Surprisingly good and bad units

[invicta]

See, the difference is that when you compare them, you have to compare 2 cohorts of Marians with one hastati and one principes. the hastati i principes had greaves, which the marian legionaries lacked.
And what did you actually expect, Urban cohorts?

My arguments is strictly gameplay-based. What I mean is: you are the gamer, and you have the option
to recruit Polybian Principes or Marian Cohort. Considering upkeep and the 2 more defense point what would you choose? I would choose the Polybian principes. While you can't recruit in so many regions as Marian legionaries, still you can recruit principes in most of Italy which is at the center of Mediterranean sea.
If you consider other factions, not even them can recruit their best units in so many regions.

would you give an example? I get the principes are better than marian legionaries, despite the fact that you can recruit marian cohorts a few kilometers behind the frontline, whereas principes would have to travel six or seven turns to get to the more distant locations. And the truth of the matter is, professional armies cost more than levies, which the principes are.

I get professional armies cost more, but for this reason I expect more. So the -2 in armor is disappointing for me.

Again, praetorian cavalry these horsemen aren't. They are very good at what they do. They aren't superheavies with four-meter long pikes. They are better than the roman equites, which is what should concern you in a Romani campaign

For their cost they're good. But if you play as Averni or Aedui you might very well face the Lusothann cavalry or the Carthaginian's one. Maybe it's just me,but I imagined Gallic elite cavalry being a bit stronger.
maybe not as the Carthagininan's one (29 defense, for sacred band) but 25-26 was what i was expecting.

[Entropy Judge]

My arguments is strictly gameplay-based. What I mean is: you are the gamer, and you have the option
to recruit Polybian Principes or Marian Cohort. Considering upkeep and the 2 more defense point what would you choose? I would choose the Polybian principes. While you can't recruit in so many regions as Marian legionaries, still you can recruit principes in most of Italy which is at the center of Mediterranean sea.
If you consider other factions, not even them can recruit their best units in so many regions.

Marians, easily. Why? Sure, they have 2 lower Armour and cost a bit more, but they're more common, and they're still better than most factions elite units. They don't quite outstat Neitos, but it's much easier to recruit a half-stack of Cohors Reformata than Neitos, and the Romans are far more likely to be able to afford that half-stack, thanks to having more ports. Compare Reformata to Rycalawre - just a bit more than half the cost, and almost as good. As a gamer, my regular units are already almost as good as my opponents' elites, and they're cheaper, so I consider the ability to spam them at my enemies much better than a slight lowering of a single stat.

I get professional armies cost more, but for this reason I expect more. So the -2 in armor is disappointing for me.

The thing that I don't get is why you consider -2 Armour to be so crippling, especially when there are more men in the unit and they have better morale. It's not like it really makes that much of a difference most of the time, and they're *still* much better than equivallently-costed units, so it just really sounds like you're viewing any sort of lowering of stats to mean something is worse. 40*24=960, 50*22=1100. The Reformata have higher Defense total. Even if you just do the Armour, it's 40*12=480 vs 50*10=500. Cost-wise, it's something like 29/P Principes vs 39/Reformata, alongside 53/Neitos and 106/Rycalwre (Upkeeps are 7.4, 8.96, 13.35, and 26.6).

For their cost they're good. But if you play as Averni or Aedui you might very well face the Lusothann cavalry or the Carthaginian's one. Maybe it's just me,but I imagined Gallic elite cavalry being a bit stronger.
maybe not as the Carthagininan's one (29 defense, for sacred band) but 25-26 was what i was expecting.

True, the Brihentin are only about equal to Iberian Medium cavalry, but Iberi Lanceari and Sacred Bands are terrifically expensive, rare, and when encountered should be met with the *proper* response to heavy cavalry: good spearmen and AP units, which the Gauls have in spades.

[invicta]

The thing that I don't get is why you consider -2 Armour to be so crippling, especially when there are more men in the unit and they have better morale. It's not like it really makes that much of a difference most of the time, and they're *still* much better than equivallently-costed units, so it just really sounds like you're viewing any sort of lowering of stats to mean something is worse. 40*24=960, 50*22=1100. The Reformata have higher Defense total. Even if you just do the Armour, it's 40*12=480 vs 50*10=500. Cost-wise, it's something like 29/P Principes vs 39/Reformata, alongside 53/Neitos and 106/Rycalwre (Upkeeps are 7.4, 8.96, 13.35, and 26.6).

