Mounted units! What are they good for? aka why mounted units have been sidelined

[Knut_Are_M]

Nah ranged units are downwright overpowerd.
Especially crossbowmen and frigates.
They have 13 defence vs melee and 18 vs ranged.
Most Mp games have people spam ranged units and use 1 horsemen to take the city.

And attilla is downwright broken in MP, battering rams + horse archers to pick off the units almost allways ends up in the next door nabour dieing.

Catapults are not used in siege because composite bowmen does a better job.
They have 11 ranged defence compared to a low 8. Also composite bowmen does not need to set up and are better vs units.
Rome has some pretty sick legionaires that composite bowmen are very bad vs.
Also ballistas are much thougher and better vs cities(25%). Outside of rome yeah ranged units dominate the early warfare.

Cavalry are quite good because you normally have armory by then to get some nice promotions. Also gatling guns only have 1 range.

 

[agonistes]

I find them useful for scouting terrain, taking out barbarians/protecting borders, and sniping enemy artillery. Good for advanced scouting when sending a settler way out into the wilds.

Recently had a settler push into darkest Africa. Had two horse scouting, as I built up a chain of xbowmen to guard my settlers + road builders.


In crowded rooms they can clear/hold some space for you, like, when two armies are just mashed together face-to-face, and you finally killed an enemy unit next to an enemy city, clearing some space, but nobody can reach it in your turn... except that one knight you have. I guess I find them generally handy, but not to be used to make up the bulk of my army.

 

[smallfish]

To take out targets blocking a road... say there is this mountain pass to Sparta, and its the only entrance into Greece proper (surrounded by mountain ranges), and you have a ton of medieval cavalries, meathsields and some cannons but can't seem to bring all of them over. You lay down a citadel to bring your borders closer to Sparta's side of the pass... then a Greek Musketeer rushes in and sits on it to pillage.

You can use your Knights to repeatedly punch the musket in the face and then retreat to heal, then destroy it with a ranged unit or another melee meatshield to pave the way in all in a single turn or two.

 

[Bamboocha]

I agree that mounted units are rather useless. Horsemen and knights are strictly inferior to infantry units from the same era (swordsmen and longswordsmen/musketmen) which makes no sense since knights were the kings of the battlefield in the middle ages. After that, cavalry is on par with riflemen so it's so-so because they still have the cavalry disadvantages. After that the tank and modern armor outdamage infantry and mech. infantry respectively by quite a bit, but still have the silly penalty against cities (why?!). Most games don't last long enough to reach the final upgrade, the GDR, so there's no real use in that one either. This makes cavalry strictly inferior to infantry in almost all cases.

 

[Gamewizard]

And attilla is downwright broken in MP, battering rams + horse archers to pick off the units almost allways ends up in the next door nabour dieing.

Attilla is vulnerable to early mounted units since he has no spearman. They can chase down those horse archers and then move back to block the path of a battering ram that can't attack units.

 

[Nukes R Us]

I agree that mounted units are rather useless. Horsemen and knights are strictly inferior to infantry units from the same era (swordsmen and longswordsmen/musketmen) which makes no sense since knights were the kings of the battlefield in the middle ages. After that, cavalry is on par with riflemen so it's so-so because they still have the cavalry disadvantages. After that the tank and modern armor outdamage infantry and mech. infantry respectively by quite a bit, but still have the silly penalty against cities (why?!). Most games don't last long enough to reach the final upgrade, the GDR, so there's no real use in that one either. This makes cavalry strictly inferior to infantry in almost all cases.

I find tanks and modern armor over-powered against cities :b

Maybe that is why

 

[Denounced]

I don't really see the point of their penalty vs cities- they already have the crippling no defensive terrain bonus and get shredded by Spear and Pikeman.

Because, they are already powerful! It balances the game. To some players who use them, they may even seem too powerful

I agree, they can be pretty strong out in the field. The melee style ones are good for taking the city aswell, just like a swordsman or any other such unit. What makes the mounted units so powerful is their ability to run rings around an enemy with their mobility. One spearman is nothing. He can't touch a mounted unit unless the player made a mistake with movement points or attacked with really low health or was pinned down somehow or was caught unawares.
I love to give mounted units the medic upgrades too. Makes them pretty much unstoppable.

 

[Galgus]

I agree, they can be pretty strong out in the field. The melee style ones are good for taking the city aswell, just like a swordsman or any other such unit. What makes the mounted units so powerful is their ability to run rings around an enemy with their mobility. One spearman is nothing. He can't touch a mounted unit unless the player made a mistake with movement points or attacked with really low health or was pinned down somehow or was caught unawares.
I love to give mounted units the medic upgrades too. Makes them pretty much unstoppable.

The problem is that it is fairly viable to make an army of spearmen instead of swordsmen.

 

[mintcandy]

The problem is that it is fairly viable to make an army of spearmen instead of swordsmen.

This.

I'm not the biggest fan of how Gods and Kings strengthened Pikemen (or was it weakening Swordsmen?) because it indirectly makes the offensive use of mounted units even less viable in single player than they already were.

