The overall goal of this guide is to explain the intricacies of ‘Order of Battle’ creation. It strives to give illustrated examples of all relevant levels of army organisation, with clearly explained advantages and disadvantages. It also strives to offer in-depth information on the choices one can make when composing his forces and the logic to take into account when making these decisions.

Most examples offered in this guide are intended as inspiration rather than gospel. There are many possible variations to army organisation and it is impossible to show them all, let alone discuss each individual composition in detail. It is far more important that the OOB you settle on is one that you understand and find intuitive to use in battle. A neat organisation avails you little if it makes fighting battles or conducting campaigns a chore.

---

Over the course of a campaign, units will suffer losses, be it from battles, sickness, desertion or simply having served the full length of their contract. While there is an automated system that tries to replenish units back to their maximum strength, it is not immediate and requires available volunteers or drafts to be present in the home state of the unit. If you find yourself in a situation where immediate combat strength is more important than future potential, it can be interesting to adjust your OOB.
The first method is to simply combine understrength units to keep them close to their nominal strength. This leaves you with few units, but the units will be closer to full combat potential. This method is not always useful, since units with a lot of wounded but few actual deaths cannot be brought up to strength via this method. You also risk losing units to the merger, potentially costing you experienced and trained units that could have been replenished with time. When merging units, the experience and training also changes depending on the quality of the influx.
The second method is to shift around units within the OOB of the afflicted corps or army. This will lead to your formations shifting from one template to another, and will still leave them understrength for the new template, but can be useful if you prefer a certain number of effectives in a formation, rather than a certain number of units.

---

The backbone of almost any force you will field, the infantry is perhaps the most important branch of your armed forces. Equipped with muskets or rifles, they are able to lay down punishing fire if they can approach close enough. Most of your casualties, both inflicted and suffered, will come from your infantry brigades, so it is a good idea to organise them in a way to your liking.

---

---

Skirmishers can be detached by any infantry brigade as long as it would have more than 500 effectives remaining after detaching. Skirmishers have faster movement than their parent unit and this also carries over for double quick and running speeds. They also have a line of sight that is slightly larger than that of their parent unit and on par with that of a cavalry brigade (250 vs 200) and better concealment too. Skirmishers are mainly limited by their small unit size (maximum of 200 men) and small ammo reserve (20), though both can be refilled by reattaching and then detaching again. They can perform a variety of roles, ranging from improvised scouts to harassers, from flank guards to fighting a (shirt) delaying action.
segment about equipment
The most abundantly available muskets, and also the default infantry weapons in early campaigns, are the smoothbore muskets. They are characterised by a slow rate of fire, poor accuracy and shorter range. There are only 2 models in this category: the Springfield Musket (don't confuse with the rifled model) and the Mixed Muskets. Of these two models, the Springfield is the better one, with some of the highest firepower of all small arms and an actual bayonet (see the last paragraph of this section). While you should generally avoid using them, there is merrit to replacing Mixed Muskets with Springfield Muskets when you have no other alternatives.

The largest category of infantry weapons (in models) is the rifled musket group. They are characterised by (very) long ranges and decent accuracy, though their slow rate of fire and lower production can hold them back. The 2 most common models in this group are the Springfield Rifle-Musket and the Enfield Rifle-Musket. For all combat related purposes, these are identical, having identical accuracy, range, firepower and melee values. Their main difference is in production, with Enfields being import only weapons while Springfields are domestic production for the Union (and the Confederacy if they choose the Southern Industrialisation campaign policy). In later startdates these weapons become the default armament for newly raised brigades.

A third category is more a group of exceptional rifled muskets, since their main difference is a much better rate of fire than most infantry weapons, while retaining the other characteristics of rifled weapons. There are 3 models in this group: the Sharps Rifle, the Hall Rifle and the Dreyse Needle Gun. The first two are production only, the last is import only. All three are only sparsely available, with maybe a handful of brigades worth being produced over entire campaigns.

All weapons show their accompanying melee weapon/attachment, and this is the same for infantry armaments. Generally speaking, weapons that show something that is not some form of bayonet have an inferior melee stat, though with the way melee works this is rarely a make or break factor.
The example divisions shown below are all organised based on the number of units rather than based on the actual strength of said units. Pros, cons and usage advice given for them is done under the assumption that the division is operating somewhere between 40% and 90% of its theoretical strength, and that the component brigades are of roughly equal size. If you deviate from these assumptions (as is your right), you should take into account that you might need to mix the knowledge of several different division templates to arrive at an accurate view.

---

Any division where the primary combat unit is the infantry brigade is an infantry division. They are the mainstay division of armies and corps throughout the war, although their organisation can vary considerably based on many factors.

---

Nominal Strength

• 6.000-15.000 infantry
  
  • 400-1.000 skirmishers

Organisation

• 2-5 infantry brigades
  
  • skirmisher detachments
  Officers
  
  • 1 Brigadier General | Major General - Division command
    
    • 2-5x Colonel | Brigadier General
      
      • Preferably with “Infantry Officer” trait.
  Pros
  
  • Their large primary unit sizes allow for hard hitting volleys.
    
  • Their large primary unit sizes allow them to absorb more casualties.
  Cons
  
  • Being primarily composed of infantry brigades, this division is slow to move and react.

Demi dvisions derive their name mostly from the author. They are not truly based upon a historical organisation, but rather on specific needs and circumstances that may occur during a campaign. They are not true mainline formations that you can trust to hold a line of battle and hold it for a decent time, as they simply do not have the manpower for that.
In campaigns they are most likely to occur as a 'storage' formation for replacement brigades to keep bigger divisions up to strength, a leftover bin after units were shifted around to other mainline divisions, or for formations with a more specialised purpose.

---

Nominal Strength

• 6.000 infantry
  
  • 400 skirmishers

Organisation

• 2 infantry brigades
  
  • 2 skirmisher detachments

Pros

• This division requires very little manpower to create.
  
• This division can deploy in a single line without compromising the division commander's ability to order and rally units.
  
• Equipping the entire division with the same weapons is easier due to its small size.

Cons

• Being a demi division, it is virtually incapable of reacting to threats on its flanks without additional support from other units.
  
• Being a demi division, it can only deploy 2 skirmisher detachments, mostly reducing its independent skirmish capacity to that of scouts and low intensity harassment.
  
• This division type has very little capacity to bear losses and routs. Any prolonged engagement will likely see it gutted.

Proposed Usage

• As implied in the name given above, the demi infantry division serves best as a reserve formation for its parent corps. It can then be used to extend flanks, replace battered divisions or respond to enemy breakthroughs. If employed in this way it can also serve as an effective way to baptise new units, as it reduces the risk of the first battle morale cap coming into play.
  
• In a pinch, this barebones division can also hold choke points such as bridges and fords, though it is likely to be pushed back or even routed should a significant force press the attack.

---

The small nature of a 2 brigade division makes it less suited to straight up combat, but it opens a lot of opportunity for specialisation in an orderly manner. Below some examples of such specialised roles.
2 brigades with the engineer perk, grouped together with the express purpose of creating fortified positions for the rest of the corps/army.
2 brigades equipped with repeater rifles and preferably well trained and well led. While a traditional assault division would rely strongly on numbers to achieve a breakthrough, this division tries to achieve the same result by putting out a similar amount of fire with a lot less men. It is riskier than the conventional approach as it requires high end weaponry and is unable to handle casualties very well should it fail. It can also find itself without ammo if used intensively, potentially rendering the formation toothless until resupplied.
2 brigades armed with accurate rifled muskets or rifles and possessing relevant perks such as zouave, sharpshooter or skirmisher. This formation can be employed either to support your skirmisher detachments or to pressure flanks.

---

Triangular divisions are so named because their core organisation is centered around 3 main combat units.

---

Nominal Strength

• 9.000 infantry
  
  • 600 skirmishers

Organisation

• 3 infantry brigades
  
  • 3 skirmisher detachments

Pros

• It requires less manpower to create than other mainline divisions, enabling either more divisions for increased flexibility, or a reduction in manpower usage.
  
• This division can deploy in a single line without compromising the division commander's ability to order and rally units too severely.
  
• It has a limited internal reserve when deployed in a double line formation.

Cons

• Being a triangular division, it is less capable of reacting to flanking movements by the enemy due to its single reserve brigade when deployed in a double line. Simultaneous threats on both flanks or particularly large flank attacks cannot be countered effectively without support from other divisions.
  
• Being a triangular division, it can only deploy 3 skirmisher detachments, making it less effective in combating the enemy skirmishers and guarding flanks.

Proposed Usage

• This division template can act as part of your line of battle, and can do so with some flexibility. Depending on the situation it can deploy in either a single or a double line formation, making it suitable to be placed on exposed flanks that you expect to envelop or fold.