-2 armor is crippling for me because I found this more useful than the +1 morale of the Marian legion.
Principes have anyway good morale, and in my campaign they almost never break. Only in some occasion against Elephants (when i failed to stop them with skirmishers ) or against Celts Fanatics (these are more difficult to stop) it happened they broke. So the +1 morale would have been useful to me only in some battles, while the +2 armor is useful in every battle.

True, the Brihentin are only about equal to Iberian Medium cavalry, but Iberi Lanceari and Sacred Bands are terrifically expensive, rare, and when encountered should be met with the *proper* response to heavy cavalry: good spearmen and AP units, which the Gauls have in spades.

Yeah they are expensive, but even at that prices you sometimes need them. Also planning carefully Sacred bands won't be rare. Usually I keep 2 of them in 4-5 armies with my Carthaginians campaigns.

Also in general, I was negatively impressed by the cost of Barbarian units. Having barbarian factions a weaker economy, I expected them having lower upkeep costs.

[athanaric]

True, the Brihentin are only about equal to Iberian Medium cavalry,

Their sidearm is completely different. Not that the AI ever uses it though...

but Iberi Lanceari and Sacred Bands are terrifically expensive, rare, and when encountered should be met with the *proper* response to heavy cavalry:

Indeed, their "elite" status means that they should be a much rarer sight than some other heavy cavalry, even Brihentin.

good spearmen and AP units, which the Gauls have in spades.

You're confusing Gauls with Germans. Gauls are the masters of the sword in EB, but their spearmen are rather average (given the fact that EB is basically the "spearmen mod" and the best regular Gallic spearmen are the Gaelaiche, who, while versatile and certainly very useful, carry no armour and are only low tier regulars). Of course, some elite and regional units also carry spears, but IMO it's kinda lame to make Appea Gaedotos your standard line unit unless you're roleplaying an Alpine faction. Same for Belgian units. What really bugs me is that Gauls lose Teceitos with their last reform.

The only Gallic AP units are slingers (who have a very low attack - also, more than two or three Iaosatae units per stack is lame), Teceitos (who are only recruitable in the East and get phased out with the last reform), and cavalry (who are not meant for melee). Appea Gaedotos and Tekastos are even more outlandish than Teceitos and thus more of a rare auxiliary unit type for players who want historical accuracy. In fact, IMO Gauls are sub par in terms of AP attributes and have to make up for it with lethality and other brutal means. However this is a moot point when it comes to defeating cavalry since most Gallic foot units can defeat cavalry in a fair fight. As Pahlava (getting entangled in a proxy war against the autoretard-augmented Lusotannan), I had a unit of Lugoae (i.e. crap levies) shred a sizable unit of Lusitanian bodyguards (i.e. insanely expensive elite cavalry with 18 morale) without even breaking sweat. And in the rare case that a Gallic player encounter anything resembling a cataphract, there are still Solduros and Alpine auxiliaries to fall back upon.

[Entropy Judge]

-2 armor is crippling for me because I found this more useful than the +1 morale of the Marian legion.
Principes have anyway good morale, and in my campaign they almost never break. Only in some occasion against Elephants (when i failed to stop them with skirmishers ) or against Celts Fanatics (these are more difficult to stop) it happened they broke. So the +1 morale would have been useful to me only in some battles, while the +2 armor is useful in every battle.

Not quite the way I see it. When I look at the lower armour, I see that I'm going to take a bit more casualties compared to the Principes, but Reformata can both sustain those losses more easily (higher men/unit) and more easily restore them (greater AoR). Yes, higher armour would be 'better,' but that would just make the Reformata absurdly powerful.

Yeah they are expensive, but even at that prices you sometimes need them. Also planning carefully Sacred bands won't be rare. Usually I keep 2 of them in 4-5 armies with my Carthaginians campaigns.

I was thinking more from the other side - as the Aedui/Arverni, you won't be *facing* many SB/Lanceari units, and those you do run across can be removed by the proper counter-units. True, a human player - with a bit of planning - could easily field a stackful of SBs if he felt like it, but the AI doesn't.

Also in general, I was negatively impressed by the cost of Barbarian units. Having barbarian factions a weaker economy, I expected them having lower upkeep costs.

