DLC > Vanilla Units?

[dmcheatw]

are DLC units more cost effective than regular vanilla units? discuss.

[Von Kickyourass]

Depends... Some are such as bulkeleys regiment, they cost a bit more then superior line but they have alot better stats. Can't be bothered writing anything else, bye...

[daniu]

I think they're pretty balanced.
Better, yes; more price-effective? I think no.
I usually do have one of the Elites in my armies, but mostly for the inspire to buff the other troops.

[average650]

I agree with dani, better but not mote cost effective. The advantage it does give though is that it withh occasionally give a nation a unit type they didn't have before, like lancers for USA in the units of America dlc. This can give you an advantage.

[Hekko]

It depends on the unit. Some are more cost efficient, some are less and some are equal.

1st Maryland, especially with it's old cost springs to mind.

[aletoledo]

It depends on the unit. Some are more cost efficient, some are less and some are equal.

1st Maryland, especially with it's old cost springs to mind.

I didn't notice the price change, I'll have to look closer. 1st Maryland is likely the best unit in the game. In general, I think the DLC just adds variety, with mostly them bring different uniforms and a mixup of the stats. 1st maryland is the only exception to this and give rank fire, something everyone always wanted for elites.

[Valkierei]

bulkleys pwn.

[{GODS}Scipio_Africanus]

Bulkleys and US marines really pwn. They can easily rape any normal line, Us marines can rape prussian line which costs the same so it is pretty efficient too.

[Valkierei]

yes but marines have lower hp. also its more of a long term shoot out kinda unit. bulkleys and us maryland pwn if you're using shock tactics.

they simply take out more in a short amount of time, leaving fewer units to shoot back.

[TheAussieDigger]

theyre not any more cost effective but what all the DLc units do is fill gaps that can be very useful

example:

DLC Guards> vanilla guards > DLC line/sub-guards> Vanilla line/subguards> DLC militia > vanilla militia

without those in-between units that DLC provides armies are a lot less flexible

so theyre not any more cos-effective, but theyre essential to a strong army that doesnt spam something

[dmcheatw]

so it's fairly unanimous that DLC units provide an advantage, and a couple do provide more bang for you buck than traditional vanilla units, but most just increase army diversity and therefore potential tactics. do u guys think that would that be fair statement to say?

[The Spaniard]

so it's fairly unanimous that DLC units provide an advantage, and a couple do provide more bang for you buck than traditional vanilla units, but most just increase army diversity and therefore potential tactics. do u guys think that would that be fair statement to say?

That would be a fair statement regarding the usefulness of DLC units. I just recently purchased them myself.

[daniu]

most just increase army diversity and therefore potential tactics. do u guys think that would that be fair statement to say?

It's pretty much what I was about to write in my first post here

[Valkierei]

why would anyone pay for them if they didnt provide an advantage =___=

[blank]

why would anyone pay for them if they didnt provide an advantage =___=

Considering the clone appereance of vanilla units, i bet many would pay a little just to see more uniform/headwear variety. A good example are the GB DLC line, which aren't really better than the defaults (morale bonus but less defense), cost about the same but add visual variety.

[TheAussieDigger]

Considering the clone appereance of vanilla units, i bet many would pay a little just to see more uniform/headwear variety. A good example are the GB DLC line, which aren't really better than the defaults (morale bonus but less defense), cost about the same but add visual variety.

and the Deux-Ponts for the french

[ccqwert7]

Well, the US militia have 5 ammo after I purchased the DLC, and are more expensive, and have a different name, so yeah, up t you to decide.

[dmcheatw]

also another question. are the number of units you can take relatively the same? like i'd say on a large funds game the number of units you can take on average is 15-17 without any DLC. say you have an army composed of 50% DLC units, would your average army size on large funds still fall within this range, or would it be different (i.e. 14-16 individual units on average (slightly lower number of unit cards))

this difference is more subtle, but the implications are significant.

[aletoledo]

also another question. are the number of units you can take relatively the same? like i'd say on a large funds game the number of units you can take on average is 15-17 without any DLC. say you have an army composed of 50% DLC units, would your average army size on large funds still fall within this range, or would it be different (i.e. 14-16 individual units on average (slightly lower number of unit cards))

this difference is more subtle, but the implications are significant.

This aspect upsets me occasionally. the price differences between units isn't great enough to justify not taking the best unit possible. Albeit, there is a price difference between a line unit and a guard unit, the differences between guards isn't significant enough. For example, if you're French and you're going to pay for a guard unit, you might as well take Swiss guard, since the extra 100 in price doesn't really affect much at all. In fact, I would say that now with DLC, I rarely every take a vanilla guard in any of my builds. If it wasn't for the limits to the DLC line units, I might never take a vanilla line again either as well.

[daniu]

If it wasn't for the limits to the DLC line units, I might never take a vanilla line again either as well.

I'm never even close to hitting the unit cap with guards...
Well, I do have one Austria build with four, but otherwise, max 2 total.