---

Square divisions are another historical OOB organisation method, though it does not work on the basis of 4 brigades like this guide uses, but 4 regiments grouped into two brigades. Since the smallest unit measure available in the campaign is the brigade we will gloss over the inaccuracy.

---

Nominal Strength

• 12.000 infantry
  
  • 800 skirmishers

Organisation

• 4 infantry brigades
  
  • 4 skirmisher detachments

Pros

• As long as the brigades are of roughly equal strength a square division in double lines will have 2 local reserve brigades to replace the frontline and protect the flanks.
  
• When close to maximum strength this division template has a decent ability to absorb casualties without being rendered combat ineffective.

Cons

• Depending a bit on the strength of its brigades, a square division can cover more frontage in a single line than the division commander can control, reducing command effectiveness.
  
• This division composition is quite manpower intensive to set up. Depending on the exact manner in which it is employed, this can lead to “wasted” brigades that do not see any action.

Proposed Usage

• A solid mainline force, the square division can act as a straight combat division for a decent amount of time without being rendered combat ineffective by casualties.
  
• When concentrated into attack columns a square division can be quite effective in massed assaults, though it is more vulnerable to enemy fire in this formation.
  
• If close to full strength, a square division can come quite close to matching the size of a smallish depleted corps. It can thus perform delaying and holding actions decently well, especially when in possession of a terrain advantage such as cover or chokepoints.

---

A somewhat ahistorical organisation, the pentomic structure is named for its characteristic subdivision into 5 parts, translating to a division of 5 brigades in this case.

---

Nominal Strength

• 15.000 infantry
  
  • 1.000 skirmishers

Organisation

• 5 infantry brigades
  
  • 5 skirmisher detachments

Pros

• Being a pentomic division, it can act as its own local reserve when deployed in a double line, enabling it to guard its own flanks and rotate out battered units.
  
• Being a pentomic division, it has access to a strong skirmisher component, enabling more aggressive tactics when using them.
  
• This division type has a lot of reserves to absorb losses and routs. It can endure prolonged engagements and emerge still fit for further combat.

Cons

• This division requires a lot of manpower to create.
  
• This division requires a lot of brigades, potentially leading to long recruitment times and a reduction in the number of divisions in a corps, lowering tactical flexibility.
  
• This division cannot deploy into a single line without compromising the division commander's ability to order and rally units.
  
• Equipping the entire division with the same weapons can be a challenge, especially with top of the line equipment.

Proposed Usage

• Pentomic divisions are large and border on unwieldy, but they can perform very well as the central division of a corps, being the nucleus of a defensive position or the hammer of an offensive push. Their size can rival that of a small corps if the division is at full strength, making it quite suited to operating in a more independent fashion, acting as a detached force.

---

The large nature of a 5 brigade division makes it more cumbersome in manoeuvering, but its sheer weight of numbers can be useful at times. Below some examples of such tactics.
5 brigades, preferably with morale or melee perks, grouped together with the express purpose of assaulting fortified positions on a narrow front. The division will use either the successive line formation or a series of attack columns to engage the enemy in melee combat. Preferably the division can focus on 1 or 2 enemy brigades to ensure local superiority. Units should have a decent drill level and their commanders should have high leadership. Keep in mind that close combat assault can result in very high casualties if it fails, and that it is rarely needed. In most cases it is safer and more effective to try and fold the enemy flanks if you have superior numbers.
The main difficulties with this tactic are as follows:

• Successive waves can disrupt eachothers cohesion, a critical factor in melee, so try to avoid this.
  
• The assaulting units are vulnerable on their flanks, and an unsupported assault will fail more likely than not.
  
• High casualties are likely, necessitating populous states to supply reinforcements and long recovery periods.

Rather than having multiple divisions form the frontline of a corps, some commanders prefer to have a single large division as the anchor for their line. This division foregoes a more conservative double line formation in favour of a single line. This tactic ensures that most other divisions are free to be committed in full as desired. It can be useful in some scenarios, mostly when you are defending, but it reduces the flexibility in the centre of your formation as orders take longer to travel and the central division commander struggles to motivate all his brigades at once.

---

There are several ways to organise the artillery in your forces, and one of them is to assign artillery battalions directly to your mainline divisions. This organisation somewhat mirrors historical precedent, especially for the confederates.

---

---

It is important to note that artillery comes in a few different varieties. The main differences are between smoothbore and rifled guns.
Smoothbores are generally the older and more available designs and are thus quite abundant in a typical campaign. Most of the designs of this type are quite heavy and tend to have poorer accuracy. These deficiencies are compensated somewhat by their on average better canister performance.
Rifled guns encompass most of the newer designs, but suffer from limited availability, especially in the early months of the war. Most of the time they have greater range and better accuracy than their smoothbore counterparts, but a slightly worse canister performance.

---

Generally speaking, a single artillery battalion will suffice for most divisions in terms of integrated support. In some cases, either due to understrength battalions or very large divisions, a second artillery battalion might be useful to keep a desired ratio between men and guns.
There are two main scenarios for the use of integrated divisional artillery battalions. The first scenario is in fulfilling the role of close-up support. In such cases you will use the guns as giant shotguns to defend against enemy pushes or disrupt large concentrations of enemy troops. This role is best left to smoothbore guns and howitzers, since the closer ranges make accuracy less of an issue and also because they tend to have a larger caliber than the available rifled guns. It also helps that smoothbores are in much higher supply, with both sides defaulting to them for equipping newly raised battalions.

The second scenario is fulfilling the role of all purpose artillery for independently operating battalions, such as divisions guarding a particular chokepoint or sent on a large flanking maneuver. In this role there is less clarity on the ideal gun type, and it might make more sense to use rifled guns for the added range and suitability for counter battery fire.

• Divisions with integrated artillery are more capable of acting in a detached manner due to their easier access to artillery support.
  
• Frontline artillery battalions will often fire at shorter ranges, improving their accuracy and thus damage output.

• Divisions with integrated artillery are less mobile than their simpler counterparts, making them somewhat less suited to quick maneuvers.
  
• Due to the higher risks of being closer to the frontline, integrated artillery battalions will likely suffer more casualties.

---

An important, though not vital, portion of most corps and armies, cavalry can perform a variety of functions, both on and off the battlefield. Often equipped with fast firing carbines or repeater rifles, they can pour a surprising amount of lead downrange when required. Their horses increase movement speed, but don't do well with fences and firing from horse is an art difficult to master. Often only a minor part of your force, sometimes it can be rewarding to have a few more and employ them in their own formations.

---

---

Scouts can be detached by any cavalry brigade as long as it has more than 500 effectives remaining after detaching. Scouts have faster movement than their parent unit, both mounted and on foot, this also carries over for double quick and running speeds. They also have a line of sight nearly 50% larger than their parents (350 vs 250) and better concealment too. Scouts are mainly limited by their small unit size (maximum of 150 men) and small ammo reserve (20), though both can be refilled by reattaching and then detaching again.
Cavalry units have some hidden stat changes depending upon whether they are mounted or not. When on their horses, a cavalry unit will only have 60% of its potential accuracy, but it’s reload will be boosted by 25%. Overall, this is still a reduction in ranged combat ability compared to dismounted cavalry, but the changes can be negated (partially, and it affects both changes) by the 'Mounted Rifles' perk.
Cavalry units have access to a fairly wide array of weapons, though they can all be divided into 2 main categories: slow firing and rapid firing.
The slow firing category is the smallest group, containing only 3 models: Mixed Cavalry Weapons, Springfield Musketoons and Enfield Musketoons. Their main characteristic is a slow rate of fire, going from a slow 2,5 rounds per minute to a less slow 3,5 rounds per minute. It is tempting to think of this category as the trash category, but it contains one redeeming model: the Enfield Musketoon. This weapon allows cavalry units to be equipped with a weapon that matches the ranges of the common rifled-muskets and beats them slightly in rate of fire and accuracy. The only downside is its weaker melee profile when dismounted and that you need to dedicate valuable policy slots to the Diplomacy branch to get your hands on it, as it is an import only weapon.

