The worst unit overall

[The Last Conformist]

I'm very surprised that any UUs turn up in this thread - for each and every one the corresponding normal unit is worse for the same cost (altho' in some cases, notably F-15 and Cossack, the difference is quite small).

And for people who think the War Chariot sucks; doesn't the Horseman suck alot harder then, since it's 50% more expensive and it's only advantage above the War Chariot is the ability to cross unroaded Jungle and Mountains?

 

[Homie]

When you rate the UU's, you compare them to the unit they replace. So if there is little differance or the extra point(s) or
ability(ies) are useless (like the extra point in defence for cossack) then the UU would be referred to as "it sucks".

When you rate normal units you consider how useful they can be and in which cases the units are useful. Some units are only useful in very few cases, like the fighter, other than defending against bombers (Personally I have never needed to defend a city against bombers, the AI usually bombards terrain improvements) it sucks.

 

[bobgote]

Originally posted by Homie
When you rate normal units you consider how useful they can be and in which cases the units are useful. Some units are only useful in very few cases, like the fighter, other than defending against bombers (Personally I have never needed to defend a city against bombers, the AI usually bombards terrain improvements) it sucks.

They can still be intercepted if they're only attacking improvements.

And jungle/mountains crossing can be very significant if theres a belt of one or the other between you and your enemy

 

[Lab Monkey]

Most naval vessels are pretty awful up until carriers and battleships and transports. I think I'll mod it so that they all come earlier than they do, so as to give the player time to actually use them.

I've already upped the values of paras and marines so that they actually cause some damage. Also, why doesn't advanced flight feature in the space race? Surely it needs to be linked to space flight - another reason to make that alteration.

Explorers I use to check on the buildup of enemy forces, so they're cheap 'n' cheerful.

But pointless units? Fighters and Jet fighters are not much good outside of a MP game, the AI rarely bombs. Also the big problem is that many units are made pointles by the tech tree (unless you are specifically researching for a conquest victory), either by coming too late, or being too quickely superceeded. In this way, Civ3 is a war game and a culture game that doesn't quite glue together. Many late units are only really for those people who continue after 2050.

 

[Homie]

Good LabMonkey, do that mod. And I fully agree with what you said about the late units and advanced flight being linked to space flight.

They can still be intercepted if they're only attacking improvements

(By Bobgote)
I know, but I won't buy a dusin fighters to protect my terrain improvements around a city, it's not worth it. The only reason must be to use them to protect a uranium (or other valuable resource) or a city that you know they'll attack.

 

[kb2tvl]

roads and railroads can be protected on key tiles by stationing 2 or 3 units on the tile, along with having battlefield medicine. Bombing and arty barage are not very effective and hence a few units can withstand attack without much degradation.

 

[bobgote]

I hate getting my improvements bombed. Especially my roads to another town. It slows my city growth and i hate that. It stops my production. I hate that too. When the city relies on the food for survival, and then it begins starving, and gets below 13, you get a distinct defence advantage. I am being constantly bombed. All the time. My cities, my improvements, especially resources. They do to me exactly what i'd do to them. So if anything, the fighters are vital just to give me that edge. And you don't want bombers softening up your defences for the invasion.

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Originally posted by The Last Conformist
And for people who think the War Chariot sucks; doesn't the Horseman suck alot harder then, since it's 50% more expensive and it's only advantage above the War Chariot is the ability to cross unroaded Jungle and Mountains? [/B]

Well, you could say that you hate the war chariot because it belongs to a non-militaristic civ or something... I remember the last time I did a horseman rush with a militaristic civ... 6 GLs before the AD years Never had similar results with a standard civ.

Nevertheless war chariots are extremely good units. The GA could be better timed, but otherwise the jungle/mountain problem is virtually insubstantial and the increased number of units you will be able to bring along in a fight make conquest much easier. Egypt has great traits if you do get stuck in crap land too. Industrious will allow you to build a road through that mountain range/jungle to send your chariots though in half the time a normal civ could.

 

[Sim_One]

Radar artillery-not a big improvement over artillery...still moves only one square per turn...pretty much replaced by bombers anyway
Aegis Cruiser-dont see the point to these ships
Stealth fighter/bomber-what's the point to precision bombing? why do i want to risk destroying an enemy city's marketplace or factory when im about to take the city.
Carrier-makes little sense that these guys come before flight is researched. just quickly capture a city and rush build an airport.
War elephants- no different than a knight. if you dont have at least one iron and/or horse--the most abundant resources--at this point then something is wrong with the way you're playing.

 

[wtiberon]

Explorer, helicopter, paratrooper, cossack, and fighter suck. I like using bombers and artillary to support my infantry and tanks. I had to change artillery specs though because the one move and no airlift was annoying.

 

[bobgote]

Originally posted by S1m0ne

Carrier-makes little sense that these guys come before flight is researched. just quickly capture a city and rush build an airport.

Taking the city isn't always as easy as that.