I guess previous Civilization games spoiled me, because I'd usually have way more mounted units than foot units in previous Civ games. In Civ V, there's little reason to do so, unless one has a really great mounted Unique Unit.

 

[Avatan]

The problem is that it is fairly viable to make an army of spearmen instead of swordsmen.

Yes. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I do feel like the "switch revealing iron from iron work to bronze working" idea might just solve the whole mounted units are underpowered problem.
Iron visible earlier => iron working teched earlier if iron nearby => swordsman relevant again.

 

[Galgus]

Fundamentally, the Spearman needs to be less of a slightly less powerful Swordsman replacement to stop using them in that way.

Probably either through increased production time or lowered combat stats.

Alternatively, I could support halving their bonus against Calvary and leaving everything else the same- that way the bonus would be more consistent with what they give up for it.

 

[Hammer Rabbi]

i use my melee horse units to either pillage or take a city. i rarely use them for combat. i keep them out of attack and sight range and take a city with them when it is down to nothing. and pillage/retreat is just for the gold if the terrain isnt too bad. if the terrain is bad the horses become more questionable.

 

[Danei]

Being able to attack and retreat is a great ability in battles where tile space is at a premium. Attack with cavalry, then back off, then send in your non-cavalry units. It's basically free damage, at the cost of some hitpoints from your cavalry. Because they're fast, it's easy to send them to the nearest friendly territory to heal (in land wars, at least). It doesn't sound like much, but once you get used to using it, it really turns the tide of battles in many cases. Essentially, it allows you to output more damage in a turn than you could possibly do with melee and ranged units alone, if your positioning is good.
Note that this is somewhat less effective in regions without flat terrain, but that's realistic.

Also, more movement points means easier/safer pillaging. This is useful both for getting extra gold and for disrupting the target's economy. In the upcoming fall patch, pillaging heals the unit doing it, which, assuming other pillaging mechanics remain the same, will be a relative buff to cavalry, because they can pillage more easily and safely.

I usually have fewer cavalry than ranged and melee units, but I do like to take a few with me, as their advantages are unique and cannot really be replicated by spending those hammers on more melee or ranged units instead. The fact that you can beat the AI by spamming a single type of unit if you want to is more indicative of how ineffectual the AI is at war, rather than indicative of cavalry being useless.

 

[swishizzle]

While it was fun having my Hakkapeliitta Medics roaming around my Marching Caroleans, it was simply because of my abundance of spears/pikes upgrading to them. I usually don't build mounted units at all unless I'm Attila, Arabia, or Mongolia for obvious reasons.

They look great on paper (faster, stronger, and able to retreat) but I feel like I can't keep them alive when it's city-taking time. Once pillaging heals, however, I think we'll see mounted units being used a lot more. Not only are you wrecking their cities, but you're healing in the process.

 

[Liegence]

That's a point - Has anyone made a hakkapetilla gunship? How does the GG movement work? Can they then fly over rought terrain too . That'd be so cool!

Well, as Sweden is one of my fav Civs, of course I have made a Hakkapetilla gunship! They do boost GG movement to their movement speed which is awesome, but they do not grant the GGs fly
would be nice though! Seriously should patch this in

And on topic, i think mounted units are great. If you use them correctly the computer has a very hard time dealing with them, especially if you are using them defensively.

I wish there was more incentive to build swordsmen now as pikes are far too common imho. I am all for swords getting a small bonus vs. Spears/Pikes.

 

[Socrates99]

The only thing mounted troops are good for is their mobility. They are generally weaker than their contemporary infantry counterparts, weak vs cities, can't fortify and have an Achilles heel in spear/pikes that infantry do not have. It's those weaknesses that make me think they should have higher attack power than infantry rather than lower. They will come out on the short end of most battles they get in so I'd rather build units capable in taking a bigger role in combat.

Armored units on the other hand are great since they can stay out of city defense range while gatling/machine guns and artillery batter down city defense then swoop in and take the city when its Hp are gone. It's their contemporary units that make them useful whereas knights and horsemen don't mesh strategically with theirs.

 

[Vladesch]

Mounted is a liability since the AI builds heaps of spearmen and pikemen.

 

[AWahl]

I just want to know why my awesome trebuchet upgrades to a seemingly less effective (for it's designed role) knight.

 

[AWahl]

Mounted is a liability since the AI builds heaps of spearmen and pikemen.

And then there is this as well. lol

 

[Freeman_C2K]

Get Gods & Kings already!

I don't get how people can play without it. Admittedly I'm new to the game and in fact bought GOTY edition and G+K together as a start - that said however, all I hear from the Civ purists is how AI sucks and this and that... Civ IV was better... blah, blah...

Whatever, I say!

Civ V is the best game I've EVER played. I got bored of SC2... battle.net is just too competitive, I'm more of a chill person and I can't compete with 16 year olds with their 20 000 apm.

Anyway,

Religion and Espionage add SO much to the game!! From what I hear the new units and AI are a big step up from original version as well.

Go to the store and buy G+K dammit.