Numidian Cavalry is one of those UU's where people are really, really divided. In SP, it's certainly nothing special imo since the AI defends primarily with archers. Not bad since you can pillage pretty much at will, but nothing special.

But, in MP, they should be much stronger where people build more offensive units (i.e. melee units and siege) against which the Numidian Cavalry is amazing. If you have a Barracks and Stable, you can get CI/Shock Numidians out of the gate (which get 50% odds against attacking CI Spearmen) or FI/FII which gives it 50% withdrawal chance I think. I've never used this unit in MP.. What does everyone think? Given their cost (50), it looks like they are still countered by Spearmen (35) rather well.

Numidian Cavalry is one of those UU's where people are really, really divided. In SP, it's certainly nothing special imo since the AI defends primarily with archers.

NC kills archers just as well as it kills axes and is much less vulnerable to spears than the normal HA.

Any horse archer replacement UU is a good bet. Favor the ol Keshik meself. But the Numidean is a good second, and as such is superior to every earlier foot soldier on the field including Preatorians.

I only play SP but I love the Numidian Cavalry. They eat axeman and C1/shock stand a good change against a spearmen. With flanking one and two they have a 50% withdrawal chance, so you can use them as an early catapult. A stack of NC's mixed with swords is very powerful.

They are also very good to upgrade because of the built-in flanking promo.

I like keshiks a little better due to their pure str, mobility, and first strike, but numidians aren't far behind.

Excessive easy access to flanking II is a big jump start, especially since these guys fare much better against the only units of comparable strength in their era (other than elephants, which might as well be a UU)

Excessive easy access to flanking II is a big jump start, especially since these guys fare much better against the only units of comparable strength in their era (other than elephants, which might as well be a UU)

You're right. I would think Keshik is better in SP (I tried Keshiks and they are pretty darn good), but Numidians would be better in MP since they don't really have a counter.

Concerning elephants, you're absolutely right. I never thought that way...
If Ballista Elephant was a UU and War Elephants didn't exist as a unit, no one would think the Ballistas are weak. :D UU's should not be based on very strong units to begin with. Another example is Cossack I guess... The vanilla Cossack was .. :crazyeye: and current one sucks cuz the Cavalry is already amazing. They had to rework the tech tree for BTS to nerf it.

'UU's should not be based on very strong units to begin with."

Not sure that they could implement that, but i would like to see more varied UU placements-Civ3 had scout, explorer, ship and airplane UU's which gave the player some options. (although the "fast Worker" was inspired)
How about mixing it up with a spy or settler UU ect.?

Numedians are actually countered just fine by horse archers in their time...

Definitely one of my fav UUs. With barracks/stables/charismatic you can have flanking 2/combat 2 on them in no time. If they don't win their attack, they will often withdraw. Their two movement means you can zip through enemy territory quick. Your first GG should go to a medic so you can heal up those injured guys who withdrew. They upgrade nicely as well, which you can usually afford with financial. I know horse archers don't get much love around these forums, but in the right circumstances they can be highly effective.

I usually find numidians to be prohibitively expensive. HBR costs a ton to research early and the units costs more than axes, which do just as well for taking AI archer defended cities due to city raider promotions. Yes they're an awesome unit, but for the price you can get a big stack of axes.

...and in addition to being expensive, they belong to a leader who doesn't have a production bonus or hammer saver on anything, who has a UB that's more expensive than the one it replaces and who encourages you not to whip much (higher happiness cap).

They're good, but unless several things go my way they end up being an additional promotion for my initial knights and little else. That they get beaten up by regular Horse Archers and are rendered totally useless by Elephants doesn't help either.

I scored one of my highest conquest scores using NC UU. 20-50% withdrwl rate is fantastic. You do have to use the window of archers to its full.

Spearmen are a minor pain but a lot of the NC retreat before they are killed. Sitting bull does not like NC. early on.

Hannibal is one of my favorite leaders, but you're right, he doesn't seem to fit his UU at all.

Well horse units are best with carismatic due to stable... So they fit by being the right unit type.. would be better as a chariot replacement with +50% against meele of course, but you can't have everything...

tbh I rarely find myself making great use of any uu except for praets, samurai and fast workers. Nothing really beats a good old axe rush or medieval war with maces + trebs. Hannibal's UB though is pwn. Get the great lighthouse and make a sweet coastal econ.

good leader, mediocre uu...

civver:

Maybe you just didn't think about it that much.