All weapons not part of the slow firing category fall into the fast firing one, for a grand total of 11 models. While there are still substantial differences in rate of fire (from 7 to 16 rounds per minute), this factor can generally be assumed as high enough. A lot of these weapons possess average or better accuracy, though they all have lower ranged damage and when on foot, lower melee stats. The main attribute deciding the usefulness of a rapid fire weapon is its range. Most are stuck on a paltry 200 yards, meaning any infantry musket outranges them, though this might not always be noticeable due to range allowances. The more worthwhile rapid fire models have a range of 300 or even 350 yards, which gives them a decent chance/ability to exchange volleys with infantry with rifled-muskets.
Cavalry can fulfill several roles on the battlefield, and it is important to be aware of them so that you can employ them too.
The first role is perhaps the most iconic, as it involves aggressive charges and a focus on melee combat. When used for such a role, the equipment of the unit matters little. This can be a risky role, as it is not just making charges of opportunity against isolated or weakened units. In its truest form, it relies on a sizeable cavalry force to engage a substantial part of the enemy force in short succession. While it can be used as a standalone tactic, it is better for your units to aid them with infantry and artillery support. This role is arguably a dated use for your cavalry, as melee combat against steady units is a very risky endeavour morale wise.

A second role for cavalry is that of mounted skirmishers. In this function the goal is to harass enemy flanks and support units with a few volleys of carbine fire before falling back should the enemy try to respond. This tactic is quite micro intensive as it requires orders on the brigade level to pull it off effectively. It is also prone to disruption if the ordering HQ is not close enough, so this tactic benefits greatly from a dedicated division.

The third role for cavalry is one in which they act as mounted infantry. They will forgo the mounted charge and firing from horseback in favour of riding to the battlefield and once there, fighting dismounted. This negates the stat changes from firing while mounted and allows them to utilize cover like regular infantry can. The main drawback of this tactic is that a lot of cavalry weapons lack the range to go head to head with rifled infantry weapons, making them less suitable for defensive actions, though this can largely be negated with the import of Enfield Musketoons.
Cavalry brigades have a lower max strength than infantry brigades, at 2.500 men versus 3.000. Depending somewhat on the exact equipment and circumstances, this means that cavalry lacks some of the staying power of infantry units. For cavalry brigades and divisions intended for heavy combat a unit size between 40% and 100% of the theoretical is recommended. If their purpose is closer to harassment or opportunistic flanking, the lower bound drops to 25-30%. For scouting purposes there is no minimum size, and it can be beneficial for the unit to be smaller, though this purpose can largely be fulfilled by the scout detachments.

---

The cavalry variant of the demi division. Where infantry divisions of this type are of limited utility, cavalry differs enough in its strengths and weaknesses that it can make fair use of this formation size.

---

Nominal Strength

• 5.000 cavalry
  
  • 300 scouts

Organisation

• 2 cavalry brigades
  
  • 2 scout detachments

Pros

• This is a monotype division, meaning all its components are of the same branch and thus do not differ too much in terms of speed, making movements more cohesive.
  
• This is a mounted division, meaning its movement speed is higher than average.
  
• This division requires very little manpower to create.
  
• This division can deploy in a single line without compromising the division commander's ability to order and rally units.
  
• This division's rate of fire will often be superior due to the equipment available to cavalry.

Cons

• Being a demi division, it is virtually incapable of reacting to threats on its flanks without additional support from other units.
  
• Being a demi division, it can only deploy 2 scout detachments, mostly reducing its independent skirmish capacity to that of distant scouting and low intensity harassment.
  
• This division has less manpower than a comparable infantry division, and has low manpower in general. This means it has very little capacity to bear losses and routs. Any prolonged engagement will likely see it gutted.
  
• This division's accuracy and range will often be inferior due to the equipment available to cavalry.

Proposed Usage

• In essence the demi cavalry division will fulfill the same roles as a lone cavalry brigade attached to corps command. It can serve as an aggressive scouting force, flank guard or flanking force, but in a pinch can also be used for assaulting enemy positions head on, though this will be reduced in viability as the war progresses and the range difference between the most common cavalry weapons and infantry weapons increases.

---

The cavalry variant of the triangular division. A size more suitable to combat oriented cavalry formations.

---

Nominal Strength

• 7.500 cavalry
  
  • 450 scouts

Organisation

• 3 cavalry brigades
  
  • 3 scout detachments

Pros

• This is a monotype division, meaning all its components are of the same branch and thus do not differ too much in terms of speed, making movements more cohesive.
  
• This is a mounted division, meaning its movement speed is higher than average.
  
• This division can deploy in a single line without compromising the division commander's ability to order and rally units.
  
• This division's rate of fire will often be superior due to the equipment available to cavalry.
  
• It has a limited internal reserve when deployed in a double line formation.

Cons

• Being a triangular division, it is less capable of reacting to flanking movements by the enemy due to its single reserve brigade when deployed in a double line. Simultaneous threats on both flanks or particularly large flank attacks cannot be countered effectively without support from other divisions.
  
• This division has less manpower than a comparable infantry division. This means it has less capacity to bear losses and routs. Prolonged engagements are likely to reduce the division to a more passive role.
  
• This division's accuracy and range will often be inferior due to the equipment available to cavalry.

Proposed Usage

• A triangular cavalry division offers a decent strike force that can be used both for ranged engagements as well as melee confrontations. When used in an aggressive role, it is best to concentrate on a small part of the enemy force, often a single brigade, preferably one that is isolated or has an exposed flank. The goal is to leverage the higher volume of fire of cavalry carbines and the multiple angles of attack to induce multiple morale penalties. This can then be followed upon with a mounted charge. The mounted aspect is quite important since most cavalry weapons have inferior melee stats when used on foot, while having much better stats if mounted. In an ideal scenario this concentration of force allows you to roll up several enemy units one after the other.
  
• A triangular cavalry division equipped with Enfield Musketoons can act as a mounted infantry division that is pushed ahead of the rest of your forces to secure important battlefield locations, be it Victory Points, choke points or cover rich terrain. Once they arrive at the desired location they dismount and fight as more conventional infantry. Their specific weapon loadout allows them to trade fairly evenly with infantry brigades even at rifle musket ranges, although their comparatively lower number means that the cavalry will likely lose eventually if not relieved.

---

The cavalry variant of the square division. At this size the formation is really only suited to combat oriented actions, otherwise it represents a significant amount of underused manpower and equipment.

---

Nominal Strength

• 10.000 cavalry
  
  • 600 scouts

Organisation

• 4 cavalry brigades
  
  • 4 scout detachments

Pros

• This is a monotype division, meaning all its components are of the same branch and thus do not differ too much in terms of speed, making movements more cohesive.
  
• This is a mounted division, meaning its movement speed is higher than average.
  
• This division's rate of fire will often be superior due to the equipment available to cavalry.
  
• It has an internal reserve when deployed in a double line formation.
  
• Being a square division, it is quite capable of reacting to flanking movements by the enemy due to its often double reserve brigade when deployed in a double line. Simultaneous threats on both flanks or particularly large flank attacks can be countered without support from other divisions.

Cons

• This division has less manpower than a comparable infantry division. This means it has slightly less capacity to bear losses and routs.
  
• This division's accuracy and range will often be inferior due to the equipment available to cavalry.
  
• This division cannot deploy in a single line without compromising the division commander's ability to order and rally units.

Proposed Usage

• The sheer size, both in number of men and surface covered, means that this division is more suited to straight up combat. It can utilise the same tactics as a smaller triangular cavalry division, though there is potential for employing those against more than one unit at a time. See Cavalry - Triangular Divisions for expanded usage proposals.

---

While it is certainly possible to make a pentomic or even larger cavalry division, you should ask yourself whether or not such a large formation of cavalry is still usable. Cavalry has faster movement due to their horses, but at the same time their manoeuvrability is less than that of infantry units because they have trouble with fences and similar obstacles. Cavalry is also disadvantaged because of their lower manpower strength per brigade, their shorter ranged weapons, their poorer accuracy when mounted and their inability to lay down in the face of bombardement. In short, in straight combat they are generally outmatched by infantry units.

Their strengths are mainly focused on the ability to flank and act quickly, something that is made more difficult with larger formations that strain the command and control ability of their commanders. If used in a purely supporting role there is also less need for more than a handful of brigades, and if more are needed, it is likely to be on opposite flanks, meaning multiple smaller divisions are probably more suitable for the intended purpose.

Even, or especially, in a scouting role there is little benefit to having large divisions. A couple of cavalry brigades with scouts deployed are likely enough to cover most areas that you would need intelligence on, both on the campaign map and on the battlefield.Indeed, should you find yourself in a situation where you do need many scouts over a wide area, it is far more efficient for command and control purposes to divide them into a couple of smaller divisions than to keep them centralised in a single one.

---

There are several ways to organise the artillery in your forces, and one of them is to assign artillery battalions directly to your mainline divisions. This organisation somewhat mirrors historical precedent, especially for the confederates.

---

---

It is important to note that artillery comes in a few different varieties. The main differences are between smoothbore and rifled guns.
Smoothbores are generally the older and more available designs and are thus quite abundant in a typical campaign. Most of the designs of this type are quite heavy and tend to have poorer accuracy. These deficiencies are compensated somewhat by their on average better canister performance.
Rifled guns encompass most of the newer designs, but suffer from limited availability, especially in the early months of the war. Most of the time they have greater range and better accuracy than their smoothbore counterparts, but a slightly worse canister performance.

