How come noone uses General units in multiplayer?

[piranha45]

everyone seems to bring up weak Greek cavalry, but their Armoured Generals are quite strong. Why aren't they ever used?

Why do Romans opt for Praetorian Cavalry over Armoured Generals?

Armoured Eastern Generals seem to essentially be superior Cataphracts, yet noone uses them in large quantities either.

What's up with this?

[Oman]

hi mate,
They do sometimes, however in 1 on 1 MP games, they are often not worth the money they cost. Some players, especially in 2 v 2 or higher use generals incredibly well, to harass, take out archers..etc etc. A good expample of this the roman general unit. I think they are faster than pretorians, and iin a rome on rome battle they can cause havoc. The reason they are not used is mainly money though i think. In mid/low money battles, you would be better to get an upgraded pretorian for example than a general horse unit. More actual horses ,more killing power....but the beware the expert that can use the general well.
If you are talking about selucids, i remember you liek them, the general unit is expensive, and no where as good as a cataphract unit upgraded to same cost. Maybe there are more reasons that others can elaborate on.

[Xavier Dragnesi]

Yes, it is usually a price:worth ratio problem. It's too expensive compared to something else that is worth the same. All you need to do is move an especially upgraded unit to the front of the stack when you are choosing your army, then that unit becomes a general unit.
For example with cataphracts, if you upgrade one heaps and put it at the front of the stack, you get more troops in that general's unit, plus more experience and better weapons. Worth much more than a general unit.

[Prince_of_Macedon]

everyone seems to bring up weak Greek cavalry, but their Armoured Generals are quite strong. Why aren't they ever used?

Why do Romans opt for Praetorian Cavalry over Armoured Generals?

Armoured Eastern Generals seem to essentially be superior Cataphracts, yet noone uses them in large quantities either.

What's up with this?

They're really expensive (especially at the denarii level I play at), but I used to use them quite a bit for the purpose that Oman proposed (taking out archers and whatnot).

[General_Vladimir]

Yes I agree Prince of Macedon and to everyone in this post.

Piranha mate its most to do with the cost. In some lower denarii games as Oman said they don't go so well. But in terms of higher denarii games (Talking 20,25,30k) they can come good

I have a rocking SPQR army in which I have Roman Armoured Generals in my cavalry force. Now those generals rock against Roman Preatorians. Preatorians engage; then come in my generals and bam, the dirt is gone!!! (hehehe )

But thats why I love them. When you can afford them they're very valuable. But alot of people these days especially in the modern lobby forget there is such a thing as a general cavalry. I mean I don't but because alot of 'standard' armies which clans make for their clan mates, or even people who make their own armies they usually don't put generals. Personally, Generals are good in high k games, but I would never pick it for a game under 20k because of the fact that its a waste of money well spent on something which could improve my chances on the battlefield

Why I remember the good old days of 2006 people spamming generals. But doesn't happen too often anymores

[Dionysuis of COH]

yea i guess i started the no gernal rules lol na they die to quick and are tageted to easly

[Erwin Rommel]

hey Prince!!

your a mod now!!

hmm, how about generals, well why bother a 1000 plus denarii 25 man guy, when you can do it with 53 men guy?? although the rally button can be pretty nifty,

nahh Meat grinder battles, that where that rally button is helpful

[_TubbZ_]

tbh if you need the rally button you are doing something wrong so why get it?

[Erwin Rommel]

meat grinder battle (same type unit vs same type unit)

[General_Vladimir]

lol I love meat grinder battles there so fun!!!

RTW been gone real serious. I mean I play serious but fun is always good

Rallying button you'd be suprised. It raises morale when pressed in the heat of battle and they are less likely to retreat. If they are retreating it could mean the difference between winning and losing.

But yeh otherwise its worthless. If you're playing low denarii go for something more efficient. If high denarii its good to have a General or even to have it for fun. Otherwise if its full damn serious/tournament style then no dont go for a general avoid it like the plague itself..

[|Sith|Duke_Spartacus]

when i play online i usually have an upgraded urban for a gen. For all the gentlemen that say thats noobish, i beated some of the best players out their for years with that gen. I just deployed him behind the main line, letting his unit only help out incase of a breaktrough. Often i would let him go with the cav, to help in the cav battle.

[Xavier Dragnesi]

Yes, that's why heaps of people don't use general's bodyguard, cos an upgraded unit of any other troop can do just as well (save peasants perhaps).

[Ojf]

I normally have a official general unit

[avesta]

Guys, getting an upgraded "regular unit" as your general is not necessarily better than having an actual general's bodyguard unit as your general. The bodyguard unit can use the rally horn to raise morale. If you have a regular unit as your general, it cannot do this. It can however, hold out for a bit longer than your other units since it has the general in it.

The reason I don't usually use a general's bodyguard unit as my general is because having an upgraded infantry/or cav unit has more soldiers in it, and will usually survive longer - meaning there's less risk of the actual general dying and causing the whole army to rout, I really hate that.

[Lord Raneus]

In single-player, I play on Huge settings and thus prefer the more than 2x as large normal cavalry units. I'll normally put my general in a Cataphract unit or some sort, because it's cheaper and, I find, tougher.

Don't have much MP experience yet, though.

[HeroSK]

They are too expensive and low in numbers. They can be easily eliminated by outnumbering.

But, they are good for rallying the routing troops and you can choose them when you don't have much choice, such as playing with Greece.

[Lord Raneus]

Yeah, I mean really, greek cavalry are just pathetic.

In a recent (SP on MEDIUM!!) game, I had a unit of them about 70 strong plow into about 100 Roman archers, and break and flee on impact. When they had the charge.

[Shqiponja_Hayabusa]

Actually back in the days, people who played as Greece would get 4 units of generals to compensate for the lack of other cavalry, and they would do pretty well.

[_TubbZ_]

Actually back in the days, people who played as Greece would get 4 units of generals to compensate for the lack of other cavalry, and they would do pretty well.

But a general unit is half the size and stupidly costly. You can only afford a good bunch of general units on silly money (over 25~30k+ really) when they everything else becomes un balanced and boring . Greece isn't a faction you take for the cavalry but for the Infantry and missiles (cretans + rhodian slingers + standard archers, possibly the best missile line up in the game). Thats why they are a very strong team game faction...

[king-nord]

generals are pointless, screenshing women, and druids on the other hand arent .