It makes sense, though - they don't have the infrastructure to support the sort of 'industrialized warfare' the Romans can carry out, so their units are actually more expensive to maintain.
Also: Galatikoi Klerouchoi (Ptolemai and Saba) are similar to the Neitos, and are 2196/549. Basilikon Agema are a bit better than P Principes (slightly weaker sword), and are 3121/780. Massalian Hoplites are weaker than Principes, cost 1479/370.

It's not the Barbarians, it's actually the Romans who are screwy. In a strict stat:cost comparison, Roman Infantry beat just about every unit in the game. They're not the best, but they're so much cheaper than units that can easily take them toe-to-toe that it doesn't matter, particularly once you get Marian and can recruit from everywhere in Europe and the Mediterranean.

[athanaric]

Also: Galatikoi Kleruchoi (Ptolemai and Saba) are similar to the Neitos, and are 2196/549.

Fixed

It's not the Barbarians, it's actually the Romans who are screwy. In a strict stat:cost comparison, Roman Infantry beat just about every unit in the game. They're not the best, but they're so much cheaper than units that can easily take them toe-to-toe that it doesn't matter, particularly once you get Marian and can recruit from everywhere in Europe and the Mediterranean.

Also, the Romans are the only faction in the game that actually has a legitimate reason for spamming heavy swordsmen, because that's what Legionaries are. You can do this with other factions, but it would be wildly ahistorical. Not to mention retarded. With the Romans, it's actually historically accurate. Huge advantage there.

[Trax]

Their sidearm is completely different. Not that the AI ever uses it though...

I think I've only seen it once, in vanilla BI.

Is it any different in Medieval?

[Entropy Judge]

Their sidearm is completely different. Not that the AI ever uses it though...

Which is why I said "about" equal. Their stats are a bit different, and one's got an AP sword while the other has excellent Lethality, but they're 'about' equal. What I'd send Curisi to deal with I probably wouldn't send Brihentin to deal with, but they're pretty comparable.

You're confusing Gauls with Germans. Gauls are the masters of the sword in EB, but their spearmen are rather average (given the fact that EB is basically the "spearmen mod" and the best regular Gallic spearmen are the Gaelaiche, who, while versatile and certainly very useful, carry no armour and are only low tier regulars). Of course, some elite and regional units also carry spears, but IMO it's kinda lame to make Appea Gaedotos your standard line unit unless you're roleplaying an Alpine faction. Same for Belgian units. What really bugs me is that Gauls lose Teceitos with their last reform.

Well, I'm considering that (assuming you have any skill at the game) by the time you're facing Lanceari as anything other than singletons you can swarm under, you'd have little difficulty fielding Iberi Scutari (if you're into Iberia proper already), Solduros, Arjos (if Arverni), and the odd Mori Gaesum. I didn't mean to say that the Gauls are a spear-primary faction, or that all their spearmen were great - just that the Gauls have wide access to excellent Spearmen who are quite capable of dealing with Lanceari.

I will admit I don't recall losing Teceitos, but I tend to play as the Casse when I play Celts - although I could easily be wrong remembering the Casse keeping them, as it's been a while since I've played.

The only Gallic AP units are slingers (who have a very low attack - also, more than two or three Iaosatae units per stack is lame), Teceitos (who are only recruitable in the East and get phased out with the last reform), and cavalry (who are not meant for melee). Appea Gaedotos and Tekastos are even more outlandish than Teceitos and thus more of a rare auxiliary unit type for players who want historical accuracy. In fact, IMO Gauls are sub par in terms of AP attributes and have to make up for it with lethality and other brutal means.

Clona Tekonac are just a skip away - a fast Arverni, or a seafaring Aedui - wouldn't have much difficulty taking Asturia well before the Lusotannans get anywhere near. The Aedui also have quick and easy access to Illyrians, who, while not being terribly impressive, do have an easily-recruited AP infantry and cavalry unit. Depending on how imperialistically you play, Kluddargos might be an option. Again, I thought Teceitos stayed throughout, so that does remove a quick-and-easy, decently powerful unit from the roster, but they've still got a nice selection.

However this is a moot point when it comes to defeating cavalry since most Gallic foot units can defeat cavalry in a fair fight. As Pahlava (getting entangled in a proxy war against the autoretard-augmented Lusotannan), I had a unit of Lugoae (i.e. crap levies) shred a sizable unit of Lusitanian bodyguards (i.e. insanely expensive elite cavalry with 18 morale) without even breaking sweat. And in the rare case that a Gallic player encounter anything resembling a cataphract, there are still Solduros and Alpine auxiliaries to fall back upon.

