The best unit in the game!

[Warriorfromafar]

In my opinion its Infantry because the can dominate the battlefield for a long while after they are first built (with the right promotions) plus they completely own the older units.

What do you people think is the best unit?

 

[Zombie69]

Workers, followed by settlers. Search for old threads, you'll see these being consistently at the top of the chart. No need to start a new thread.

 

[Thrar]

You're raising an interesting point there, Zombie. Not that those two are important, but rather, which one is more important?
So, would it be harder to play a game without settlers (not OCC, you can capture things!) or one without workers?
From this point of view, I think you're right, workers are more important than settlers in the end. But still I'd claim the best (as in: most powerful) unit in the game is that very first settler you start with!

 

[Naismith]

I'm going to assume we're talking military units here. The most powerful in terms of their ability to win or lose the game for you:
1) Axeman
2) Catapult

My thinking: Axeman rush, and critical importance of the first seige weapon. Catapults are paramount for a ridiculously long period in the game. I listed axeman first because getting them early and using them early is critical for higher levels.

I see your point about infantry, and agree. I think Cavalry fall into the same category.

 

[Sisiutil]

In my games Infantry have a very short period of usefulness. Tanks are just around the corner; when they start appearing, Infantry are relegated to securing cities.

It's hard to assign a "best" unit because of the specialization of units. No one unit is best at everything.

Still, limiting it to military units, it's probably Catapults. They are, as Naismith says, crucial to the game and probably have the longest window of usefulness--mainly because, unlike all the other units, they have no medieval replacement. They can be used for defense and attack, and so many different types of attack. If they survived more often, I'd love them even more. As it is, I end up building more of them than any other unit.

 

[macrobot]

I usually play elizabeth because her UU seems to come on the scene at teh right time and stay dominant for quite some time. THey own musketmen, cavalry, and grenadiers as if they were infantry. THis puts you WAY ahead of everybody at a very critical tiem in the game. In addition they have no natural counters like most other UU's because they are not technically rifleman. I find that redocats are viable from when I get them rigth up until I switch over to tanks. I usually skip building infantry because they are not as good as redcoats.

 

[MazX_TheDog]

Catapults for sure, as they allow inferior units to take out superiors by widdling them down.

 

[Mirc]

Settlers and Workers.

 

[Jayhawk_Colin]

I personally like the indian UU, the fast worker, they boost your economy alot and you get them the entire game unlike anyother UU

 

[Codeman]

i think the best unit depends on your current situation. what good are settlers/workers without military to defend from attack? but how can you support your civ without workers? with the way it's balanced, you have some strong, some weak, but for the most part all necessary. of course most players never use many units available, but effecient use envolves all units. that's my $0.02 worth.

 

[Sisiutil]

In this sort of debate, I think everyone's referring to military units, not civilian units. Workers and Settlers are essential, end of discussion.

 

[jayseedubya]

1. Praetorians- They can win a conquest vic over 5 civs on noble before 1 AD
2. Axemen- Not quite Praets, but close
3. Tanks- Soooo many promotion opportunities
4. Catapults
-jcw

 

[Howitzah]

I'm not saying it's the best, but my favorite regular unit is Riflemen.

I always try to get to Rifling ASAP for two reasons;

1) Replaceable Parts = Lumbermills, which I love.

2) Riflemen. If you rush there you can move out Riflemen while the AI is still on Longbows or Muskets, which a City Raider III Riflemen will trounce.

Of course if you have Redcoats it's even better.

 

[aelf]

Settlers are not that essential. Had a game where I never built one. Forgot whether I won that game. I've also had a game or two where I never built a single catapult. My first non-axe war featured Musketeers capturing cities on their own. And then it was cavalry doing the job. I did build cannons, though.

 

[Tephros]

In my 1010 A.D. monarch domination victory I didn't build any settlers until the last couple turns to grab a few squares between my cities. Of course this would not have been possible without quechua, so I guess those are my favorite.

 

[Alraun]

Catapults are paramount for a ridiculously long period in the game.

I normally play the game on Emperor. I've never built a catapult ever. Mind you, I'm not saying they're not good, just that calling them paramount is certainly false. I do agree with your about axemen though.

 

[Naismith]

I normally play the game on Emperor. I've never built a catapult ever. Mind you, I'm not saying they're not good, just that calling them paramount is certainly false. I do agree with your about axemen though.

Inconceivable! You Emporer players are a tricky bunch. Seriously, you do not use them at all? How do you manage that?

 

[Alraun]

Inconceivable! You Emporer players are a tricky bunch. Seriously, you do not use them at all? How do you manage that?

Flanking can accomplish in a poor way what catapults do. Focusing on using mounted units, if you give half flanking and half combat skills, you can attack cities with those that have flanking first, hoping they retreat from their inevitable loss, then moving in the combat trained skills. A catapult based strategy is probably more effective for Civ IV, but I haven't been playing long enough to change ALL of my Civ I-III habits yet.

 

[Araqiel]

I personally like the indian UU, the fast worker, they boost your economy alot and you get them the entire game unlike anyother UU

As long as you're playing on normal speed I like the fast worker as well. Both Epic/Marathon dilute its power too much for me to play India when I have the urge to play those speeds.

 

[Araqiel]

Flanking can accomplish in a poor way what chariots do. Focusing on using mounted units, if you give half flanking and half combat skills, you can attack cities with those that have flanking first, hoping they retreat from their inevitable loss, then moving in the combat trained skills. A catapult based strategy is probably more effective for Civ IV, but I haven't been playing long enough to change ALL of my Civ I-III habits yet.

Absolutely, the thing is that those units come well before catapults. So its not really an either or situation in my mind. Once you hit the medieval era though they're truly essential. Longbows are just too tough in cities if you don't at the very least bombard them. Though if I'm playing Saladin I'll use less suicide catapults as Camel Archers are rather nifty.