 

[Tiamat]

Originally posted by S1m0ne
[Carrier-makes little sense that these guys come before flight is researched. just quickly capture a city and rush build an airport.

If you are trying to establish a beachead on an island with only very large metropolii on it then you would need to use bombers loaded on carriers to weaken a city to a point that you could take it and be sure it won't quickly flip back. Using bombers on a carrier/marines on transports can really help getting the beachhead established.

 

[civ_steve]

Too many replies trashed catapults. I'll get at least 4 or 5 once I can.

1.) They can help in attacking a city, or stack of units. Each hit point reduced helps.

2.) They are great on defense. I like to place my catapults with defensive units on hills and roaded mountains. This forces the other civ to take the open ground, where they are easy pickings once they've lost a hitpoint or two. Even later in the game, artillery gets a defensive shot against ground troops - aircraft don't

3.) Near the coast they can be used to ping on enemy galleys or caravels that pass by, making my fleet's odds that much better.

Units I never get:
Chariots (War chariots I get in droves just before I get knights)
Archers and Longbowmen (unless I have neither horses or iron)
Musketmen (too expensive for 1 more defensive hitpoint; I'll wait until Riflemen, and developed cities with factories)
Frigates and Privateers (Ironclads come too soon)

I haven't had much experience playing at the modern era where the game was on the line. Aircraft combined with submarines make a powerful combination to decimate an opponent's navy without much risk. I've used carriers sparingly. I've never built a helicopter or marine, but I might under the right circumstances.

Oh, yeah ... Explorers. I usually find uses for a few of them.

 

[Hades]

Stealth fighters: There is no advantage of SF over Sealth Bombers but they required that same tech to build. In other words, they are obsoleted as soon as they exist.

Bombers: When AIs have fighters, these guys dropped like flies.

Musketmen: They are actually worse than pikemen (without the bonus against the mounted units).

Chariots: With the same attack and defense as warriors, what are they good for?

Most naval units are useless too but that's because I usually play continents and pangaea

 

[bobgote]

Musketmen are fine I think. Don't see the problem here, maybe a bit too expensive. The only advantage the chariots have is that they can retreat when losing (regular occurance). You can see this trait better in the impi, a more useful unit that can defend, and will not let attacking horsemen escape, and be able to retreat from the slower attackers. I actually modded my impi to be more historically accurate. (Replace swordsman, have +1 to Movement). They are now very good, although i haven't really tested them yet. I might have to make them more expensive too.

Also I modified the naval units so the speed they move is better. You could make Frigates faster than Ironclads, and better on the attack (While Ironclad has higher defence) and frigates could be used for attack and ironclads for protecting convoys.

 

[Sim_One]

Originally posted by Tiamat


If you are trying to establish a beachead on an island with only very large metropolii on it then you would need to use bombers loaded on carriers to weaken a city to a point that you could take it and be sure it won't quickly flip back. Using bombers on a carrier/marines on transports can really help getting the beachhead established.

I originally meant to quickly take down a sparsely populated city (below 6), which should be no sweat since it would be tanks/marines against infantries supported by bombardments by your destroyers/battleships. then as soon as you take the city then loaded it up with units (to prevent culture flip) and send as many bombers as you can to let them be within range to other enemy cities.

 

[mad_stork]

I built a chariot once, but it couldn't get to the enemy because of a mountain

I built a bunch of catapults once, but they all missed every time

I will never build those units again. They are a waste of shields and money

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

Chariots rule.

Just build 20+ (dependant on the map size) and upgrade them all to horsemen/mounted warriors/knights after saving up a fair bit of gold. Instant army, and instant capability to trash your neigbours.

 

[Neomega]

A stack of twelve catapults, 3 spearmen, (or better hoplites) and a couple of swordsman makes an overwhelming army that can slowly crawl its way to a capital in the heart of an enemy empire. It is my most used offensive tactic, after your army starts crawling, build swordsmen to make their way down and replace the swordsman lost in the offensive, with a couple of extra catapults and spearmen every now and then to occupy the captured cities, (although I prefer razing due to culture flipping).
The catapults will destroy walls, temples (imagine all of your culture built up in a temple or library being lost) and barracks. In the long run, an army backed by catapults is invincible, (at least against an AI).
I have never lost a war once I got a catapult army moving, and I play on emporer.
Sometimes you have to siege a city a few turns before luck turns your way and 6 of the catapults hit, thats enough to drive three veteran units to yellow, send in four or five swordsmen, you may lose one or two, but the city is yours at the mere cost of two swordsmen, I would bet anyone attacking without catapults loses alot more than two swordsmen trying to capture a city with just horsemen and swordsmen.
Eventually my catapult strength grows to around 30, and in modern times 30 artillery is a force that cannot be stopped.

 

[VanillaCube]

Originally posted by sabo10
privateer

well then make that the Barbarian sea unit you'll never see it in the game other wise unless YOU are stupid enough to build em