No 9 armor/5dam is not the way to go

1/0/29 in sufficiently large numbers will beat anything. That being said anything in sufficiently large numbers will beat anything.

Stick with what i told you

I'm planning to try out 10/10/10 Infantry unit set-up at Earth 1. I personally think this unit set-up is the best.

No,dont build that kind of infantry composition,i suggest that you dont use damage at all only ranged and armored.

These are my suggestions of the best army compositions economically:
Tanks - 6 Ranged Tanks 4 Armored Tanks

Vehicles - 10 Ranged Vehicles and 5 Armored Vehicles
OR 9 Ranged Vehicles and 6 Armored Vehicles(if its too difficult for you to build the first suggested vehicle composition use the second.)

Infantry - 20 Ranged Infantry and 10 Armored Infantry.

It is not advisable to build much more ranged than this because it will only consume more of your resources without the proper armor build up.
Those that build alot of range and so few armored ones are considered token users or players that have already gathered enough conquers to provide the necessary resources.

In my recent years of playing BD,usually the ones that dies in my wars are the ones that use too many range and no armor at all or the ones that have bad army compositions.

Just because you have a stronger army composition doesnt mean that you are at an advantage,your economy may not handle all the costs of that ranged units.

All players must remember these important questions and factors regarding army compositions:

1)Are your army compositions cheap enough for your economy to handle?
2)What are your enemies using against you?Do they have a better composition than yours but cant handle all the costs?
3)Dont just focus on the compositions,focus on the type of weaponry you and your enemy is using
4)Use only one chassis per alliance,having 2 or 3 chassis is a disadvantage.
5)If you have alot of imperial sectors a.k.a (Subs) remember to build up your sub's army compositions. -Each sub must have 1 different chassis(Optional)
exp:
UG(Main) Chassis: Tanks
UGS (Sub)Chassis:Vehicle
(Note:You can also use only one chassis for your entire empire,but remember that you will be in a disadvantage when your enemies have a chassis that is an advantage in destroying your own chassis)

Uhh everyone here already knows the basics. We're arguing whether the effectiveness of damage i even battles out weighs the ability of large range armies to end battles in one round thus rendering damage useless.

Well some of the veterans here so much focus on what their army build ups would be that they forgot to consider some of the key important factors,thus rendering most of their planning useless.

Anyways back into the matter at hand:
Ranged Units defeats armored ones hands down,unless those armored units have acquired experiences,enough to upgrade their armor range and damage.
This fact reflects another truth that damage are usually useful only in early ticks of an era,but are usually rendered useless later on,since most people build range.

Way to totally miss the point. The point they're making is that in an even battle a damage unit build of 10/20/0 does indeed beat the standard "pro build" of 10/0/20 or 9/0/21. The point we're arguing is that a) as one army size gets larger damage becomes less and less effective b) most battles will last 1 or 2 rounds and c) spys and nukes exist

I normally build 10/0/20, but have an occassional all damage squad to maximise well, damage! and a few all armor squads, to act as cannon fodder.

hm,i see your point noew,indeed damage does beat range in an even battle of infantry,so does the standard tank build of 6 range and 4 armored being beaten by 6 damage and 4 armored.

well therefore the conclusion is that new buil is better than the standard pro build,without any of the other factors that can affect the battle that is(spies missiles and overwhelming numbers etc)