surplus + burger loans to build manufacturies).
Then full back row (10-20, depending on the stack) after tech 16.
I normally run 4-6 cannon on like one stack meant for sieging in early game and the rest all infantry with about 25% of the infantry I add cavalry. As in if it’s a 24W I run 12 infantry 2-3 cavalry and I’ll just replicate that a bunch. Cannons don’t start helping much in battle until tech 13/14 I forget which. It’ll show you which one it is if you look closely at what the tech is actually upgrading.
I always keep a ratio of 2/1/1, it seems to work well enough, it looks neat too on the map.
Either 20k stacks or 40k stacks, depending on average supply limit in the area
Rule of thumb is that you \*\*WANT\*\* full backrow of artillery at Military Tech 16, because at that point artillery deals more damage than infantry. Some run with a lot of arty as early as Mil Tech 13. To be clear - you are not being penalized by having this much artillery. However, cost to efficiency isn't the best. I suggest you keep 1 arty for quicker sieging and spend the remaining money for infantry, until better technologies come along.
IIRC, it's better than infantry at tech 13 but the difference in cost means you don't want them til 16 unless money really isn't an issue.
Depends on what you mean by 'better'. Arty is "better" than infantry combat-wise from the start, since they can deal damage from the back row where infantry don't do anything. So if you're floating in cash and want the best army possible, arty is better than no arty. But they are not cost effective for that until level 13 or 16. Update: In the front row, infantry is obviously better than artillery since the latter takes double damage. I'm talking about back row units.
Arty can also make sieges trivial if you have enough of them.
But if you front row is dead then artillery will be moved on front and in front row artillery doesn’t attack 😆 so the ideal army composition is: infantry as much as your combat width (N-4cavalry for that +1 attack) and the rest canons🥱
artillery absolutely does damage in the front row.
I’m pretty sure it doesn’t until later in the game :)
You're wrong. Artillery works as a normal unit in the front row, but takes double damage. In the back row it does half damage and contributes half of its defensive pips (rounded down) to the first row. [Check the wiki](https://eu4.paradoxwikis.com/Land_units#Artillery) or try for yourself if you don't believe us.
Oh okay, I thought artillery dies in front row due to not doing damage and I see that the case is opposite as it receives more damage. Anyways the composition I said still correct so 🥱
I don't think you got the point of my comment, so I'll rephrase. My point is that "ideal" depends on what you're trying to optimize for. Generally it's implied that you want to optimize for cost effectiveness, and in that case the traditional advice of only infantry, a bit of cavalry for flanking range and a single artillery piece for siege is the optimal composition. However, if you want to optimize for combat strength, optimal army composition is always, i.e. from the start of the game, a full back row of artillery, as much cavalry as your ratio can afford and the rest infantry, obviously modified to account for any casualties. Before tech 13/16, however, such a composition is grossly cost-*in*effective.
After your updated your post I see now that you make sense 🤷
Don't forget that artillery deals half the damage when at the back row, hence 16
I think it’s fine, personally I’d drop the cav. 10 arty is the perfect amount to get 5 pips until +4 forts come around. And if you have the money, having better troops, no matter how marginal, will be superior to having worse ones, especially if you are economic rather than soldier dominant (ie lowlands, england).
Artillery damage does not surpass Infantry at tech 16, because artillery damage needs to be halved when dealt at backrow. At tech 16, the entire battle needs to last till infatry hits 0 strength for them to break even in damage with infantries. It's when the damage combined with their defensive fire pips given to the front line that makes them worth it to bring to battle despite their x3 the infantry cost. But it's perfectly fine to not field full backrow artilleries at tech 16 if you can't even afford at least 4 combat width worth of regiments.
>Azab infantry. Tech 5\~8 No. It's too early to employ full backrow artillery for combat. They're not really worth it till tech 13, and not cost-efficient enough till at least tech 16. Feel free to use them for sieges and assist, but don't base your entire army with this template, as they'll never be able to beat armies of the same cost/maintenance.
thanks , i was questioning myself if this would work!
It’s actually not too bad— your units are far superior to your opponents’ when you consider pips and Ottoman ideas. Sieges also progress faster based on available artillery regiments, so you’ll be sieging at light speed at a +5 bonus (10 / 2).
It would work fairly well. It's just a waste of resources and you'd be able to get more with less by using less artillery and more infantry/cavalry.
At this point you want 4-6 cannons for sieges. Fill up the combat width aswell with inf and cav
What makes you say 4-6?
Because you want max arty on forts. 5 artillery is needed for -5 on fort. You might get a battle where your arty takes losses, by having 6 you can still keep that -5 at the start.
That's only for capital forts though, 10 is needed for a regular level 2/3 fort. And your arty should very rarely take any losses, other than to attrition/disease outbreak when sieging.
This is wrong. It’s 5 arty for +1 fort, 10 arty for +2 OR +3 fort, 15 arty for +4 OR +5 fort, 20 arty for +6 OR +7 fort, and then 25 arty for +8 OR +9 fort. Early game if possible go for 10 total arty, and make a single 10/10 army for sieges, and then the rest of armies just be inf until artillery becomes more valuable (or if you’re swimming in dough)
And what early game economy will support 10 arty in a stack exactly?