---

Generally speaking, a single artillery battalion will suffice for most divisions in terms of integrated support. In some cases, either due to understrength battalions or very large divisions, a second artillery battalion might be useful to keep a desired ratio between men and guns.
There are two main scenarios for the use of integrated divisional artillery battalions. The first scenario is in fulfilling the role of close-up support. In such cases you will use the guns as giant shotguns to defend against enemy pushes or disrupt large concentrations of enemy troops. This role is best left to smoothbore guns and howitzers, since the closer ranges make accuracy less of an issue and also because they tend to have a larger caliber than the available rifled guns. It also helps that smoothbores are in much higher supply, with both sides defaulting to them for equipping newly raised battalions.

The second scenario is fulfilling the role of all purpose artillery for independently operating battalions, such as divisions guarding a particular chokepoint or sent on a large flanking maneuver. In this role there is less clarity on the ideal gun type, and it might make more sense to use rifled guns for the added range and suitability for counter battery fire.
For cavalry divisions it makes sense to use horse artillery as the integrated support. Its greater mobility allows it to better keep up with the rest of the division, and makes it more useful in aggressive actions and opportunistic maneuvers.

---

• Divisions with integrated artillery are more capable of acting in a detached manner due to their easier access to artillery support.
  
• Frontline artillery battalions will often fire at shorter ranges, improving their accuracy and thus damage output.

• Divisions with integrated artillery are less mobile than their simpler counterparts, making them somewhat less suited to quick maneuvers.
  
• Due to the higher risks of being closer to the frontline, integrated artillery battalions will likely suffer more casualties.

---

---

Artillery is an important part of a well rounded force. While not a true butcher in the current iteration of the game, it can still have a hefty impact on the field of battle in the form of morale penalties from artillery fire and close range deterrent from canister salvos.
The theoretical strength of an artillery unit is a battalion sized force of 240 artillerists manning 16 guns. In campaign gameplay your batteries will rarely differ much from that theoretical strength due to their ability to project force from behind friendly units (to some degree). Unless used aggressively or caught severely out of position, artillery battalions will be some of the safest units on the field, subjected only to counter battery fire from opposing artillery.

---

---

Integrated artillery is a term for artillery battalions that are not separated from the mainline infantry and cavalry divisions. They typically take the form of a single battalion mixed into one of the previously shown examples of division structure. There are arguments pro and contra this approach, but ultimately it will come down to personal preference, though somewhat influenced by tactical considerations. For more details, see the integrated support sections for infantry and cavalry divisions.
Independent artillery is a term for artillery battalions that are attached directly to the corps or army HQ. This means that single battalions answer directly to the higher levels of your OOB structure. This approach works quite well in smaller scale corps where the number of artillery battalions is quite low, but can seriously strain the command and control when the numbers start increasing.
It retains some use for specialist battalions in larger corps and armies, for example counter batteries equipped with 6 and 12 pdr Withworths or heavy batteries with 20 and 30pdr Parrotts.
Artillery divisions is a term for artillery battalions organised under a division HQ without any infantry or cavalry units being part of the division. They represent an easier way to control large numbers of guns at once and can help lessen the strain on other HQs. For more information and examples, see below.

---

Nominal Strength

• 480 artillerists
  
  • 32 guns

Organisation

• 2 artillery battalions
  
  • 32 guns

Pros

• This formation is easy to command and control for the division commander unless the batteries are very far apart.

Cons

• This formation lacks the number of guns for truly effective bombardements.

Proposed Usage

• This dual structure can be used to leapfrog artillery battalions, allowing one battery to move up/back under cover of the other battery. This method can be quite potent when trying to keep a fairly constant canister barrage on a more mobile frontline.
  If used for close range support, its battalions should be equipped with heavy caliber guns, with a preference for smoothbores.

---

Nominal Strength

• 720 artillerists
  
  • 48 guns

Organisation

• 3 artillery battalions
  
  • 48 guns

Pros

• When used as the main artillery formation of a corps, its triangular structure allows for an easy role assignment in the form of left-center-right.

Cons

• This formation is still lacking in guns for bombardements, though it can serve in a pinch.

Proposed Usage

• A somewhat uncomfortable formation size that can perform most artillery roles, but is a bit big for the more active tactics and slightly small for the more passive ones.

---

Nominal Strength

• 960 artillerists
  
  • 64 guns

Organisation

• 4 artillery battalions
  
  • 64 guns

Pros

• The 4 battalions represent a substantial amount of firepower when concentrated on a single bombardement target. While in the current iteration of the game artillery damage is generally lackluster, it can still deal substantial casualties and morale debuffs when massed.

Cons

• Artillery divisions do not follow standard formation conventions, they will always default to a single line unless its constituent battalions are individually ordered. This makes the command and control for large divisions difficult.

Proposed Usage

• Generally speaking, grand batteries make more sense for large corps or armies as a way to coordinate a large number of artillery at once. Its purpose is to target a single area or unit at a time and to unleash hell upon it. The formation is generally too unwieldy for use as frontline artillery and relies on other divisions for its protection.
  Equipment wise it benefits most from using heavier guns with decent range, like 12pdr Napoleons, 12pdr Field, 24pdr Howitzers, 20 and 30pdr Parrotts and 14pdr James. Accuracy is less of a concern than sheer weight of fire for this purpose.

---

Legions refer to formations that bundle infantry, cavalry and artillery units into a single formation. They can vary in command level from a divisional command all the way up to an army command, though they probably function best as small corps. Their purpose is to have a close cooperation between the three branches at relatively small scale, theoretically enabling a numerically inferior force to punch above its weight.
The legion structures proposed in this section can be seen as a transitory step between division level organisation and true corps and army level organisation. They can be remodeled fairly easily into full fledged corps with the addition of a few more units and a bit of subdividing into more conventional divisions, making them a good fit for the early war period and theatres of secondary importance.
Historically speaking, while legions did get employed during the civil war, they were limited in number and scope, acting more like mixed regiments or brigades than than the mixed division sized formations you will see in the examples below.

---

---

Legions are in essence a single mainline division acting as a (very) small corps. They have all the basic support elements of a regular corps, but much reduced in scale and numbers to fit the much smaller core of direct combatants they need to support. Most of the time this will translate to a number of core units matching a triangular, square or even pentomic structure, aided by a further group of support units that is smaller in number and size. A rough ratio would be that ~60% of a legions units are its mainline brigades and the remaining 40% will be divided over supporting brigades and battalions. Note that this ratio is only for the number of units and that the manpower ratios are skewed even more in favour of the mainline brigades.

Deciding on what unit type you will build the legion around is one of the more important factors in determining what roles it will be able to perform efficiently.
The classic legion focuses on an infantry division as core supplemented with a smattering of cavalry and artillery support. A general ratio for the different troop branches is as follows:

• 1 artillery battalion / 2 infantry brigades
  
• 1 cavalry brigade for scouting purposes

The infantry core is meant to engage an enemy in open battle if there is numerical parity or to fall back on (self made) cover and choke points should it find itself outnumbered. The cavalry is meant for scouting and silencing enemy batteries should they be left exposed. In a pinch they can serve a more combat focused role as well. The artillery is lacking in numbers to be truly effective at long range and should instead be focused mostly on shoring up your own lines with short ranged support or targeting enemy artillery.
A less common variant of the legion structure, this organisation swaps the cavalry and infantry ratios around. The legion is now built around a cavalry division supplemented with horse artillery and a single infantry brigade. A general ratio for the different troop branches is as follows:

• 1 artillery battalion / 2 cavalry brigades
  
• 1 infantry brigade for engineering purposes

The cavalry core is at its best when designed as mounted infantry, meaning it is equipped with weapons that have a range of 300 yards or more. The infantry is meant to prepare fortifications for the cavalry and artillery units and act as a reserve force and rearguard. For this purpose the brigade marches at speed towards the desired location, potentially arriving severely fatigued. The artillery is lacking in numbers to be truly effective at long range and should instead be focused mostly on shoring up your own lines with short ranged support or targeting enemy artillery.
A compromise between the two other designs, this variant keeps an equal balance between the infantry and cavalry brigades of the legion. The force is still supplemented with artillery, but whether it is horse artillery or not is largely up to personal preference. A general ratio for the different troop branches is as follows:

• 1 infantry brigade / 1 cavalry brigade
  
• 1 artillery battalion / 2 mainline brigades

A mixed legion is an attempt at combining the best elements of both worlds. In practice it is liable to end up in situations where it is a “Jack of all traits, master of none”.
Legions can be a good choice for fronts where you don't expect an enemy presence, since a typical legion is closer to an overstrength division than a full fledged corps. They are also less intensive on the supply system and should therefore suffer less when operating in regions with poor infrastructure.
Legions are also viable as a vanguard/rearguard corps for the rest of the army, where it fulfills the role that might otherwise be attributed to a cavalry corps of pushing ahead of the main body and securing or contesting important locations on the strategic or tactical map or of covering for the rest of the army as it repositions or retreats.