To be fair to the Katuvaram, they're basically well-armoured Skirmishers, and they'd actually do comparatively better against better units, since the sidearm is AP. I do agree that they kinda ... suck ... compared to other BGs, though.

I'll also freely admit that 'historical accuracy' isn't something I'm particularly good at when it comes to army-building. I tend to go more with 'what works,' which gets my economy into trouble as the Casse and Sweboz, since they have a bit more trouble maintaining all those nice toys compared to the more civilized factions.

[athanaric]

I think I've only seen it once, in vanilla BI.

Is it any different in Medieval?

In M2TW cavalry drop their lances after the charge and switch to sidearms automatically (assuming they got any), which is a huge improvement. In RTW, AI cavalry only uses their secondary weapon upon being charged by another unit, like for example other cavalry or elephants.

I will admit I don't recall losing Teceitos, but I tend to play as the Casse when I play Celts - although I could easily be wrong remembering the Casse keeping them, as it's been a while since I've played.

Casse keep their Teceitos, Aedui and Arverni don't.

[strategos roma]

I would like to clarify something on the Iberi Lancearii. In fact, having conducted an extensive series of one-on-one tests on medium difficulty, I've noticed that they certainly can beat all their most likely enemies, eg. Brihentin or Equites Extraordinarii with ease. Nevertheless, I stand by my previous assertion that they're are surprisingly bad as the much chepaer Curisii can do the above at a much lower cost while Sacred Band Horse is superior to the Lancearii in an one-on-one melee.

[Entropy Judge]

I would like to clarify something on the Iberi Lancearii. In fact, having conducted an extensive series of one-on-one tests on medium difficulty, I've noticed that they certainly can beat all their most likely enemies, eg. Brihentin or Equites Extraordinarii with ease. Nevertheless, I stand by my previous assertion that they're are surprisingly bad as the much chepaer Curisii can do the above at a much lower cost while Sacred Band Horse is superior to the Lancearii in an one-on-one melee.

...
Sacred Band cost 4432 (1108 Upkeep). Lanceari cost 3815 (954 Upkeep). In fact, I think you're making a bit of a mistake - as Carthage, why bother training SBs or Lanceari, when you can just recruit Liby-Phoenecian Cavalry instead? Better than Curisi, and cheaper than both the SBs and Lanceari. In fact, most Super-Heavy Cavalry falls under the "unimpressive" category, since there are cheaper units that do the same job almost as effectively.

Also, I just ran four tests with Curisi vs Brihentin and one of Lanceari vs Brihentin. In the four tests, two as each side, the player-controlled unit won (base unit size is 51). The only battle which was even remotely in doubt left the Victor (Curisi) at 25 remaining (post-healing) vs 7 remaining. The Brihentin didn't go below 45 in either battle, and only lost a couple men in one. In the Lanceari vs Brihentin, however, I took the Brihentin, and I stopped the fight when both sides were exhausted - 37 Brihentin to 39 Lanceari. Imagine what the battle would have been like if the Lanceari had been using their swords and not their spears. So the Lanceari are certainly more effective at counter-cav than Curisi, particularly against units without AP sidearms.

[Boriak]

So in a horse-to-horse melee, should I switch to secondary weapon? Some cavalry has overhand spears which are suppose to be good against other cavalry. Should I use those or secondaries?

[torongill]

So in a horse-to-horse melee, should I switch to secondary weapon? Some cavalry has overhand spears which are suppose to be good against other cavalry. Should I use those or secondaries?

Depends on your secondary. For example Equites have no attribute to their spears. They don't get a bonus fighting cavalry. Their lethality is the same. Now, Extraordinarii, I personally would switch once the melee has started. See, the pike they use has a sixteen-eighteen second delay between attacks. Maybe it's just when it's charging, and then since you can't use the pike, they use the stats of the secondary and the model of the pike, IDK. But I personally would use the secondary, since it's an AP cleaver. For some cavalries, you don't have a choice - campanian cav, lusotanian guards, they have javelins as primary. And it makes sense - you charge with your spear/pike, then you leave it because it's either broken and the point is lodged into somebody's corpse, or it's too long to use in a boot-to-boot melee.

I really wish cavalry were modelled better. Seriously, warhorses are trained killers - they rear, stomp and bite. More people die annually by a kick by a donkey than by shark attacks, did you know that? A donkey can kill a fully grown man. A kick by a 500 kilo warhorse? That would kill a man in armor. A stomp will stave his helmet or plate armor like it's cardboard. And biting isn't fully appreciated either.

