The strongest unit in the standard game

[Naismith]

Quecha, Cossak, Redcoat and Prat's in that order.
...
If I haven't defeated my two nearest neighbors before the Iron Age I consider it a bad start for the Maya. I won't play the Maya on a Pangea, Continent or Fractal anymore (at Monarch level) because the advantage is so overwhelming./QUOTE]

I assume you play at Marathon speed. I suspect Quecha's are pretty useless on Normal, and better but not so overpowering on Epic. I have almost no experience with them - am I wrong?

 

[Pantastic]

One thing that factors in to the 'best unit' is whether you're fighting human or AI; praetorians are much better against the AI than humans because the AI won't build tons of axes to counter them the way a human will.

I think Cossacks are stronger overall than redcoats because they come so much earlier on the tech tree. It's pretty easy (at least on monarch) to get liberalism first for free nationalism, then research military tradition and research/trade gunpowder to have cossacks when your opponents only have pikemen as a counter. To get redcoats, you have to go further up the tech tree and in a less natural direction.

Cho-Ko-Nus are OK, they're good at fighting in the field but are very poor at actually conquering territory unless you pull off a rush, and crossbows are basically as good at that rush. They certainly don't shred everything in their era; they're equal against one-era-back horsemen, weak against one-era-back elephants, trashed in the field by same-era knights, equal against cheaper same-era longbows in the field, beaten by longbows in cities, and only slightly ahead of macemen (roughly equal against aggressive maces). They're not a useless UU, but I'd much rather have samurai.

 

[Armorydave]

I assume you play at Marathon speed. I suspect Quecha's are pretty useless on Normal, and better but not so overpowering on Epic. I have almost no experience with them - am I wrong?

I play exclusively on Epic but pay more attention to making sure enemy resources don't get hooked up and snagging/paralyzing workers then I do on immediate conquest when I play the Maya. There is no war weariness at the beginning of the game so you can fight your two nearest opponents over a long period of time and Quecha's are so cheap you can still build early wonders and buildings (barracks and granary specifically).

Once you control their terrain they are pretty much helpless with archers against Quecha's and if you can hook up copper early it becomes a rout. Basically your first four cities are your capital, your #2 city and the two nearest enemy capitals. It gives an incredibly powerful base to build from given that three of your cities have starting capital terrain. I might keep or build one other city in the early phases but research can become an issue if you aren't willing to torch a few cities along the way. Using this startegy at Monarch I would win the vast majority of my pangea, continent or fractal starts (with all other settings normal). My two best scores (by far) were with the Maya and they are three or four of my top ten.

BTW, you can't do this strategy half-assed because if they ever hook up copper or horses you are screwed. Charge their nearest workers *immediately*, steal them, and hold their best defensive position to terrorize any other workers in the area (hill-woods are almost always near in this era). Then build/move your pillaging/raiding force into place and don't give them peace until they are wiped from the board. Your early builds are Qeucha, Quecha, Quecha, Quecha, Quecha, Quecha, Quecha, etc. with a barracks thrown in as soon as feasible. Workers and "settlers" are supplied by your foes and Stonehedge or Oracle can be chopped out relatively quickly once you have your boot on the collective neck of your ancestral enemies.

 

[JoeM]

This is often repeated but it is not always true since axes typically fight archers in cities. ...

Well as you see from earlier in the thread I've made the point between raw stats and in-game situations.

 

[MisterBarca]

One thing that factors in to the 'best unit' is whether you're fighting human or AI; praetorians are much better against the AI than humans because the AI won't build tons of axes to counter them the way a human will.

I think Cossacks are stronger overall than redcoats because they come so much earlier on the tech tree. It's pretty easy (at least on monarch) to get liberalism first for free nationalism, then research military tradition and research/trade gunpowder to have cossacks when your opponents only have pikemen as a counter. To get redcoats, you have to go further up the tech tree and in a less natural direction.

Cho-Ko-Nus are OK, they're good at fighting in the field but are very poor at actually conquering territory unless you pull off a rush, and crossbows are basically as good at that rush. They certainly don't shred everything in their era; they're equal against one-era-back horsemen, weak against one-era-back elephants, trashed in the field by same-era knights, equal against cheaper same-era longbows in the field, beaten by longbows in cities, and only slightly ahead of macemen (roughly equal against aggressive maces). They're not a useless UU, but I'd much rather have samurai.

Well-said; I agree with everything here.

 

[gunkulator]

Well as you see from earlier in the thread I've made the point between raw stats and in-game situations.

Yes, but my point is that axeman are only better than archers if you bring about twice as many. That hardly qualifies as a "greater raw advantage over Archers". Quite the contrary. Bringing twice as many units is good tactics for any era.

 

[Pantastic]

One other thing is that rifles and grenadiers at least put up a fight against redcoats; city garrison rifles or counterattacking grenadiers can certainly hurt them, so if an opponent gets your UU tech or the easier Chemistry, they can at least fight back. Regular cavalry stand no chance against Cossacks (+50% and higher stength), so an opponent hitting the tech at the same time as you doesn't slow you down at all. In fact, you'd rather them make more expensive cavalry instead of pikemen; I'll usually trade away MT without a second though as the Russians.

 

[sirtommygunn]

quote:Cho-Ko-Nus are OK, they're good at fighting in the field but are very poor at actually conquering territory unless you pull off a rush, and crossbows are basically as good at that rush. They certainly don't shred everything in their era; they're equal against one-era-back horsemen, weak against one-era-back elephants, trashed in the field by same-era knights, equal against cheaper same-era longbows in the field, beaten by longbows in cities, and only slightly ahead of macemen (roughly equal against aggressive maces). They're not a useless UU, but I'd much rather have samurai.[/QUOTE]
cho-ku-nos pwn cuz of their collateral dmg sure in a 1 vs 1 they suck but if its a big stack vs a big stack cho-ku-nos win hands down

 

[Esox]

axeman are only better than archers if you bring about twice as many. That hardly qualifies as a "greater raw advantage over Archers".

Yes, the problem with axes vs archers is that the AI actually uses archers correctly - they park them in cities and wait for you.

 

[apopholeus813]

As elizabeth the redcoat really rocks, you should be in a posistion to be the first to rifling. I no longer even play as elizabeth b/c its ridiculously easy to get any kind of victory. Perfect timing to, you have a well developed infrastructure to support military conquest. The inca quecha rush is only usefull if youre going to burn cities, you dont have the economy to support early all out war, unless youre on a small map you fall way behind really quick. With Quin Shi Huang its possible to build pyramids, research metal casting and use your engineer to get machinery and get CKN pretty early. Personally though my favorite UU is the cossack hands down.

 

[Danicela]

Soo..... Does Grenadier have +50% vs Redcoat?