Blackbird_SR-71
Spying from 85,000 ft
Which one do you prefer to use? i read that Tomoyo say that Horsemen are better. but how? although they can retreat but that won't do much since you can retreat but the horsemen are too weak to kill spearmen
Swordsmen vs Horsemen
- Thread starter Blackbird_SR-71
- Start date
In practice I find Horse are better than Swords in that they can retreat and hence live to fight again. They can kill spears, but will need more units often, if the spear is forted in a city than both units will have their hands full.
Horses can move 2, so they can get out and grab camps on many levels. The can cover towns bettr, they can get to stragglers that Swords will not reach in time.
They have a more useful next upgrade. Probably in part it is a bit of a relic from the days when you did not have the MedInf to upgrade Swords to and you grew to shun Swords more often.
The 2 move cannot be over stated IMO. Got 16 tiles to your next target, would you like to get there in half the time or not?
Horses can move 2, so they can get out and grab camps on many levels. The can cover towns bettr, they can get to stragglers that Swords will not reach in time.
They have a more useful next upgrade. Probably in part it is a bit of a relic from the days when you did not have the MedInf to upgrade Swords to and you grew to shun Swords more often.
The 2 move cannot be over stated IMO. Got 16 tiles to your next target, would you like to get there in half the time or not?
Tomoyo
Fate
I never that horsemen *were* better. I said that they *could* be better sometimes. I actually like swordmen better, it's just that horsemen are so much more effective in getting to attack the enemy units that can attack you.Blackbird_SR-71 said:
I prefer Horsemen. I find speed kills. You only give up about 21% on combat calculations against Spearman. You gain a 100% increase in movement and the ability to retreat. I do build swordmen too, to attack in the jungle and marsh area cities.
SJ Frank
Spamalot Co-court
I like to use swords when the odds are in my favor, like when my swords are attacking reg spears in size 6 cities on the flat, or if I have a lot of catapults 
.
On the other hand, if I'm going up against a size 7 city on a hill, without bombardment support, then I'd rather use horse (possibly because once upon a time my entire stack of swords got wept-out in a situation like that).
In any case, I'm firm believer in combined arms. A swords army is much more effective with a couple of spears and horses in the stack. They can absort or head-off counter attacks, preserving the swords for more important tasks. A horse army is much more effective with some spears and swords behind it in reinforcement. They can cover exposed horses, defend captured cities, and attack red-lined units (horses can't retreat against red-lined units, which also means once you have enough catapults, you lose one of the major benefit of horses).
. On the other hand, if I'm going up against a size 7 city on a hill, without bombardment support, then I'd rather use horse (possibly because once upon a time my entire stack of swords got wept-out in a situation like that).
In any case, I'm firm believer in combined arms. A swords army is much more effective with a couple of spears and horses in the stack. They can absort or head-off counter attacks, preserving the swords for more important tasks. A horse army is much more effective with some spears and swords behind it in reinforcement. They can cover exposed horses, defend captured cities, and attack red-lined units (horses can't retreat against red-lined units, which also means once you have enough catapults, you lose one of the major benefit of horses).
Binnor
High Prince
Personally i find horses more useful. sure you have to build more of them but they tend to survive more battles. i fully agree with vmxa: the speed advantage at this early stage is a big bonus. i also find the upgrade more useful.
but as sj frank points out the best strategy is to cover all bases. swords and horses have different roles so it is a little hard to compare them.
but as sj frank points out the best strategy is to cover all bases. swords and horses have different roles so it is a little hard to compare them.
Yes one must always be flexible, especially when you do not have horses.
Mordack
Increase the Deceased
Binnor said:
agree...apples and oranges
I prefer Swordsmen in general because you need a smaller number of them to present a credible conquer threat to a neighboring civ, compared to the forces you must amass with Horses. This is especially imporant in the Ancient Age when troop count tends to be rather small for a variety of reasons.
Once you get to the late Ancient Age, Horsemen tend to get better. I'd like to have both if I can help it at all.