Lots of UU are axes. Phalanx and Vulture beg to be used aggressively and I would consider an axe rush with these units "a great use."

Keshiks are also a fantastic UU and it's a replacement for a mainstay support unit - HAs. Aside from Samurai, Ragnar's Bersekers are a great Maceman replacement unit and using them for taking cities counts in my view as "a great use."

Shaka's Impis are Spearmen replacements - vital support troops for Axemen in a rush and buildable with negligible additional requirements. Rushing a few Impis for additional pushing on an Axe Rush and for pillaging and raider work counts to me as "a great use."

I'm quite sure you're capable of all these maneuvers and use them without even thinking about it - perhaps that's why it doesn't loom large as "great uses of UUs."

Lots of UU are axes. Three of them. And there were none before BTS came out ;)

Ah! Perhaps he's playing Warlords?

Clearly he has not played the persians, Egyptians, incas either. All three have a great UU.

Its all about strategy. If your game play does not involves a war till 500ad-1500ad then your bound to think most early units are useless. Especially if your alone on your own island.

On the other hand if you plan ahead a bit. Tech towards them asap and use oracle to nab horseback riding. Your NC are out the door 1000bc or earlier. That gives this unit a good 1500 years to kick some AI butt before long bowmen arrive. Even when they do some Ai will still have archers to defend with.

The Ai will no doubt build lots of spears.Thats why you keep some axes in the stack. Chariots too for axemen. The Ai will struggle if you do it right and early.

civver:
Lots of UU are axes. Phalanx and Vulture beg to be used aggressively and I would consider an axe rush with these units "a great use."

Heh. The random generator gave me my first taste of the Vultures recently. I totally gave in to the urge to use them aggressively and ended up isolating myself for a thousand years on a somewhat small icy continent, having killed off the Incan civilization before 1AD.

It was still the right thing to do with those units. It went so smoothly that I still ended up being second most advanced nation and with the help of lightbulbing, was WAY ahead of the world with astronomy.


On the other hand, I play Hannibal on purpose frequently. The UU is a tough one for me. It makes me slot HBR much higher in the research order than normal, although the financial trait lets me survive a little longer without currency or code of laws. It also isn't a strong enough unit to carry out a full blown rush on it's own. (It takes way too many, IMO, to take out a city with fortified CG archers.) I love the fact that it can charge forward and quickly pillage the enemy metal (which is curiously somewhat counter productive) especially if they are protecting it with an axe.

I suppose the best success would be to send 4-6 of them with the traditional stack of swords/axes to the capital city, then once that's captured, have the NCs charge off to the back cites that still only have a single or pair of defenders.

I despise HA altogether, they are fun for raiding, but nothing else, they're virtually useless at taking cities since they can't get CR, they have a counterunit which is cheap an leaves them without any chance, and having 2 movement points doesn't help since you'll be waiting for all the foot/artillery anyway. You could use them to soften up defences but at 50 hammers, you might as well build catapults. You'll lose some, but probably not alot more since they get progressively better odds with the collateral and all. Furthermore, they get better odds anyway since THEIR counter is a unit without defensive bonuses (the dispicable HA).

I despise HA altogether, they are fun for raiding, but nothing else, they're virtually useless at taking cities since they can't get CR, they have a counterunit which is cheap an leaves them without any chance, and having 2 movement points doesn't help since you'll be waiting for all the foot/artillery anyway.

Depending on a difficult level, they can take cities just well. I tried just today on monarch and was able to take the whole byzantian empire with NCs only. If you attack on BCs or early ADs, flanking 2-NCs have some 40-50% survival rate against highly promoted archers/axes in capital, and much better against weaker cities/defenders, which is decent enough. Spears may be bit tougher, but there won't be many of them after metal sources are cut.

Longbows probably obsolete NCs as city raiders. However, up to emperor level, you should have time to get NC stack running before all your neighbours have feudalism.

