Useless Praetorians

[Spearthrower]

Lightening bolts from their asses.... that reminds me of something.... maybe a David Gemmel book?

 

[axident]

Lightening bolts from their asses.... that reminds me of something.... maybe a David Gemmel book?

Braveheart

 

[SeriousTiger]

I think Rome should be able to build tanks with Bronze Working and access to sheep.

Outstanding. I had a real "A Team" moment there.

Praets should be able to build tanks when locked in a warehouse with access only to two used toilet-rolls and some double-sided sticky tape. And a cigar, natch.

 

[diablodelmar]

With respect to the original poster, the roman UU is one of the best for early game rushing. In fact, it is widely considered the best UU.

 

[Dnomal]

This is historically inaccurate. Rome won wars based on their organization and resources, not on fighting skill. See Hannibal for instance--without any support from back home, he kept destroying Roman armies, but Rome kept raising more. Rome kept grinding away in its eastern wars, too.

Similarly, the Allies won in WWII with sheer economic might. It's not that the Red Army, British/ANZAC, or US soldiers were better, but they just kept grinding away and eventually wore down the Wehrmacht through sheer numbers, air superiority, and capitalizing on intel breakthroughs and Hitler's idiotic excuse for military strategy.

Agreed, despite what people might like to think, the Allies won because of superior numbers, not technology, training, motivation or anything else.

In fact i think if you put one million Whermacht soldiers (from 1942) in a field agianst one millione red army/Anzac/British Army/US Army from any war year, the Allied troops would be slaughtered, end of.

Oh, and the original poster said that the Roman Legions never lost in republican times, hate to you know, bring up fact to counter this.... but in the grand Republican times Crassus's Legions were wiped out by Parthians.... oh and Hannibal's victories against the Romans????

BTW - Empires based on martial prowess rarley suceed, if they did, we'd be ruled by the Spartans.

Hell why not have a new ability "resurrection", whenever a Praetorian is killed, he is instantenly revived in the previous location. Try beating Rome then!!!

Hell, after being brought back, why not bring a freind.

Resurection II
For every Preatorian killed in battle, two will appear in the location of death to replace it!

 

[TheRealCzar]

Had a great laugh reading this thread, some great suggestions for how we can get those lame duck praets doing something useful. I'm all turned round on trolling now, trolling rulz.

Even funnier though are the people taking this all very seriously.

I think they should have a special promotion that allows them to transcend into pure energy that can warp space and time. Oh, and they have legendary culture, so that they can flip cities by standing on the border.

 

[Jamesds]

Praetorians are amazing units for their time! They help you gain a great start by conquering neighbours early in the game. The thread starter was obviously joking when he said they are useless !

Maybe they should be able to pillage tiles completely just by moving onto them...

 

[Dejagore]

true true. Praetorians are really awesome UU. i played on BTS two games so far on Epic speed/Monarch as Rome and Praetorians did really help me in conquering neighbours. i just assume that this thread is a provocation or a silly joke :->

 

[Gorgo]

In fact i think if you put one million Whermacht soldiers (from 1942) in a field agianst one millione red army/Anzac/British Army/US Army from any war year, the Allied troops would be slaughtered, end of.

Not sure I agree with that- post Stalingrad, I believe Zhukov did not lose a single engagement on the road to Berlin. You also need to factor in the psyche of the soldiers, the terrain, the equipment they had available, the leadership, a thousand other factors too (including old Clausewitzian factors like the weather).
In general terms, the Wehrmacht were better one-to-one than any other soldiers on the battlefield, granted, but it was a rare situation where an engagement was fought on these terms.

Also consider that post-1942, Hitler was still interfering with the German High Command on a daily basis, whilst Stalin had learned (finally) to delegate to military professionals (whilst naturally still taking the credit). You can't praise the Wehrmacht for their discipline, technology and "warcraft" and at the same time ignore the fact that Hitler was instrumental in creating them as such, and dictated not just strategy, but frequently tactics too.

I remember very vividly a conversation I had with a published author on Soviet history. He told me that the Germans respected the British/ANZAC soldier, that they treated the US soldier as a worthy foe, but that they feared the Soviets with every fibre in their being, partly because of their supernatural insistence on self-destruction, but also because they were motivated by an unchecked, bitter and potent need for revenge. When this was coupled with some half decent hardware and a strategic command not based on the ego of one delusional man, they were the finest soldiers in WWII in terms of discipline and effectiveness, and history bears this out. (Again, in my opinion).