Once you get to the late Ancient Age, Horsemen tend to get better. I'd like to have both if I can help it at all.
ChuckDizzle
Warlord
Actually, having both swords and horses is better. I like swords for hard targets, like units on hills or in cities behind walls.
citizen001
Banned
Swords are a much more potent weapon especially against size 12 cities with spears. Horses are weaker but have retreat which means you need to build more initially and I find that annoying.
If I have both iron and horse, I build swords and horsemen. I usually put 1-2 spear and 1 sword in exposed towns, some horse around to go where it's needed.
To attack IA, I go with swords/horse AND bows (2-3 bows for the stack), with some spears to take the hit. Bow is somewhat safe for defense with their little bombard. They are cheap and they upgrade -> TOW.
Like SJ Franck, red lined unit have to be killed with swordmen, it's much more effective; bowmen without guards, or big town on hill with horsemen. Bows are only here for defense but if the town is redlined, it's better to use them than horse.
To attack IA, I go with swords/horse AND bows (2-3 bows for the stack), with some spears to take the hit. Bow is somewhat safe for defense with their little bombard. They are cheap and they upgrade -> TOW.
Like SJ Franck, red lined unit have to be killed with swordmen, it's much more effective; bowmen without guards, or big town on hill with horsemen. Bows are only here for defense but if the town is redlined, it's better to use them than horse.
Darkness
Shadow creature
Ah, yes, the great horseman vs swordsman debate, again... 
Swordsman:
30 shields, 3/2/1, needs Iron
Horseman:
30 shields, 2/1/2, needs Horses
My POV:
The swordsman in stronger, both on offense and on defense, but the horseman has a better upgrade path (best in the game), it's faster and it can retreat.
I'd take the horseman in almost every situation, with the exception of a really crowded start, with AI neighbours with AA defensive UU's.
Basically, IMHO, the swordsman is a quick fix, whereas the horseman is a depth investment.
FWIW: One of the funnest games I played was COTM7 (IIRC). Demigod level, playing as Sumeria, with neither Iron nor Horses available to the human player. Try killing Babylon and the Byzantines with archers/catapults/Enkidu warriors.... Now that was fun!
Swordsman:
30 shields, 3/2/1, needs Iron
Horseman:
30 shields, 2/1/2, needs Horses
My POV:
The swordsman in stronger, both on offense and on defense, but the horseman has a better upgrade path (best in the game), it's faster and it can retreat.
I'd take the horseman in almost every situation, with the exception of a really crowded start, with AI neighbours with AA defensive UU's.
Basically, IMHO, the swordsman is a quick fix, whereas the horseman is a depth investment.
FWIW: One of the funnest games I played was COTM7 (IIRC). Demigod level, playing as Sumeria, with neither Iron nor Horses available to the human player. Try killing Babylon and the Byzantines with archers/catapults/Enkidu warriors.... Now that was fun!
MeteorPunch
#WINNING
Would anyone build an army with horses? I've definitely built swordmen armies that can march straight into enemy territory, kill 2 units per turn, and not get counter-attacked.
Swords for close enemie cities the send in horsemen in large numbers for far cities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't Be Mean And Dont Be Whiney Or Else I'll Go Medevil On Your Highney
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't Be Mean And Dont Be Whiney Or Else I'll Go Medevil On Your Highney
Darkness
Shadow creature
MeteorPunch said:
Why would that be any different for a horseman army? Besides the fact that it can kill three units a turn?
Ljdjr
Warlord
IMO Horsemen are better than Swords cause they prevent the enemy from promoting most of the time. Obviously, if it's a city on a hill a few swords will help out.
As far as Horsemen Armies I think they suck, cause the AI will attack them and they only defend at 1.
As far as Horsemen Armies I think they suck, cause the AI will attack them and they only defend at 1.
Darkness said:
In the case of an army I think I would want a swordsmen army rather than a horsemen one since at least then the army would still be vaguely useful later on in the game on defence and offence. The horseman army would expire too quickly.
Similar threads