• Low manpower requirements
  
• Low supply burden
  
• Low transportation burden
  
• Contains all basic elements for combined arms

• Lacks reserves
  
• Largely restricted to small scale tactics
  
• Potentially intensive on the command & control of its commander

---

There are three different ways in which you can organise a Legion in your OOB structure.
A legion organised under a divisional HQ is the most constrained in terms of strategic and tactical freedom, being chained to its parent corps/army on the campaign map and still dependent on those parents for supply and formation orders during battles, making it arguably the worst choice.
When organised under a dedicated corps HQ, the Legion gains a lot more flexibility. It can move relatively freely on the campaign map, though still subject to order delay via its army HQ, and perhaps most importantly, becomes far more able to act as reinforcements in battle. The formation movement orders can also be sped up considerably by adding in a divisional HQ between the Corps HQ and the actual units, ensuring that for formation movements you can draw the orders directly from the corps level instead of having to go one level higher.
This structure is one of the easiest ones to set up, as it simply requires recruiting a new army and filling it with the needed brigades. You lose some of the strategic flexibility because you can't reinforce nearby battles with the same ease that would come from being part of the same army, but you do gain the most freedom of movement on the campaign map, with the only order delay coming from the distance to the capital.

---

The following lists and pictures are examples of different legion types and organisations. They are not strict templates that have to be copied, but serve to show the different forms a legion structure might take. When organising your own legions, consider both tactical implications (battlefield role), operational considerations (supply, terrain and transportation) and also strategic deliberations (campaign goals).

---

Nominal Strength

• 12.000 infantry
  
  • 800 skirmishers
• 2.500 cavalry
  
  • 150 scouts
• 480 artillery
  
  • 32 guns

Organisation

• 4 infantry brigades
  
  • 4 skirmisher detachments
• 1 cavalry brigade
  
  • 1 scout detachment
• 2 artillery battalions
  
  • 32 guns

Pros

• This legion contains a small cavalry component, allowing it to gather intelligence and scout the battlefield.
  
• This legion has a sizeable infantry core, allowing it to hold its own against superior forces for a while.
  
• At roughly 15.000 men at full strength, this formation requires only ~75 transport capacity to make use of alternative means of transportation.

Cons

• This legion lacks the cavalry numbers to use them aggressively.
  
• With seven units attached to the HQ command & control is less efficient.

---

Nominal Strength

• 12.500 cavalry
  
  • 750 scouts
• 3.000 infantry
  
  • 200 skirmishers
• 720 horse artillery
  
  • 48 guns

Organisation

• 4 cavalry brigades
  
  • 4 scout detachments
• 1 infantry brigade
  
  • 1 skirmisher detachment
• 3 horse artillery battalions
  
  • 48 guns

Pros

• This legion contains a large cavalry component, allowing it to gather intelligence, scout the battlefield and act aggressively in combat.
  
• This legion has a small infantry core, allowing it to erect fortifications, though not very fast.
  
• This legion has a sizeable artillery component, allowing it to use bombardment tactics with decent effect.
  
• At roughly 16.000 men at full strength, this formation requires only ~80 transport capacity to make use of alternative means of transportation.

Cons

• This legion lacks the infantry numbers to use them aggressively.
  
• With nine units attached to the HQ command & control is inefficient.
  
• The heavy cavalry focus makes the legion less capable of winning extended ranged duels.

---

Nominal Strength

• 6.000 infantry
  
  • 400 skirmishers
• 5000 cavalry
  
  • 300 scouts
• 480 artillery
  
  • 32 guns

Organisation

• 2 infantry brigades
  
  • 2 skirmisher detachments
• 2 cavalry brigade
  
  • 2 scout detachments
• 2 artillery battalions
  
  • 32 guns

Pros

• This legion contains a cavalry component, allowing it to gather intelligence and scout the battlefield. It can also be used semi aggressively in combat.
  
• This legion has a modest infantry core, allowing it to hold its own against superior forces in choke points or to erect fortifications at speed.
  
• At roughly 11.500 men at full strength, this formation requires only ~58 transport capacity to make use of alternative means of transportation.

Cons

• This legion lacks the cavalry numbers to use them aggressively.
  
• This legion lacks the infantry numbers to use them aggressively.

---

A corps is a grouping of two or more (mainline) divisions. The size of a corps can range from barely more than 10.000 to formations of several tens of thousands. Most corps tend to have elements of infantry, cavalry and artillery present, though with different weights. They serve mostly to reduce the strain of command & control upon the higher echelons of command.

They can vary widely in intended functionality, ranging from small semi-independent armies to glorified flank designations only used on the battlefield. It is also not unusual for them to change drastically in composition and size as the needs and limitations of the conflict (local and national) change.

Historically speaking, corps were used extensively during the American Civil War, and they did vary wildly in terms of manpower and equipment over the course of the war. Part of this was that the system was a novel implementation for the United States military, having not needed it in the past, and part was due to the less formalised nature of American corps as compared to European counterparts.

---

---

There are several different ways to describe the size and strength of a corps. These can relate to the number of directly subordinate units, the total number of subordinate units, the number of men, the number of men of a particular branch, the number of combat ready units, the number of combat ready men, etc. All these measurements have their own merits and flaws and therefore it is important that a general terminology is established beforehand.

This guide will use the number of mainline divisions as the general size measurement for corps level formations, while using the manpower count as the general strength indicator. Should you note cases of improper usage of these terms in the guide, please leave a comment.

---

It is important to note that not all theatres of the war need multiple corps that form a larger army. When deciding on whether to split a single corps army into multiple corps there are a few factors to take into consideration.

• Spread the burden of command & control over multiple commanders.
  
• Spreads out the supply burden.
  
• Spreads out the transportation burden.
  
• Tends to contain all the basic elements for combined arms.

• Reduced force concentration opens up the possibility of defeat in detail at the strategic level.
  
• In the early war period cooperation between corps will be stymied due to the lack of a formal corps structure.
  
• Overspecialisation of corps can leave them ill equipped to operate independently.

---

There are three distinct ways in which you can organise the elements of a Corps in your OOB structure.
Mainline divisions refer to those divisions that contain infantry or cavalry brigades, possibly with integrated artillery support.
Support divisions refer to those divisions that contain only artillery battalions, irrespective of them being horse artillery or not. In some rare cases an infantry or cavalry division meant for non combat purposes like fortification or scouting can also be referred to by this aegis, but generally it is reserved for pure artillery formations.
Directly attached unit refers to those brigades or battalions that answer directly to the corps command and are not grouped under a division headquarters.

---

As mentioned before a corps is typically made up of two or more divisions and often contains additional supporting elements. The main factor that decides the capabilities of corps is the type of divisions it is composed of, in particular the unit type, though equipment, training and manpower all affect this too.

It is important to note that the exact equipment and composition of the divisions that make up a corps can differ wildly even within a single corps. While there is a tendency towards standardising the mainline divisions of the same corps around a single template, there are also examples of more uneven distributions of units in the historical record.

Deciding on what unit type you will build the corps around is one of the more important factors in determining what roles it will be able to perform efficiently.

---

The most common type of corps, this formation uses infantry divisions as its mainline force. The infantry brigades are generally supported by a decent amount of artillery, sometimes integrated, sometimes separate. Generally there is a small cavalry component present to fulfil scouting duties, but it might be dropped if there is a dedicated cavalry component operating in the same area.

The role of the infantry corps is chiefly to engage enemy forces in direct combat. It lacks the mobility to swiftly execute sweeping manoeuvres and will thus often dedicate a significant portion of its strength to tying down opposing forces in firefights giving its remaining forces (or other corps) the chance to perform more decisive actions.

When deciding on the composition of an infantry corps, the chief concerns should be whether it is meant for aggressive or more defensive tactics. As a general rule, aggressive tactics will require more units and more manpower and tend to generate more casualties, necessitating a larger force. More defensive tactics rely on using man-made or natural advantages to allow a smaller number of units and men to perform admirably even when significantly outnumbered. Further accommodations can then be made for the limits of equipment, manpower, supply and command, but having a clear vision of what the corps ought to do should be the guiding principle.