 

[Kurgan]

Well, first of all I am sorry for not having replied earlier. Obviously everyone dissagrees with me , maybe you are right, but what I say is based on my experience of being almost always defeated by axemen. I agree that praetorians are great for taking cities and you can use them almost till riflemen are out, but I do not know what happen (maybe I am the only one that get all the bad odds) when my praetorians fight against axemen (does not matter terrain, fortification, etc) they lose 90% of the time. That is what is happening to me also in BTS . My post was obviously not right, but (as long as my experience with axemen) or I get demoralised, and it affects my units when I see those axes coming, or my computer hates praetorians. So I agree with you all, in fact praetorians are my prefered UU, but still I am right (just taking my own results, I do not know yours) in my case about praetorians- axemen fighting ratio. I also recognise that I wrote it after losing a stack of 5 praetorians to two axemen in plain terrain (just the last of my "axemen" nightmares)

"This is historically inaccurate. Rome won wars based on their organization and resources, not on fighting skill. See Hannibal for instance--without any support from back home, he kept destroying Roman armies, but Rome kept raising more. Rome kept grinding away in its eastern wars, too."
by axident

I disagree if you are talking about the victories after Caius Marius reform of the roman army. Of course Rome won many wars by the sheer size of its resources, but against Macedonia, Pontus (Mitridates), Tigranes, Partia (Trajano), Cesar in Gaul, Marius against the Cimbrians, etc Rome won victories with less resources and based in the discipline, organization, and endurance of its legions. The resources (manpower and money) that many of the foes (before it ruled all the mediterranean) of Rome had were much bigger (had the gauls killed 1 legionaire for 7 of their warriors, Caesar would have been wiped out). I will say also, that stuborness was also a major factor.

 

[Spearthrower]

Kurgan..... if you look at the odds, especially as Axes are the perfect (only) counter to Praetorians in the early game... you'll still find that you lose less Praetorians than you defeat Axemen. It's attrition - don't count the individual, count the mass.... make a few more than normal to counter the counter (so to speak).... or even better, why not drag a few chariots along with you to counter the axes and give your Praets free reign.

 

[Kurgan]

Kurgan..... if you look at the odds, especially as Axes are the perfect (only) counter to Praetorians in the early game... you'll still find that you lose less Praetorians than you defeat Axemen. It's attrition - don't count the individual, count the mass.... make a few more than normal to counter the counter (so to speak).... or even better, why not drag a few chariots along with you to counter the axes and give your Praets free reign.

Yes I think I will have to bring some chariots. Maybe The shock for me is bigger because as praetorians are so good even against more "advanced" (technologically) units, it seems a little bit odd to me that an "inferior" unit always (almost) smashes me, then Let's chariot them!

 

[Kurgan]

Sorry I forgot, I change my suggestions to improve praetorians, instead they should be equiped with chariost, that they will use everytime the fight axemen( just joking)

 

[Killroyan]

Bring some shock axes and chariots in your stack to defend against axemen or to attack axemen but consider this:
After researching iron working you get a unit that is as good in sieging a city as a maceman. How can that ever be weak? Especially if you know that you need machinery and civil service to get that unit.

 

[Drakan]

Kurgan, the beauty of C4 is that every unit in the game have a counter unit that can be used against them

Axeman are the counter units to Prets. You are likely to lose most battles against them.

 

[kristopherb]

Kurgan, the beauty of C4 is that every unit in the game have a counter unit that can be used against them

Axeman are the counter units to Prets. You are likely to lose most battles against them.

Are you saying axemen beet C4? i was under the impression that C4 was a powerful explosive?

 

[CivDude86]

Prats still come out ahead of axeman (7.5vs8). Give a couple shock in case you don't pray to the RNG gods that turn and you'll be good to go.

 

[Drakan]

Are you saying axemen beet C4? i was under the impression that C4 was a powerful explosive?

C4 is useless in the hands of my spies in BTS.

 

[uppi]

I remember very vividly a conversation I had with a published author on Soviet history. He told me that the Germans respected the British/ANZAC soldier, that they treated the US soldier as a worthy foe, but that they feared the Soviets with every fibre in their being, partly because of their supernatural insistence on self-destruction, but also because they were motivated by an unchecked, bitter and potent need for revenge. When this was coupled with some half decent hardware and a strategic command not based on the ego of one delusional man, they were the finest soldiers in WWII in terms of discipline and effectiveness, and history bears this out. (Again, in my opinion).

Calling the Russian soldier effective is ignoring the numbers. There were over 10 million Russion soldiers killed in WW2, that's more than all dead Axis soldiers combined. The Red Army was effective, but it was effective because of its numbers, not because of the effectiveness of the single soldier.

 

[Kranden]

Using the praetorians means i can win on emperor, If you use them right you wont even need many catapults (sometimes none!) Rome is the best civ imo Early game you can take out soo many enemies but sometimes i can get carried away and take more cities than i can support! forums do help Though.

Which leader do you guys like more Julius Caesar or Augustus Caesar?