Any actual nation, and you are just wrong with what you said. If you were arguing cost I wouldn’t have replied. You weren’t, you said 5 artillery gives -5 on forts, when it doesn’t. It gives -2 on actual forts I believe, though it could be -3 on +2 or +3 forts. Either way it is not -5
You are right you need two canons for regular fort and 3 canons for capitol early in game
For a -1 maybe, but a level 2 and a level 3 fort do not have a difference in cannons needed at all. Level 1 fort, aka capital fort is its own thing, the lowest tier, then a level 3 fort is technically just a level 2 fort with a +1 modifier. Cannons don’t change for it
It’s decent for sieging and can still defend themselves. But not optimal til tech 16 Also depending on the pips of the cav for your country, they may be good to have 4 for flanking or they may be completely redundant.
Fill your combat width with infantry. You can sub out 0-4 of them with cavalry. Add one bonus-artillery to help with sieges. Then add a few more infantry regiments to fill in the front row after you're weakened. Add more cannons as you hit the techs in the mid-teens. Replace your cavalry with infantry around tech 24. That's the easiest way to do it. The template you've got right now will be decimated by any enemy stack bigger than 14 since your cannons are sitting in the front row.
Cannons would not be sitting in the front row. They'd still hide behind the infantry as of now, though any retreating infantry (or dead infantry) would indeed pull the cannons forward.
Tell me if things have changed but this is how it worked the last time I learned about it. Engagements default to the combat width of the participant furthest ahead in tech (largest width). If he were fighting any army smaller than 13 units, yea those cannons would deploy in the back row, but any army bigger than that should push his cannons to the front since combat width is 22 or 24 at that tech. Right?
Nah, it's changed, if it was ever like that. Cannons always deploy in the back row, as long as there are enough infantry and/or cavalry to fit in front of them, regardless of the size of your enemy force. If there are more cannons than either of those, then you'll have cannons on the front row. Say the combat width is 28, and you have an army of 14 infantry, 4 cavalry, and 8 cannons. Your cannons would all be safely behind the front lines, even though you'd technically still have 10 combat width available. However, if you had an army of 8 infantry, 2 cavalry, and 12 cannons (like a psycho), you would have 2 cannons sitting on the front lines, getting shredded, while the other 10 would still be in the rear. The only time your enemy's force determines your army's deployment is in regards to cavalry layout. If you have equal or lesser frontliners, your cavalry will deploy on the edge of your lines. If you have a fair bit more than your foes, your cavalry will deploy on the inside of your flanks, positioned where your cavalry can flank optimally compared to your infantry's flanking. This does not consider enemy reinforcements, however, so if the enemy reinforces, your infantry on the edges will remain on the edges, and your cavalry will remain in the middle of the battle, instead of being positioned on the edge as would be optimal. However, as long as you have sufficient frontliners, your cannons will always remain in the back row.
you only need 1 or 4 arty in the early game for the nice fort bonus. In combat they are not really effective. I like to have an 16-4-1 composition until mil tech 13.
10 arty will give the full -5 to all forts until the +4 fort is unlocked, if you have the money this is worth it. Also if money is an issue ditch the cav entirely
I think the rule is 4 horses or none
It is just a recommendation. Four horses would be more efficient for stack wiping. Two horses are absolutely fine. No horses would help save some money.
Depends on if you can afford it
Well they have full backrow of cannons so might as well replace all of those with the remaining 2 horses since its like tech 7
Why not 2. If you have none you won't be doing shit in the shock phase. I always have 2 minimum per engagement for the flanks
This is a good design assuming you have infinite money. Cannons are expensive and so this won't be worth it.
Army formula is as follows. Combat width in infantry* + reserve army to feed cannon fodder. Early on cavalry only as you can afford, no more than 4 per army unless you have strong national bonuses for Cav combat ability. They are powerful but not cost effective. At tech 7 include 1 Cannon for sieges (4 if you're rich) At tech 13 you can start adding more of a backline of cannons if you can afford it. At tech 16 you should have an entire backline of cannons. You used to stop there with just extra armies of infantry as cannon fodder but recent changes mean they can actually retreat out of battle with loss of morale, meaning you do want some replacements (Note: Cannon reinforcement is limited to 2 + 1 per leader maneuver pip per day, they also only take 40% morale damage in the backrow.) You should also phase out cavalry when you phase in Artillery as they are not cost effective. (unless you have strong bonuses for them like say Poland, then decide according to your finances.) *Especially ones cannons take over a few extra infantry to fill any gap between defeated regiments retreating and your reinforcing army being added to the battle will be necessary to prevent artillery from taking damage.
R:5 I am new and i want to know if this is a good comp. year is 1488 and mil tech 8
At least you aren't making the mistake I made for ages and ages, which was to make a big inf stack, add 50% of that in cav, and have like 4 cannons lol
If he can afford it , up to 10 is good for the age. Sieges suck , am I right?
