Infantry. You use them?

[EQandcivfanatic]

With PTW, infantry is entirely different. With medieval infantry and the gureilla unit it makes the warrior upgrade path much more useful. My question is do any of you use the warrior upgrade path? I usually do in PTW until Cavalry comes along. The guerilla unit in my opinion is useless, even though i expect it could be useful if you do a mass upgrade.

 

[Yzman]

How could you not use infantry? None of the other units have the defense that they have. The warrior upgrade path does not have defense like that. That path sorta seems the the resource-less,cheaper units path. Not that their is anything wrong with that, but infantry are essential for defense, if you use them for attack, then you are using them wrong.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

lol, i didn't mean the spearman upgrade path. I meant by infantry the warrior upgrade path. I guess that was a bad choice of words.

 

[Yzman]

Oh ok, I thought you were crazy for a second.

 

[cgannon64]

I haven't gotten a chance to try this in-game but, here is what I think: Guerillas have the same attack as calvary, come a little before tanks. They COULD be slightly useful for the mass-upgrade to add another 20 units to your offensive, and those 20 units could make all the difference. Just a suggestion.

CG

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Yzman: Yes anyone who didn't use the spearman path would have to be crazy.

 

[Cantankerous]

I always upgrade all of my units as long as I have money to do so. And it used to be that my Swordsmen (mostly built during the ancient age) were disbanded as soon as better attacking units came along.

But I don't think the Guerilla unit is particularly useless. It certainly gives you a reason to keep Swordsmen and Medieval Infantry around even into the late Industrial Age, and although they are not spectacular units, they could serve a purpose as secondary attack and defensive units.

They also require no special resources, so if a civ doesn't have rubber, they can still build them. And that provides a unit with the attack of cavalry/infantry and the defense of a rifleman without the need for rubber. That in itself gives it at least a marginal value.

 

[kgkia33]

The only real benefit guerillas have is the 3 extra defense points than cavalry. My cavalry always get sneak attacked and killed after fighting or on their way to fight because of their weak defensive value.

Also, guerillas would be more capable of seizing a city and still being able to occupy it. Cavalry's defensive value of 3 is just not enough to hold on to a city..ever.

 

[Lynx]

I use both, as both can be pretty useful. I usuall use gurellas to break easier targets such as cavalry and rifemen, while infantry are more defensive, but i use them for the charge as well.

 

[Park Ranger]

I rarely even use the warrior-swordsman upgrade I find the 40 gold too expensive.

Didn't realize the sword upgrades to guerilla in PTW how much does it cost (without Leonado's Discount, that is)?

Don't understand use of guerilla if you have rubber.

 

[Panda]

Originally posted by Park Ranger
I rarely even use the warrior-swordsman upgrade I find the 40 gold too expensive.

Didn't realize the sword upgrades to guerilla in PTW how much does it cost (without Leonado's Discount, that is)?

Don't understand use of guerilla if you have rubber.

Swordsmen upgrade first to Medieval Infantry, which in turn upgrades to Guerrillas.

Also, Longbowmen upgrade to Guerrillas as well.

As you said yourself, there's no point in building Guerrillas if you have rubber, as they cost as much as Infantry. But they are decent enough support units for garrison duty and breaking resistance in conquered cities, and thus justify their existence in the industrial era unlike Swordsmen and Longbowmen.

 

[DaDrunkenFish]

for tanks and cavalry, you need oil and rubber, salpeter and horses respectively, amd saltpeter can be a pain to get(in my experiances. However, guerillas are cheap, resources not needed and very decent in numbers

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

All good points. I've discovered though that the problem with a mass upgrade from Med. Infantry to Guerilla is that you will be stuck with A LOT of Med. Infantry for a long time. You get medieval infantry with Feudalism and guerillas with Rep. Parts. That's a pretty long jump. Also Med. Infantry just arent that great against Cavalry and Muskets.

 

[cgannon64]

MedInf are definetely useful. It allows you to have a seamless transition from Swordsmen war to Medeival war, rather than having to have peace to build up a knight army. In a recent game (where I'm doing very well) I started a war with the Mongols with swordsmen, then finished it with MedInf, then consolidiated the MedInf army and took over Greece. You may say MedInf are too slow for Medeivial combat, but being able to upgrade one strong army to another is very useful. It saves you the trouble of making a sword army, fighting a war, then making an entire knight army from scratch. You could just make horsemen and upgrade them, but that has a steep upgrade cost, and with sword to MedInf, you don't have to make a new army, you just upgrade what you have.

CG

 

[Spade7]

Guerillas are usefull if u dont have rubber and u just have alot of med infantry hanging around. I send guerrillas with my calvary when attacking just so they dont get counterattacked after they attack. However, there not reallly worth building if u have rubber.

 

[candybo]

Mop-up troops (i.e. potential leaders), and temporary garrison/cover units...