Sipahi vs Cossacks

[Nergal]

I've had an excellent game playing the Ottomans. I've never really got to grips with them before but I found Sipahi amazing to play. In sheer terms of crunching pikemen they were brilliant. I'm trying to weigh up which are better; Sipahi or Cossacks. The Sipahi are more expensive in shield terms and upgrade costs but do pack a good punch. And try as hard as I like, I just couldnt get an MGL. Whereas the cossacks are cheaper and get blitz, so elites and MGLs are reasonably common. Whose got an opinion?

 

[Bartleby]

I like Sipahi a lot. I played a big game with the Ottos a while ago (Huge Emperor Pangaea) and it was really fun. (No shortage of leaders for me).
I haven't played a similar game as the Russians, but it does sound like a good idea. Most of the Russian games I have played have been low-level fast research games.

 

[Nergal]

It might have been because the AIs didnt get going .. it was a really nice map. I had a huge lump of continent and jungle on a chokepoint between me and the rest of my locals. When I met them they were a few techs behind. I got about 6 wonders from taking out Spain, after that I was around an Age ahead. The best AI troops I met were pikes and the odd knight. The Aztecs lasted about 4 turns against my knights. THe Persians lasted 3 and the Carthaginians lasted 2 turns against Sipahi. Japan was on its own island and lasted 2 turns. They had pikes as well. I was just about to invade Portugal and the Inca, both of whom had their own islands when I got a Domination VC. I was about 3 turns from Steam Power and they both wanted to buy Education. Leaders possibly require a challenge to get, but there wasnt anything in this game. The Cossacks blitz gives them multiple attacks so the have more chance of going elite and therefore more possibilities for MGLs.

 

[eldar]

Sipahi get my vote. Most of the time even a redlined pike or musket in a 7+ city (which is what you tend to face with Cavs) will take a hitpoint or two off a Cossack. So the blitz ability is somewhat lost. I'd rather have +2 attack and a unit that is far more effective against Infantry, Tanks, and Guerillas than blitz which I don't use.

 

[vmxa]

Blitz is not worth anything to me as how often can you blitz anyhow? If you face units of the same age, then very seldom. The 8 att is good all game long.

 

[Pyrrhos]

Blitz is very useful. With two wins (preferably against barbarians), they're elite. A stack attacking can finish off the remaining damaged or redlined defenders with their second attack (which has been saved for such a purpose) even if damaged themselves. If you don't take the town, you can use the second attack to capture workers, pillage improvements or kill troops on their way to fortify the town.

On the other hand, a Sipahi Army is useful much longer as it can be used against riflemen or infantry with a decent chance of success.

 

[Miles Teg]

Blitz is very useful. With two wins (preferably against barbarians), they're elite

If you have barbarians on your hands in the late medieval period, you have a problem.

Anyways, Cossacks are great for cementing a lead, Siphai for gaining one.

 

[Marsden]

I found blitz to be a better defensive ability than offensive. When the AI is nice enough to send a stack of longbowmen a cossack can kill 3 each while a regular cavalry can only kill one.

 

[Aabraxan]

I'm going to have to go with Sipahi on this one. I don't have a great deal of experience with either one, but . . . By the time I can build either of them, I can build the Military Academy and, hence, armies. As all armies get blitz, I think a Siphahi army is clearly superior to a cossack army, though you do pay for the superiority. Nonetheless, even for 20 additional shields, I think I'd rather have 8 attack than blitz.

 

[rysingsun]

i'll give them a tie. i don't use either often enough to really know though. the high cost of the siphai matters to me. as for cossacks "rarely" attacking twice i think that is a bit of an exaggeration.

 

[vmxa]

I would say that barbs are not a factor, the AI will wipe that out at high levels as soon as they appear and I lower levels you should not have them in your land by that point in the game.

I would not want to have a Cossack or any unit in a spot where it could be attacked and have 3 units to kill. I would either have a unit that is not going to be attacked, read army, or cover them the units. IOW I should not have that many opportunities to use the blitz. Yes I will have a some.