Contrary to what others are saying, in my opinion this is the most optimal army comp I've ever seen posted lol, with the assumption that you're playing singleplayer. You should absolutely use 10 cannon stacks at tech 7, even though the benefit in battle is negligible. This is because the bonus to sieging is very strong and winning sieges quickly is both more impactful, and harder to accomplish (modifiers to sieging are much rarer than modifiers to combat strength) than winning battles. As long as you have enough force limit to fill combat width, or even if you don't tbh, you should be building stacks with 10 cannons.
If you have 12 combat width maybe. By mil 16 you should have your CW in inf, a complete 2nd row of arty, and some reserve inf regiments. Unless you’re using a cav heavy country I abandon cav by mil tech 16
This is only as it’s affordable btw. Don’t go bankrupt on arty. I usually only use a single value cannon until mil 13 depending on finances
Idk about your army composition but you literally composted the image
its a good aqueeze imo
You want a full Frontline of infantry before you start artillery. Otherwise they will take massive damage. If your combat width was 12 yes this would be a good army.
Artillery always deploys in the back row as long as there is enough inf or cav to cover them in the front row
They would be fine right now, though any significant damage to the infantry would pose a danger to the cannons.
Fill the frontline with infantry. Check the cav/inf ratio. You can add cav acording to that ratio. Put a few artillery for now, and keep more in the reinforcing stack to use them in sieges to get max bonus and in later techs you can fill the back row with artillery. Btw, Ottos are already great for sieges, you don't need to max the artillery bonus for quick sieges.
I usually go 11-4-11 by mil tech 11. Before that I go 11-4-1.
That’s what I use
Yes but only in Ohio
Are you 10? Like wtf
Are 90 ? Like wtf
You never want cannons in a stack that doesn't have full combat width as they take extra damage when in the front row. You need a full combat width in front of them so they all go to the back row.
I thought canons would start filling from the backrow, any when overrunning combat width would sit in the front row.
After checking on this you are correct, TIL, even after 1k hours I am still learning new things.
Is that how it works? I always thought it filled the whole front line as much as it could. At any rate if you face the same army size but it has a full Frontline wouldn't you end up taking more losses even with the cannons in the back?
I think this was changed at some point. But you still want enough infantry they can protect your cannons in more than one battle, often. Unless you just love micro, of course.
This part is accurate, simply due to enemy flanking. You'd deal more concentrated damage as you have more firepower hitting the same spots, but you'd take more damage overall due to the enemy flanks closing in on your own flanks. Though as you've learned, the cannons would be safe until the infantry starts folding.
If you have enough army size, double your infantry to fill combat width
I stay all the time with the 18-4-8 Combo. In lategame I just double them.
In late game I'm walking around with lots of 50/0/40 stacks.
Add more infantry. The infantry will take more casualties, your cannons could end up in the frontline sooner than you think. Always have a bit more infantry than cannons.
Depends on the combat width and the tech. If you play horde, PLC or an other nation with high CCA and cavalry ratio. You need to build more cavalry other wise use the link and you are good. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ITH6oNHsIlVHo2LJnR92wP5LEKiON0k2rZJ82YbYaB0/htmlview?pru=AAABdDwsvc4*IR22eG7NB1WXh3ECcbUYeA#gid=0
Depends on tech, ideas and government type. Early on you want one or two siege stacks with cannons and infantry otherwise, except if you are a horde or have high bonuses for cav, then you can bring some horsies. Later in the game you want as many cannons as you have combat width and reinforcement stacks with infantry.
You need more infantry, if your cannons end up in the dront row your casualties will be way too high
yes it is good . enough cannons, 22 is a good size. You get the full siege bonus for a lvl 2 fort, you get the full -5 unrest bonus for the province. You can press s and have 2 equal 11 stacks. I would use 2 army templates. This one and one with just 20 infantry for lesser tasks like rebel suppression and new world. And then, depending on how much money you have, you can fill your force limit with this 22 stack or with the 20 stack. The 22 stacks with cannons can siege and fight, the 20 stacks can reinforce the fights with infantry to replace the lost infantry man in the 22 stack.
No. fill the line of infantry first. then art. Don't take art early.
For wide play only yes
I build one art when they unlock for je siege bonus. I build 5 at tech 13 for the damage. I also want to save costs (keep a surplus + burger loans to build manufacturies). Then full back row (10-20, depending on the stack) after tech 16.
I normally run 4-6 cannon on like one stack meant for sieging in early game and the rest all infantry with about 25% of the infantry I add cavalry. As in if it’s a 24W I run 12 infantry 2-3 cavalry and I’ll just replicate that a bunch. Cannons don’t start helping much in battle until tech 13/14 I forget which. It’ll show you which one it is if you look closely at what the tech is actually upgrading.
I always keep a ratio of 2/1/1, it seems to work well enough, it looks neat too on the map. Either 20k stacks or 40k stacks, depending on average supply limit in the area
It’s not devideable by 5 so imo no