Which faction has the best infantry?

[piranha45]

In a campaign its either spain or greeks,
spanish bullwarriors beat urbans and are actually cheaper than urbans if you take their upkeep into consideration, and they are available way before urbans.
The greeks get armored hops really early on and nothing that early on can beat them.
In mp its romans, greeks, or germans depending on your playing style.

ive done multiple runs of 1 bullwarrior group vs, 1 urban group, the urbans win every time... try it urself..

[Kratos]

Romans.

[Prince_of_Macedon]

The Romans easily have the best infantry. They can't kill cavalry as well as hoplites, but they can still hold their own. But against other infantry, Roman infantry is unmatched. They've got mobility, power and more power (and pila too).

[Selifator]

Romans, they have acces to the heaviest infantry with devestating pila. Also they have a lots of different infantry types so they can adapt to every situation.

[Cmdr_Sdxo]

I'm torn between the Romans and GCS... But I choose GCS because hoplites can dispose of chariots with ease, and unless one is really speedy capturing the whole world, the late campaing usually consists of fighting a chariot super-nation (Egypt or Britons).

[Eccentric]

ive done multiple runs of 1 bullwarrior group vs, 1 urban group, the urbans win every time... try it urself..

I don't want to turn this into another bullwarriors vs urbans thread, but since it's obvious that we are talking about campaign, let me just point out that bullwarriors are kinda like urbans from minor city level, and just because iberian inf suck, doesn't mean the faction sux, if it did, you could say that the romans sucked because they have auxilia inf(sp?).(the ai seems to use them a lot too)

[Paul d]

well in reality, the late hellenic theureoporoi were very similar to legions. just, the sucessors had trouble using them correctly. they used them for harrassing, and skirmishing, when they could have used them as shock infantry.

the seleucids were the only ones who really adapted them effectively.

[general nuisance]

Romans by a country mile, Testudo (protection against arrows) Pila (better attack) and superb stats, frankly I would even back Hastasi against other early units, because of the auto fire of the pila I would back any Roman infrantry unit against their equivalent phallanx or barbarian
Phallanx is too slow, vunerable to missile fire and very weak if you can get round the back of them

[AqD]

Romans! All their regular infantry are like elite units in other factions. Nothing more terrible than a faction with all full-stacks of elite units.
________
Vaporiser reviews

[Iron Juggernaut]

Greeks with their Spartan Hoplites...

The Romans have an advantage in unit numbers, but not in quality (for instance, a single Spartan unit card versus over two-thousand enemies will typically result in the deaths of maybe 5 or 15 men whilst the entire enemy army has been routed or has been slaughtered; note that's against peasants, but that's still pretty damn impressive).

Unfortunately, I had a very easy time destroying Rome as the Greeks. Unleashed a siege on the walls for a little while, broke through the gate, got inside and assaulted the place with Spartan Hoplites and archers. Over 3/4 of the Romans were destroyed (of like 5,000 men at the time). Only 1/5 of the Greeks were killed. Glorious day because we destroyed the Brutii and the Scipii.

EDIT:

Then again, it really depends on what you want. If you're looking for a good offensive army, pick the classy Romans. If you're looking for a good defensive/offensive army, pick the tough and skilled Greeks. If you're looking for a mobile army, take the light Persians or chariot-based Egyptians. If you're wanting a fierce and brutal army, either take the mighty Carthaginians or the warmongering Germans (but the Britons and Gauls aren't bad either; they lack defense, but they make up for it in numbers).

[68 Powers]

Rome has the best Infantry.
The only thing that could possible rivil it is germania with their crazy axemen and beserkers.

As for the spartans, they suck if they fought two thounsand romans, and not peasents, they would be eatin alive.. like kittens being thrown to the wolves..

[Iron Juggernaut]

Well, actually putting the best swordsmen that the Romans have against the Spartans... it normally results in the Spartans winning. For instance, against 20 First Cohort units (they use throwable spears), the Spartans (with only 1 unit card) killed off 13 Cohort units (that's 3,146 men) before they were entirely destroyed.

Do the math. Two Spartan Hoplite units would kill roughly 6,292 Roman Cohorts (and that's more than any one commander can hold on the battlefield). These guys were maxed out (the Spartans), so that was to their advantage. BUT, despite that fact, it would take maybe 3 or 4 total Spartan Hoplite units (without gold ranks in defence, attack, and experience) to kill off 20 First Cohort units. That's still very damn impressive.

[Prince_of_Macedon]

Well, actually putting the best swordsmen that the Romans have against the Spartans... it normally results in the Spartans winning. For instance, against 20 First Cohort units (they use throwable spears), the Spartans (with only 1 unit card) killed off 13 Cohort units (that's 3,146 men) before they were entirely destroyed.

Do the math. Two Spartan Hoplite units would kill roughly 6,292 Roman Cohorts (and that's more than any one commander can hold on the battlefield). These guys were maxed out (the Spartans), so that was to their advantage. BUT, despite that fact, it would take maybe 3 or 4 total Spartan Hoplite units (without gold ranks in defence, attack, and experience) to kill off 20 First Cohort units. That's still very damn impressive.

No offense, but that's a very flimsy test using one maxed-out Spartan vs 20 non-upgraded First Cohorts (which by the way aren't the best swordsmen that Rome has). Of course the Spartans are going to kill more than they lose when you give them full upgrades.

Try 1 Urban Cohort vs 1 Spartan Hoplite with a max spending of 1,500 denarii.

Urbans have too many advantages over Spartan Hoplites:
- they're cheaper
- they're quicker
- less micromanagement needed

[Crusader Invasion]

Urbans have too many advantages over Spartan Hoplites:
- they're cheaper
- they're quicker
- less micromanagement needed

Plus they have pila and more defense points.

The only thing that the Spartans have going for them is that they have 2 hitpoints.

[General_Zavier]

Urbans have 2 hitpoints. And Spartans can only be recruited in 2 cities.

[Crusader Invasion]

Urbans have 2 hitpoints.

No they don't:

[Eccentric]

Urbans have 2 hitpoints.

They just have a whole heaping pile of armor and def stats, the highest def rating of any unit in the game.

[General_Zavier]

No they don't:

My bad.

[Prince_of_Macedon]

My bad.

No biggie - sometimes it feels like they have 2 hitpoints

[Barry]

The Romans just seem..right but one on one the long pikes own. Roman Legions need backup units