 

[rysingsun]

but now difficulty matters in another way. on both sid archi games and aw games the ai unit count can get high enough that the number of armies is limited not by the ability to get promotions but by the city count. in such a game blitz matters less.

 

[TheOverseer714]

I love 'em both. I think head to head the Sipahi wins, but just barely. Then again, with Cossacks and an aggressive military stance, you might end up fielding 20 4 unit cossack armies, all filled with elites. In my recent game as Russia, I beat back the Koreans' tanks, MI's and nukes with artilllery, infantry and cossack armies. I had so many MGL's that I stockpiled them for tanks and MA's, as I was getting 2-3 a turn. When every battle is with dozens of elites, the leaders pile up. Maybe at DG and up, the Sipahi is superior, but lower than that, give me Cossacks.

 

[ecuwins]

I like the Sipahi better. A Sipahi Army in C3C is a beast.

 

[Nergal]

Just for interests sake I played a game as the Russians. Its hard to do a direct comparison because it would mean setting up a custom map and that takes the fun out of it for me. But I think the Sipahi won. I finished the game earlier with Sipahi and that was mainly because I found I needed lots of Cossacks to kick the Americans out of their metros. The 2 point attack advantage of the Sipahi would have let me kick their riflemen a bit harder. And playing against riflemen would have meant more elite Sipahis and therefore Sipahi armies, which ecuwins is right they would have been beasts. The theory worked and I did end up with a few Cossack armies and they were handy but it actually took tanks to break the Americans in the end. My overall thoughts are that, along with the Panzer they have to be the top UUs in the game.

 

[silver 2039]

The Siaphi are damn tank killers. I got surged by them and they managed to take out several of my tanks. Quite irritating.

 

[The Professor]

I would say that barbs are not a factor, the AI will wipe that out at high levels as soon as they appear and I lower levels you should not have them in your land by that point in the game.

If you have barbarians on your hands in the late medieval period, you have a problem.

In general, I agree with both these comments, but I recently decided to go for a late conquest victory, instead of domination, so I was razing cities while going for the last of the Persians, and started seeing warriors come up, ride my railroads, and attack my tanks. My first reaction was to put infantry on the hilltops to get rid of the fog, but then I realize that I could promote my tanks to elite status on the barbs before sending them into their first true battle. Got a whole bunch of tank armies out of that.

The only downside of the blitz ability is that if you put the units in armies, they actually lose some opportunities to attack. For instance, if you have 4 tanks, they could conceivably attack 8 times, if they were moved into position the turn before and you use a stack of artillery to redline the defenders. Those same 4 tanks in an army will only be able to attack four times, at a maximum. The army, however, can travel further in one turn, and can frequently take a city without artillery back-up, so there's definitely still a place for them, but I like to have some of both, for maximum flexibility.

As for Sipahi vs. Cossacks, Sipahi, but only by a little bit.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Your odds of getting elites are much lower with Sipahi than Cossacks, with the Cossack you can have great leaders in swarms. Sipahi are the best offensive unit until tanks, but I'd rather have 20 4 unit Cossack armies than 10 3 unit Sipahi armies. Being able to rush the HE, the pentagon, the military academy, factories, etc. with tons of leaders is not to be sneezed at. I've found the Cossack to be really nice, but the Sipahi rocks also. It's like asking do you like pie or cake, the answer is, I like 'em both! Yummy!

 

[Bartleby]

I like Sipahi a lot. I played a big game with the Ottos a while ago (Huge Emperor Pangaea) and it was really fun. (No shortage of leaders for me).
I haven't played a similar game as the Russians, but it does sound like a good idea. Most of the Russian games I have played have been low-level fast research games.

I've decided to give Cossacks a work-out on a Large DG pangaea.

 

[TheOverseer714]

I've decided to give Cossacks a work-out on a Large DG pangaea.

I'll be interested to see how many leaders you get out of your Cossacks, and how many armies you end up with. Keep us posted here if you want to.