How good? Pretty good. Melee units are often in abundance, so if you attack a stack with them you will more often get the 50% bonus, than be at the 1 str disadvantage. This is ignoring the times when the opponent has an abundance of archers, but if they do have lots of archers, you have already won. What matters is shifting the balance (more so in MP) in scenarios were you don't have guaranteed victory.

A rush of a stack of numidians is less vulnerable than a stack of horse archers, since they are less vulnerable to spearmen. Spearmen are what a HA only army has to fear, not other HAs. This is talking about before elephants, of course. If you are fortunate you will be able to pillage the ivory in time, or already have won decisive victories by the time the opponent gets HBR and Construction.

The extra flanking is icing on the cake, making them withdraw more often from tough battles... then fight again at high strength, if they get enough xp for a 3rd promotion (or you save a promotion). And you can get a sentry numidian with only barracks.

Any horse archer replacement UU is a good bet. Favor the ol Keshik meself. But the Numidean is a good second, and as such is superior to every earlier foot soldier on the field including Preatorians.

Wait- I thought the bonus would be added to the NC's strength, not subtracted from the Praetorian's.

The few times I've drawn Carthage on random, I loved the NC. This is all SP, and only anecdotal, but still, that withdraw bonus is really underestimated. Against a spear your flanking 2 ends up making the NC a 75% or so favorite to survive, more so with shock for your vets, which you do get alot of with NCs since you suicide rush them and they run away all the time. Anyway I think the key is to be agressive, and do so early, before phants or LBs show up.

I've always had great success with NCs, and think they are the most underrated UU in the game.

Anyway I think the key is to be agressive, and do so early, before phants or LBs show up.

I've always had great success with NCs, and think they are the most underrated UU in the game.

yup, although they are not weak when it comes to extra defense, if that is what you want/need. No iron/copper? No problem. You can take on melee armies much better than you'd have been able to with just HAs and catapults.
And the chance to withdraw is even more useful on defense, since they can retreat and heal again.

To those who are saying NC are prohibitively expensive, remember that Hannibal is financial. I often get to HBR in an excellent timeframe with hannibal and can do a LOT of damage with his uu. The advantage that they have over axemen is that they are move-2 so they can sweep through an enemy empire faster thus giving the AI less time to whip/build defenders.

If you have copper and a close opponent then by all means axerush. However, you may not have one or both of these situations. If you lack one or the other, but have horses and a reasonbly close, but not too close, neighbour then a classical sweeping assault with two large stacks of NC can really decimate an opponent with 6-10 cities. Again the key here is being able to blitz through the enemy empire more quickly than when you have to lug along siege or other 1-move units.

I think the biggest strength with the NC though is their upgradability, especially since Hannibal is charismatic. With the free promotion and charismatic and stables and some warfare, you can really get some nicely promoted NC, which can later be upgraded to a dominant army of cavalry.

For those who are saying the NC doesn't fit with Hannibal I highly disagree because of what I just said above. Financial helps you get HBR sooner. It also helps you afford to upgrade your highly promoted NC. It also helps you keep your econ afloat when you take over 6-10 cities during the classical era. Charismatic means you are getting more promotions to add to the free promotion to get some highly-promoted units which you can upgrade to a dominant renaissance army. I forget whether you can promote them to knights or not, but if you can, then just keep the warpath going with knights (I don't usually war much in medieval).

NC are excellent, you just have to use them properly. Admittedly, this can be map/situation-dependent, but the same goes for a number of UUs.

Funny how pre-BTS most people thought keshiks were one of the worst unique units.

I always thought keshiks were awesome and still feel that way. Of course in warlords the -10% attacking city penalty hurt.

Most people just feel that teching HBR (and archery to a lesser extent) sucks because it is a "dead end tech" and takes away from other tech priorities. Admittedly, there are a LOT of important techs early on (math/alphabet/aesthetics/lit/col/currency/construction/etc./etc.). So adding another tech on top of this can seem a bad idea.

However, if teching HBR can ensure your ability to quickly overwhelm a neighbouring empire and thus give you the land you need to go on to win the game, I think it is definitely worth it, especially for a financial leader who is going to tech well anyways.