Common measurements:

• 3-4 mainline infantry divisions
  
  • often triangular or square in nature
• 1 artillery battalion / 2-3 infantry brigades

• 1 cavalry brigade for reconnaissance

---

A less common variant of the corps structure, this formation uses cavalry divisions as its mainline force. The cavalry brigades are generally supported by horse artillery battalions, though the exact manner of their integration is variable. In some cases there might be a small number of supporting infantry that serve in an engineering role.

The role of cavalry corps tends to gravitate towards scouting, acting as a vanguard, rearguard or flanking force and chasing down routing enemies. They are often smaller than more conventional infantry corps and mixed corps, both due to the lower number of men in a cavalry brigade and a tendency towards having less or smaller divisions. The main reason for this smaller strength is that cavalry represents a bit of a niche in and of itself. There are several things it can do better, but also many things it does worse than standard infantry forces.

When deciding on the composition of a cavalry corps, the main factor in the size decision should be whether or not you want it to fill a supporting role or a combat role. Further accommodations can then be made for the limits of equipment, manpower, supply and command, but having a clear vision of what the corps ought to do should be the guiding principle.

Common measurements:

• 2-3 (mainline) cavalry divisions
  
  • often demi or triangular in nature
• 1 horse artillery battalion / 2-3 cavalry brigades

---

An uncommon structure for a corps, this formation is centered around mainline infantry divisions and one or more mainline cavalry divisions. These divisions are supported by artillery battalions and sometimes also some horse artillery, though the exact manner of their integration is variable.

The role of mixed corps tends to be similar to that of more standard infantry corps, but with a preference for vanguard or flanking actions due to their better mobility. They are often slightly smaller than a same sized infantry corps, but hope to outmanoeuver parts of the opposing forces so that they may get local superiority. This type of corps can sometimes see usage in place of a dedicated cavalry corps.

When deciding the composition of a mixed corps, the main factor in the size decisions should be if it can replace or fill the function of a cavalry corps by tacking the cavalry aspects on to a standard infantry corps.

Common measurements:

• 1-3 mainline infantry divisions
  
• 1-2 mainline cavalry divisions
  
• 1 artillery battalion / 2-3 mainline brigades
  
  • can be either regular or horse artillery

---

Quite a rare type of corps, the support corps forgoes most or even all mainline units in favour of massing a large number of artillery under a single command. The artillery divisions can be supported by engineering and fortification specialists, with perhaps a cavalry brigade for general scouting purposes.

The role of a support corps is generally to bombard an area with overwhelming firepower, bringing to bear a weight of shot and shell beyond the ability of more standard corps artillery. Due to the focus on artillery and lack of mainline units, this corps is often very small in manpower terms, though it can still contain a lot of units. The corps is very much a specialist formation that will not operate well outside of its intended parameters.

When deciding the composition of a support corps, the main factor in the size decision should be how many pieces of heavy, long ranged artillery you have access to.

Common measurements:

• 1-2 support divisions
  
  • triangular or square in nature
• 1 mainline division
  
  • specialised in fortification, engineering or sharpshooting
  • optional
• 1 cavalry brigade for reconnaissance
  
  • optional

---

A small corps refers to a corps with ~2 mainline divisions. These divisions will often be triangular or square in nature, though other sizes are possible. At full strength these formations tend to number 20-25.000 effectives, though this number can drop considerably once attrition and combat take their toll.

---

• Puts a smaller strain on transport capacity when it uses alternative means of transportation.
  
• Low command & control burden on both the player and the corps commander.
  
• Quick to recruit and outfit from scratch due to its lower amount of units.

• Lacks the division count for an easy Left-Center-Right setup.
  
• No excess division to act as reserve formation for the remainder of the corps.
  
• Trends to the lower end of the strength scale unless very large divisions are used.

---

A fairly standard corps centered around a core of 2 infantry divisions and accompanied by artillery and cavalry support.

Even a small infantry corps is already a combat capable force, due to the large size of infantry brigades. While they will suffer in fights where they are outnumbered, they can generally be relied on to stay on the field for a while before crumbling. This means that they can await reinforcements while holding more forward positions than other small corps might be able to.
This type of corps also works well as part of a larger army, where the subdividing into smaller corps allows a greater degree of flexibility on the strategic map, while they can still combine forces on the tactical map without too much risk of defeat in detail happening to the first forces on the battlefield.

Common Measurements

• 2 mainline infantry divisions
  
  • 6-8 infantry brigades
• 2-4 artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division
• 1 cavalry brigade

---

A common size for cavalry corps. It is centered around 2 cavalry divisions often with artillery support.

One of the more common variants of the cavalry corps. Its small size is less of a detriment than it might seem due to the importance of cavalry being derived partly from their scouting abilities on the strategic map. On the tactical map their smaller size can be a disadvantage, but this can be alleviated by using terrain or acting in concert with other corps.
As part of a larger army this corps often absorbs any cavalry brigades these corps might have had before the formation of a dedicated corps. Combined with its more mobile horse artillery the corps often fills a role similar to a rapid response force, moving and fighting ahead of the main body of the army to secure or contest important objectives and discover the enemy disposition.

Common Measurements

• 2 cavalry divisions
  
  • 4-8 cavalry brigades
• 2-4 horse artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division
    
  • Trend towards the lower limit

---

An uncommon corps variant. It is centered around 1 infantry division and 1 cavalry division, supported by additional artillery.

Somewhat rare to see at this size, this corps variant is generally speaking quite close to a more standard infantry corps, but with 1 or more of the mainline infantry divisions replaced with (mainline) cavalry divisions. This is an attempt at increasing the battlefield mobility of a corps without compromising as heavily on its direct combat capabilities.
When integrated into a larger army structure, this type of corps often fulfils vanguard or flanking roles, where the added mobility of its larger cavalry component can be exploited more effectively.

Common Measurements

• 1 infantry division
  
  • 3-5 infantry brigades
• 1 cavalry division
  
  • 2-4 cavalry brigades
• 2-4 (horse) artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division

---

A rarely seen and used corps variant. It is centered around 2 support divisions, supported by a couple of mainline units for security or fortification.

Though rare, when it does exist this type of corps tends to be of this small size. It focuses almost exclusively on a strong artillery contingent intended to bombard enemy positions. It can have some regular infantry or cavalry units intended for guarding the guns and erecting fortifications, but these are generally not expected to see combat.
This type of corps always operates as part of a larger army because it lacks the mainline strength to defend itself effectively. In this capacity it tends to absorb a decent chunk of the other corps artillery, often reducing their number of artillery battalions to roughly their number of divisions.

Common Measurements

• 2 support divisions
  
  • 3-4 artillery battalions
• 1-2 infantry brigades
  
  • often engineering or sharpshooting specialisation
• 1 cavalry brigade (optional)

---

A medium corps refers to a corps with ~3 mainline divisions. These divisions will often be triangular or square in nature, though other sizes are possible. At full strength these formations tend to number 25-35.000 effectives, though this number can drop considerably once attrition and combat take their toll.

---

• Has enough divisions for an easy Left-Center-Right setup.
  
• Low command & control burden on both the player and the corps commander.

• No excess division to act as reserve formation for the remainder of the corps.
  
• Is liable to fill your entire transport capacity when it uses alternative means of transportation.

---

A fairly standard corps centered around a core of 3 infantry divisions and accompanied by artillery and cavalry support.

A medium infantry corps is a strong force on the field of battle. It is often capable of engaging over long stretches of the frontline at the same time, and can pour a large amount of lead downrange. While not possessing enough units to fight across the entire width and breath of the battlefield at once, it is more than capable of contesting areas where it can bring its numbers to bear.
This type of corps works well as part of a larger army, but it is also strong enough to remain a credible threat when confronted alone.

Common Measurements

• 3 mainline infantry divisions
  
  • 9-12 infantry brigades
• 3-6 artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division
• 1 cavalry brigade for reconnaissance

---

A common size for a cavalry corps intended for direct combat. It is centered around 3 cavalry divisions often with artillery support.

A not unusual variant of the cavalry corps. It has a slightly larger size and often trends towards larger divisions too. It is less focused on the scouting abilities of cavalry units, and more on their superior battlefield mobility. It can be specialised in either melee or ranged combat, and can favour fighting mounted or on foot.
As part of a larger army this corps often absorbs any cavalry brigades these corps might have had before the formation of a dedicated corps. With its size and strength, it is often used to aggressively secure forward positions or to engage in large flanking manoeuvers.

Common Measurements

• 3 mainline cavalry divisions
  
  • 6-12 cavalry brigades
• 3-6 horse artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division
    
  • Trend towards the lower limit

---

An uncommon corps variant. It is centered around at least 1 infantry division and 1 cavalry division, with an additional mainline division of one of these branches, supported by additional artillery.

