ABigCivFan
Emperor
I have had great success using both units in my games(Single player). They are both very powerful in early games. It is hard to say which one is better, but I am interested to know which UU is better in your opinion.
Pros for Immortals:
1. Cost 25 hammer Vs. 45 for Praetorian (9 Immortals for 5 Praets)
2. Speed 2 Vs. 1 - Can get to the target city 2x faster
3. 50% bonus Vs. Archers. - like a mounted swordsman (w/o CR though) also + 100% attack Vs. Axeman
4. More effective at pillaging (although I rarely pillage)
5. Ability to withdraw
6. Faster promotions with Charimatic trait
I pick Praetorian over Immortal for the following reasons:
1. City raider promotions. CR allow the Praetorians to be as effective as Maceman (but 100 turns earlier than other Civs) when attacking cities. CR also applies against ALL city defending units where immortals only gets bonus against archers. CR3 Praets = attack strength of 14 against cities! in 1000 BC.
2. Much stronger in attacking and defending in open fields.
3. Defensive bonus on hill or in forrest/Jungles.
4. Upgradable to CR Granedier/Infantry/Mech Inf.
5. Better winning/survival rates than Immortals due to its strenth superiority.
These advantages means that the Praetorians have a much longer shelf life(until gunpowder) and survival rates than the Immortals, which translates into much bigger fruit from early conquest which sets up a much stronger mid-late game for the Romans.
I have played these games on Immortal level, I could keep pushing the Praetorians swarms even when the AIs had Longbows and spears whereas the Immortals will suffer heavy losses against such foes. So Most of the time I had to stop my Immortal rush when AIs get Fedualism, and they get to it very early at high levels. But I could push the Praets unitl I see large number of AI maces/Crossbows which come much later than Longbows/spears.
Pros for Immortals:
1. Cost 25 hammer Vs. 45 for Praetorian (9 Immortals for 5 Praets)
2. Speed 2 Vs. 1 - Can get to the target city 2x faster
3. 50% bonus Vs. Archers. - like a mounted swordsman (w/o CR though) also + 100% attack Vs. Axeman
4. More effective at pillaging (although I rarely pillage)
5. Ability to withdraw
6. Faster promotions with Charimatic trait
I pick Praetorian over Immortal for the following reasons:
1. City raider promotions. CR allow the Praetorians to be as effective as Maceman (but 100 turns earlier than other Civs) when attacking cities. CR also applies against ALL city defending units where immortals only gets bonus against archers. CR3 Praets = attack strength of 14 against cities! in 1000 BC.
2. Much stronger in attacking and defending in open fields.
3. Defensive bonus on hill or in forrest/Jungles.
4. Upgradable to CR Granedier/Infantry/Mech Inf.
5. Better winning/survival rates than Immortals due to its strenth superiority.
These advantages means that the Praetorians have a much longer shelf life(until gunpowder) and survival rates than the Immortals, which translates into much bigger fruit from early conquest which sets up a much stronger mid-late game for the Romans.
I have played these games on Immortal level, I could keep pushing the Praetorians swarms even when the AIs had Longbows and spears whereas the Immortals will suffer heavy losses against such foes. So Most of the time I had to stop my Immortal rush when AIs get Fedualism, and they get to it very early at high levels. But I could push the Praets unitl I see large number of AI maces/Crossbows which come much later than Longbows/spears.