Depending on a difficult level, they can take cities just well. I tried just today on monarch and was able to take the whole byzantian empire with NCs only. If you attack on BCs or early ADs, flanking 2-NCs have some 40-50% survival rate against highly promoted archers/axes in capital, and much better against weaker cities/defenders, which is decent enough. Spears may be bit tougher, but there won't be many of them after metal sources are cut.

Say you are attacking a city with 40% cultural defence with flankingII HA, no catapults, CGI archers and not even on a hill. Archers vs. HA at that point: 6 vs. 6.3 (3 + 1.5 + 0.6 + 1.2). That would give you 40-50% chances of survival. The AI tend to build cities on hills, if they build walls too, your HA don't stand a chance. You'll need to capture the city in one go as well, or your HA will take forever to heal in enemy territory, so you'll need a bunch of them.

I feel that against an opponent with somewhat developed land, so probably with some spears, the capability to build walls and some cultural defence, HA are useless. They are good support vs. catapults, and if you manage to get enough for a rush when your opponent is undeveloped (no spears, no walls, low cultural defence, only 1-2 sources of metal) you can use them. But for that purpose, I feel they are expensive, in an awkward place in the tech tree, and obsolete in a heartbeat. I'ld rather use axes for an early rush, and a regular army post-rush-age.

I think when you go into combat you expect to lose units. Unless your sending in tanks vs spearmen on 99% odds. Chances :lol:

Chances are most cities you come against will have 20-40% cultural defences. capital maybe 50-60%. I think the window for NC will allow a period of catapults.

No one is saying you cant use axes for an early rush. I would always tech for BW before HBR. There is a period between maybe 1000bc or before till 600ad where on monarch settings the NC will rock. Chopping will speed the build process.

If you play the game right you will use barbs, wandering melee units and weakened city units to train your NC up to level 3-4.

What is 2-3 lost NC vs capturing a AI capital. Without the NC chances are the losses would be much higher.

You use flanking 2/combat 1 NC first, hoping they withdraw if they don't win outright.

Then you use combat 2/flanking 1 NC to mop up. Of course you need enough units, as is the case with any army.

Of course, over time, your experienced NC will all be flanking 2/combat 2+

Say you are attacking a city with 40% cultural defence with flankingII HA, no catapults, CGI archers and not even on a hill. Archers vs. HA at that point: 6 vs. 6.3 (3 + 1.5 + 0.6 + 1.2). That would give you 40-50% chances of survival. The AI tend to build cities on hills, if they build walls too, your HA don't stand a chance. You'll need to capture the city in one go as well, or your HA will take forever to heal in enemy territory, so you'll need a bunch of them.

I feel that against an opponent with somewhat developed land, so probably with some spears, the capability to build walls and some cultural defence, HA are useless. They are good support vs. catapults, and if you manage to get enough for a rush when your opponent is undeveloped (no spears, no walls, low cultural defence, only 1-2 sources of metal) you can use them. But for that purpose, I feel they are expensive, in an awkward place in the tech tree, and obsolete in a heartbeat. I'ld rather use axes for an early rush, and a regular army post-rush-age.

I've used the mounted line to win domination on emperor for over 200k score, and it certainly included HAs. Stock HAs, not NC's or the godly keshiks.

Your calculations are wrong. It's a 40 ish (actually high 30's normally in my experience) of WINNING the battle, but you conveniently forgot to mention/take into account the odds of withdrawal, which with flanking II are substantial. They actually have a 50% chance of survival NO MATTER WHAT! Usually 2/3 of your flanking II HAs would survive in this scenario, and almost ALL of your cleanup combat ones would.

Couple other things:

- HAs are 2 move units. This usually amounts to less units whipped last second into the city, and if you come in force more cities taken before the AI can produce units.

- HAs are IMMUNE TO FIRST STRIKES (exception - chariots, keshiks and cavalry, cataphracts, which need flanking II to get immunity). Whereas archers in hills/high defense have a chance of killing axes or swords unscathed, it is VERY rare for them to do this against the FS immune HAs.

- Gotten early, HAs hold a promotion advantage on every other unit. A combat II HA is comparable to a CR I sword when attacking a city (gimped by spears instead of axes, no built-in city attack, but ignores archer first strikes!), but moves faster and survives more frequently.