Somewhat rare to see at this size, this corps variant is generally speaking quite close to a more standard infantry corps, but with 1 or more of the mainline infantry divisions replaced with (mainline) cavalry divisions. This is an attempt at increasing the battlefield mobility of a corps without compromising as heavily on its direct combat capabilities.
When integrated into a larger army structure, this type of corps often fulfils vanguard or flanking roles, where the added mobility of its larger cavalry component can be exploited more effectively.

Common Measurements

• 1 infantry division
  
  • 3-5 infantry brigades
• 1 cavalry division
  
  • 2-4 cavalry brigades
• 1 additional mainline division
  
  • Either infantry or cavalry
• 2-4 (horse) artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division

---

A rarely seen and used corps variant. It is centered around 2 support divisions, supported by a mainline divisions for security or fortification and sometimes a cavalry brigade for scouting purposes.

A larger variant of the usually smaller support corps. In this case it increases its direct combat potential slightly by including more mainline units to protect the support divisions. The main focus is still on said artillery contingent, but it is less reliant on other corps and armies to provide protection from enemy forces. It can have a cavalry brigade for scouting purposes, but this responsibility is often delegated to other corps operating in the same area.
This type of corps often operates as part of a larger army because it lacks the mainline strength to defend itself effectively. In this capacity it tends to absorb a decent chunk of the other corps artillery, often reducing their number of artillery battalions to roughly their number of divisions.

Common Measurements

• 2 support divisions
  
  • 3-4 artillery battalions
• 1 infantry division
  
  • triangular or square in nature
    
  • often engineering or sharpshooting specialisation
• 1 cavalry brigade for reconnaissance (optional)

---

Corps - Large
A large corps refers to a corps with ~4 mainline divisions. These divisions will often be triangular or square in nature, though other sizes are possible. At full strength these formations tend to number 35-50.000 effectives, though this number can drop considerably once attrition and combat take their toll.

---

• Has enough divisions for an easy Left-Center-Right setup.
  
• Has excess division to act as reserve formation for the remainder of the corps.

• Places a noticeable strain on supply networks.
  
• Is liable to fill your entire transport capacity when it uses alternative means of transportation.

---

A fairly standard corps centered around a core of 4 infantry divisions and accompanied by artillery and cavalry support.

A large infantry corps is a strong force on the field of battle. It is capable of engaging over long stretches of the frontline at the same time, and can pour a large amount of lead downrange. While not possessing enough units to fight across the entire width and breath of the battlefield at once, it is more than capable of contesting areas where it can bring its numbers to bear. It has an easier time keeping a significant reserve force without sacrificing combat potential.
This type of corps is strong enough to be a credible threat when confronted alone, it works less well in armies due to its large infrastructure burden.

Common Measurements

• 4 mainline infantry divisions
  
  • 12-16 infantry brigades
• 4-8 artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division
• 1 cavalry brigade for reconnaissance

---

An uncommon corps variant. It is centered around at least 1 infantry division and 1 cavalry division, with additional mainline divisions of one of these branches, usually infantry, supported by additional artillery.

An unusual composition, this corps variant is generally speaking quite close to a more standard infantry corps, but with 1 or more of the mainline infantry divisions replaced with (mainline) cavalry divisions. This is an attempt at increasing the battlefield mobility of a corps without compromising as heavily on its direct combat capabilities.
When integrated into a larger army structure, this type of corps often fulfils vanguard or flanking roles, where the added mobility of its larger cavalry component can be exploited more effectively.

Common Measurements

• 1 infantry division
  
  • 3-5 infantry brigades
• 1 cavalry division
  
  • 2-4 cavalry brigades
• 2 additional mainline division
  
  • Either infantry (preferred) or cavalry
• 4-8 (horse) artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division

---

A huge corps refers to a corps with ~5 mainline divisions. These divisions will often be triangular or square in nature, though other sizes are possible. At full strength these formations will count 50-70.000 effectives, though this number can drop considerably once attrition and combat take their toll.

---

• Can cover large swathes of the battlefield on its own.
  
• Has enough divisions for an easy Left-Center-Right setup.
  
• Has excess division to act as reserve formation for the remainder of the corps.

• Strains the command & control ability of both the player and the corps commander.
  
• Places a noticeable strain on supply networks.
  
• Is liable to fill your entire transport capacity when it uses alternative means of transportation.

---

An unusually large corps centered around a core of 5 infantry divisions and accompanied by artillery and cavalry support.

A very large infantry corps that is a strong force on the field of battle. It is capable of engaging over long stretches of the frontline at the same time, and can pour a large amount of lead downrange. It is often able to fight at multiple battlefield locations at once due its size. It has an easy time keeping a significant reserve force without sacrificing combat potential.
This type of corps is strong enough to be a credible threat when confronted alone, it does not work well in armies due to its large infrastructure burden.

Common Measurements

• 5 mainline infantry divisions
  
  • 15-20 infantry brigades
• 5-10 artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division
• 1 cavalry brigade for reconnaissance

---

An rare corps variant. It is centered around at least 1 infantry division and 1 cavalry division, with additional mainline divisions of one of these branches, usually infantry, supported by additional artillery.

An unusual composition and rare size, this corps variant is generally speaking quite close to a more standard infantry corps, but with 1 or more of the mainline infantry divisions replaced with (mainline) cavalry divisions. This is an attempt at increasing the battlefield mobility of a corps without compromising as heavily on its direct combat capabilities.
When integrated into a larger army structure, this type of corps often fulfils vanguard or flanking roles, where the added mobility of its larger cavalry component can be exploited more effectively.

Common Measurements

• 1 infantry division
  
  • 3-5 infantry brigades
• 1 cavalry division
  
  • 2-4 cavalry brigades
• 3 additional mainline division
  
  • Either infantry (preferred) or cavalry
• 5-10 (horse) artillery battalions
  
  • Can be integrated, directly attached or in a support division

---

Due to the already large number of mainline divisions under the corps HQ, it can be a good idea to forgo independent support units or support divisions and instead opt for integrating these units directly into the mainline divisions. This reduces the command and control strain on the corps commander.
While it is certainly possible to go beyond a 5 division corps, it should be noted that this stretches the command and control quite a bit. Orders will take a long time to arrive and there is a distinct lack of tactical flexibility due to the singular corps. If you exceed this number due to usage of support divisions to group artillery or specialised units, the issues are less relevant, but having more than 5 mainline divisions will drastically impede effective command of the force at hand.
See 'Legions' in the previous sections of this guide.

---

In the context of the game, an army can be two different things. It can refer to a single corps, often the case for armies in the early war period. It can also refer to a collection of multiple corps under a superior army command, often the case in the late war period. The army sections of this guide will focus predominantly on the multiple corps armies, while the corps sections are applicable for most single corps armies. Army sizes can vary dramatically depending on several factors, ranging from glorified divisions all the way to 100.000 men behemoths.

The core purpose of an army is to organise and command a multitude of units. In theory it is a collection of corps that contain most or all elements needed for effective combat, but that are spread out to reduce the strain on logistics and to increase the coverage of the front. Should a battle occur, it is expected for the different corps to combine their forces, in effect assembling the army as needed. On the battlefield this concentration of forces is supposed to increase the flexibility of the army, with better command and control and local commanders with enough freedom of action and forces to respond to the changing circumstances of the battle while still being guided by their superior army commander.

Historically speaking, armies were used extensively by both sides of the civil war. Depending on the importance of the front they were associated with, they could number a few thousand men or, in some cases, over a hundred thousand men. There was also a tendency to for these armies to be semi fluid, with divisions and corps being attached and detached as needed, and fairly drastic reorganisations of the OOBs as dictated by the needs of the campaigns.

---

---

There are several different ways to describe the size and strength of an army. These can relate to the number of directly subordinate units, the total number of subordinate units, the number of men, the number of men of a particular branch, the number of combat ready units, the number of combat ready men, etc. All these measurements have their own merits and flaws and therefore it is important that a general terminology is established beforehand.

This guide will use the number of subordinate corps as the general size measurement for army level formations, while using the manpower count as the general strength indicator. In cases where the army HQ acts as a corps in addition to being an army, it is counted as a subordinate corps for size calculations. Should you note cases of improper usage of these terms in the guide, please leave a comment.