[Entropy Judge]

Pretty much agree with torongill (except that Equites have .15 Lethality with 8 Attack on their Spears and .13 with 9 Attack for their Swords). I normally switch to the sidearm, since it typically attacks more quickly, although that doesn't always matter - Brihentin vs Lanceari, for example, the Brihentin are probably better off with their Lances than their Swords, since the Lance (AP) is going to be hitting a much lower Defense than the Swords, and will therefore make up for the lowered Attack, although it's a bit of a wash either way.

[Faramir D'Andunie]

In fact, most Super-Heavy Cavalry falls under the "unimpressive" category, since there are cheaper units that do the same job almost as effectively.

This pretty much sums up my view on suprisingly bad units. Sure most elite units are not really THAT bad, but you can use cheaper/more numerous versions to fulfill the same roles.At times it is not worth the cost...


On the good side? I always will have a spot for those persian archer-spearmen. They do not look like much on first glance. They will most likely get slaughtered the first times you use em and consider em terible. But they can sure be a winning force in eastern campaigns, you can work wonders with those men.
Did I mention that they are dirty cheap and have a huge AOR too?

[strategos roma]

This pretty much sums up my view on suprisingly bad units. Sure most elite units are not really THAT bad, but you can use cheaper/more numerous versions to fulfill the same roles.At times it is not worth the cost...


On the good side? I always will have a spot for those persian archer-spearmen. They do not look like much on first glance. They will most likely get slaughtered the first times you use em and consider em terible. But they can sure be a winning force in eastern campaigns, you can work wonders with those men.
Did I mention that they are dirty cheap and have a huge AOR too?

Persian Archer Spearmen are simply incredible. They're especially good at defending walled cities but look out for them on the battlefield as they're unarmoured

[Grymloq]

Surprisingly good:
Sphendonetai: they are very cheap and kill almost everybody; they' re also very fast

Greek infantry in general: they have high stamina and morale and are very flexible

Pantadapoi: I thought they were only a cheap and weak militia, but I found them very useful: they are 240 per unit and can be recruited almost everywhere; if supported, they can easily hold the line; very useful in sieges

Suprisingly bad:
Schyted chariots: they are quite expensive and they make more damages going through the enemy units rather than charging them; however they are good against cavalry and I use them in suicide missions to destroy cavalry bodyguards

Elephants: they are a very good unit (well, they're elephants!) but their recruiting and upkeep costs are too high, compared to their actions on the battlefield

[lmt96]

Elephants: they are a very good unit (well, they're elephants!) but their recruiting and upkeep costs are too high, compared to their actions on the battlefield

I conquered the whole Greece with only Pyrrhus, Indian Elephants with a Pantodapoi Phalanx (xcept Demetrius & Pella)

[Grymloq]

I conquered the whole Greece with only Pyrrhus, Indian Elephants with a Pantodapoi Phalanx (xcept Demetrius & Pella)

Well, elephants are great, and I love them , they're just too expensive
(I conquered the whole Egypt using several armies but (only) 2 elephant units. now the have 3 gold things-with-name-unknown-to-me )

[Entropy Judge]

Surprisingly good:
Sphendonetai: they are very cheap and kill almost everybody; they' re also very fast

They're slingers, of course they're good.

Pantadapoi: I thought they were only a cheap and weak militia, but I found them very useful: they are 240 per unit and can be recruited almost everywhere; if supported, they can easily hold the line; very useful in sieges

Are you talking about regular Pantodapoi or Pantodapoi Phalangitai? I'm asking mainly because regular Pantodapoi are actually inferior to Lugoae, the Germanic Levy Spearmen, and Illyrian Levy Spearmen (although that difference is only Mass and better hiding in forests).

Schyted chariots: they are quite expensive and they make more damages going through the enemy units rather than charging them; however they are good against cavalry and I use them in suicide missions to destroy cavalry bodyguards

Chariots were going out of style the century prior to the game's start because they were too expensive and cavalry were better-suited to what chariots had been doing. Even the scythed chariots used by the Persians don't seem to have been too terribly effective, really only being useful for scrambling infantry formations.

(I conquered the whole Egypt using several armies but (only) 2 elephant units. now the have 3 gold things-with-name-unknown-to-me )

Chevrons.