Basically, if these guys WEREN'T part of a dead end tech, they'd be imbalanced and very much so. Against few defenders they're a superior option to cats, and available much earlier. The tech is decent trade fodder, too.

I too am at a loss as to the misunderstanding. Usually play Washington and beeline Animal Husbandry and Horsebackriding because it is simply the easiest way to take two to three cities. Pillaging metal, getting to the front quickly, and taking out cities -nothing else comes close in the ancient age.
Horse and woodsman Spear - counters to every single unit that can be thrown against you for quite a long time. It makes for a small guide, "How to Take 2- 3 Cities Quickly, and in MP Make'm Quit".

In the few multiplayer games I've played, I have used HA with extreme success.

civver:

Maybe you just didn't think about it that much.

Lots of UU are axes. Phalanx and Vulture beg to be used aggressively and I would consider an axe rush with these units "a great use."

Keshiks are also a fantastic UU and it's a replacement for a mainstay support unit - HAs. Aside from Samurai, Ragnar's Bersekers are a great Maceman replacement unit and using them for taking cities counts in my view as "a great use."

Shaka's Impis are Spearmen replacements - vital support troops for Axemen in a rush and buildable with negligible additional requirements. Rushing a few Impis for additional pushing on an Axe Rush and for pillaging and raider work counts to me as "a great use."

I'm quite sure you're capable of all these maneuvers and use them without even thinking about it - perhaps that's why it doesn't loom large as "great uses of UUs."

Hmm honestly I haven't played greece or sumeria yet so I wouldn't know. I did play Shaka once, but not to completion, was much more impressed by his ub than the unit. I played one game as genghis and won domination and yes the keshiks are awesome, but I didn't use them nearly enough and in the end did just fine with standard axe and mace fare. Ragnar is one of my faves but I never seem to need the amphibious part of berserkers, although they are a slight upgrade over regular maces otherwise.

I guess my point is that in general uu's are fun and provide flavor to the game but I rarely find them gamebreaking or changing my overall strategy. In general I'm going to use axes, then work in cats, then cats/trebs and maces until rifles. If a uu comes along the way that's just the cherry on top.

Say you are attacking a city with 40% cultural defence with flankingII HA, no catapults, CGI archers and not even on a hill. Archers vs. HA at that point: 6 vs. 6.3 (3 + 1.5 + 0.6 + 1.2). That would give you 40-50% chances of survival. The AI tend to build cities on hills, if they build walls too, your HA don't stand a chance. You'll need to capture the city in one go as well, or your HA will take forever to heal in enemy territory, so you'll need a bunch of them.

I feel that against an opponent with somewhat developed land, so probably with some spears, the capability to build walls and some cultural defence, HA are useless. They are good support vs. catapults, and if you manage to get enough for a rush when your opponent is undeveloped (no spears, no walls, low cultural defence, only 1-2 sources of metal) you can use them. But for that purpose, I feel they are expensive, in an awkward place in the tech tree, and obsolete in a heartbeat. I'ld rather use axes for an early rush, and a regular army post-rush-age.

Horse archers do quite well until longbows/elephants.
You should never have less than a 50% chance of surviving a battle due to flanking 2. One general city masses combat 3 horse archers (if possible), while most of the rest make 5 exp horse archers.
Use your new 5 exp flanking 2 horse archers to soften up the enemy. Half will survive. Now use your veteran combat 3, 4 or 5 horse archers to wipe out the remaining defenders. The trick is, you resupply fast, and your losses are at worst half your suicide units. The rest of your army gets stronger and stronger.

Walls aren't a big problem when you don't use siege units. Most cities are 40-60% by the time you have a large enough horde. Barring a handful of elite defenders, you're facing 50% archer city bonus, 50% hill bonus, 25% fortify bonus, 20% city garrison/guerilla 1, 50% walls. That's a little less than 9 strength. A combat 3 horse archer is 7.8 strength, more than enough to kill a 9 strength unit at half health.
Also, sometimes, maybe 1/3 the time, your suicide horse archers will win. and that's just extra units.

Numidians are awsome without metal.

This is how i ushally play.

Early BW. without bronce I go for AH and play defensive untill IW.
with NC however you can play offensive with horses only. no mettals is needed when NC's only real thret are horse archers.