---

There are five ways in which you can utilise the armies and the accompanying OOB structure.
Mostly used for secondary theaters or limited campaigns, this organisation sees the army HQ command no subordinate corps, but instead fill the role of corps HQ itself.
Effectively an expansion of the previous “Army as a Single Corps” structure. This organisation has the Army HQ still function as a regular corps, but expands its command responsibilities with additional subordinate corps. This method of army organisation is liable to put increased strain on the army HQ, making effective command and control difficult.
Closely linked to the “Army as a Single Corps” and “Army as First Among Equals” methods, this organisation still uses the army HQ as an additional corps, but does not expect it to act offensively in most cases. The army is largely relegated to a holding command that stores fresh units used to replace or reinforce units in the subordinate corps that have suffered casualties. At times the army HQ may see action on the battlefield, but this is still intended to be in a reserve role.
An alternative method to the “Army as Reserve Corps”, this organisation has an army and all its subordinate corps fill the role of reserve and training commands. Usually it involves this army having several corps spread far apart, possibly acting as rear echelon occupation corps, fairly close to theaters that are expected to see heavy fighting. Should the formations active in one of those theaters suffer substantial casualties, they will draw on units from the nearby reserve corps to replenish their strength. This method has the advantage of allowing the reserve troops to continue training, making the loss of experienced men less noticeable.
Arguably the easiest way to organise an army. In this structure, the army HQ only has corps as its direct subordinates, an organisation that concentrates all the fighting forces in the sub commands, leaving the army HQ itself devoid of any and all combat capacity. The army HQ serves only to ease administration and provide superior reinforcement ability to its subordinate corps.

---

It is important to note that not all theatres of the war need multiple corps that form a larger army. When deciding on whether to split a single corps army into multiple corps there are a few factors to take into consideration.

• Spread the burden of command & control over multiple commanders.
  
• Spreads out the supply burden.
  
• Spreads out the transportation burden.
  
• Tends to contain all the basic elements for combined arms.

• Reduced force concentration opens up the possibility of defeat in detail at the strategic level.
  
• In the early war period cooperation between corps will be stymied due to the lack of a formal corps structure.
  
• Overspecialisation of corps can leave them ill equipped to operate independently.

---

Where most OOB levels have their type depend upon the composition of their forces, the army level is different in this regard. An armies capacities correlate strongly with the size and strength it commands, especially in light of the larger area of operations that most armies are responsible for.

This guide assigns army types based on the estimated levels of opposition to be faced, the importance of its area of operations to the overall war effort and the strategic objectives assigned to said army.

---

A grand army is projected to remain relevant for nearly the entire duration of the war. It is active in a primary theatre of operations that is regarded as being of vital importance to the war effort. It is characterised by possessing multiple subordinate corps and often features some of the rarer variants like cavalry or support corps. Both the army and the corps trend towards the larger end of the scale. Grand armies often swallow most of the more qualified officers and higher end equipment, sometimes at the cost of other theaters.

Examples of common grand armies are the armies active in the Washington-Richmond theater, the Kentucky-Tennessee theater and the Mississippi theater. All of these areas have in common that they are of prime importance in both a military and economic sense. To lose the struggle in any of these areas is to suffer a serious blow to the general strategic position as the hinterlands are left exposed to further enemy incursions and areas with limited traversal possibilities are exchanged for more open terrain. They also feature important economic centers like mines, ironworks and foundries, vital transportation routes such as important ports and railroads and large numbers of potential recruits.

Note that another major factor in determining an area’s suitability for grand army operations is its supply potential. This leads to a somewhat self-fulfilling prediction that a typical grand army can only remain active in decently developed territories, meaning that the area is by definition economically valuable.

---

A field army is composed of one or more subordinate corps and is projected to be relevant for a single campaign and its related objectives. It can then extend its administrative lifespan with follow up campaigns or widening of the proposed objectives, but these are largely dependant on the broader strategic situation. Field armies can swell in size to rival some grand armies, but are more transitory in nature and will often wax and wane strongly over the course of the war. They are often a mix of more modern equipment and outdated kit, often featuring a small cadre of good officers with a larger helping of more unproven commanders.

Examples of common field armies are the armies active in the Missouri-Arkansas theater, the West Virginia theater (at least in the early war) and smaller branching campaigns that initiate from the area of operation of a grand army, but don’t require the full strength of said grand army. A field army’s objectives are often strategic positions such as river crossings, railroad junctions or economic objectives such as economically vital resources.

---

An occupation army ranges from 1 to many subordinate corps, though they trend strongly towards the smaller end of corps sizes. The purpose of an occupation army is to secure strategically important positions in areas where little fighting is expected, but that are too valuable to risk losing by leaving them totally open to incursion. They are fairly flexible in their existence, often coming into being and being subsumed into other armies as the frontline and focus of the war shifts. Often its corps also double as recovery commands were depleted units can replace their losses or training commands were freshly raised units can be drilled to acceptable standards. Equipment wise they have some of lowest priority when it comes to the more modern weapon models and command wise they are better served with administrative officers to facilitate training.

Examples of common occupation armies are the armies active in West-Virginia, Missouri, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee and Mississippi areas once enemy forces have been driven out and most of the fighting has passed to other regions. In most cases the occupation army is positioned on strategic choke points such as river crossings, ferries, railroad junctions, ports or mountain passes. As time passes an occupation army tends to get replaced with more permanent fortifications to free up the army from garrison duties.

---

A logistical army can have any number of subordinate corps, but it tends not to have any real combat potential in those corps. For the most part, these take the form of token brigades and are kept far to the rear of any combat zone. A logistical army has as sole purpose the construction of forts, supply depots and telegraph stations and strives to accomplish said goal with as few resources as possible. Since they rarely see combat, they are often led by political officers who lack the skills and experience for actual frontline commands.

Examples of common logistical army locations are the regions west of the Mississippi, where the telegraph network is very limited, the border states, where a lot of forts can be used to delay enemy manoeuvers, and the Appalachian mountains where important yet vulnerable transportation routes can be found.

---

A small army refers to an army with ~2 subordinate corps. These corps will often be small or medium, though other sizes are possible. At full strength these formations tend to number 40-50.000 effectives, though this number can drop considerably once attrition and combat take their toll.

Like all army size categories this guide mentions,all combinations and examples are intended for ‘Field Army’ or ‘Grand Army’ use unless mentioned otherwise.

---

Below are some examples of the different combinations of corps for this army size. Note that this list is not meant to be exhaustive, merely informative. Other combinations are certainly possible and at times necessary.

---

A traditional army combination for this size, both subordinate corps are infantry corps. For intelligence reasons both corps often have a token cavalry force of 1 brigade attached to them.

An infantry heavy army can often bring to bear more forces than other compositions, but this choice does come at a cost. The small or even non-existant contingents of cavalry will often not suffice for anything more than basic positional intel, leaving enemy numbers far more uncertain than one might like.
An uncommon army combination at this size, one of the subordinate corps is a dedicated cavalry corps while the other is an infantry corps.

This mixed army combination is more suited to areas where good intelligence is desired while still retaining a decent combat strength in the form of the infantry component. It can also use the cavalry corps as a campaign map vanguard to initiate battles and then use its superior battle map mobility to secure a strong position while awaiting the rest of the army.
A rare army combination, both subordinate corps are dedicated cavalry corps and form a cavalry army rather than working in concert with more infantry heavy corps.

A cavalry army is most suited to raiding and trying to lure the enemy out of position, both on the campaign and battle maps. They are not as feasible to set up as other armies, mainly due to lower production of cavalry weapons.

---

A medium army refers to an army with ~3-4 subordinate corps. These corps will often be small or medium, though other sizes are possible. At full strength these formations tend to number 60-90.000 effectives, though this number can drop considerably once attrition and combat take their toll.

Like all army size categories this guide mentions,all combinations and examples are intended for ‘Field Army’ or ‘Grand Army’ use unless mentioned otherwise.

---

Below are some examples of the different combinations of corps for this army size. Note that this list is not meant to be exhaustive, merely informative. Other combinations are certainly possible and at times necessary.

---

A traditional army combination for this size, all three subordinate corps are infantry corps. For intelligence reasons all corps often have a token cavalry force of 1 brigade attached to them.

An infantry heavy army can often bring to bear more forces than other compositions, but this choice does come at a cost. The small or even non-existent contingents of cavalry will often not suffice for anything more than basic positional intel, leaving enemy numbers far more uncertain than one might like.
An uncommon army combination at this size, one of the subordinate corps is a dedicated cavalry corps while the others are infantry corps.

This mixed army combination is more suited to areas where good intelligence is desired while still retaining a decent combat strength in the form of the infantry component. It can also use the cavalry corps as a campaign map vanguard to initiate battles and then use its superior battle map mobility to secure a strong position while awaiting the rest of the army.
A rare army combination, the more standard 3 infantry corps composition is augmented with a support corps. The support corps often takes on significant amounts of artillery that would otherwise belong to the infantry corps.

A supported army is more suited for concentrated operations where all corps remain closely grouped together. When battle is given, a heavy emphasis is placed on utilising concentrated artillery bombardments to break assaults or soften up defensive lines.

---