The worst unit overall

[Homie]

I have only admitted the worst candidates. The units you
NEVER EVER build.

And personally I never build these units either.

Paratrooper

Helicopter

Basically all air-units (Ok I build them because it is cool to have an Air Force, but when I use them I see that they are not at all worth the cost)

Catapult (Does it even work?)

Musketeer (If you are the french you build them, but come on, who attacks with musketeers, nobody! So what good does the extra attack point do?)

War Chariot (Too early for war and Golden Age)

Chariot (I never have the technology early in the game, but I guess it is good for exploring)

 

[sabo]

privateer

 

[Homie]

They have changed its attributes now, they gave it 1 extra attack, it is now 2 in attack. And that makes it quite useful sinking galleys or caravels with units that the enemy is transporting. You kill their supplies without taking the blame.

 

[cgannon64]

Explorer is made too late, but it isn't the WORST. Read the article in the War Acadamy on using them effectively...its pretty good.

 

[Portuguese]

Some must haves missing in pool options:

- privateer
- catapult
- cruise missile
- submarine
- F-15

And others, like helis, are also electibles...

 

[Bamspeedy]

I wouldn't necessarily put catapults on the list. They may be near worthless, but at least they are upgradeable! I never use artillery, but many players do, and if they have lots of money, they could build catapults by spending very few shields, then do an upgrade. Artillery is much more effective than it's ancestors (catapults, cannons).

War chariot is basically a cheap horseman. Same stats as a horseman, but at 2/3 the cost, with the limitation of not going on unroaded mountains and jungles. Some players do like an early golden age (not me), as they use this to get off to an early lead, and to beat the AI to some of the ancient wonders. If playing the Egyptians, what I would do is build a bunch of war chariots to upgrade to knights. Just don't upgrade a few, so you can use these to run along side your knights and pick off an easy target (heavily injured unit/wandering warrior), to trigger the golden age when you feel the time is more appropriate.

 

[chiefpaco]

I gotta stick up for the musketeer a bit. First, they make a cool sound!

Second, they have an attack of 3. At this time, only musketmen are better. Any damaged musketman or other unit is vulernerable to a musketeer attack. I would say that is a good option to have, especially if you use a few knights to soften your enemy up. Then you can use your musketeers to mop up instead of more knights. Not the best, but not that bad.

I'm with you in Paratrooper and Helicopter. Other air units are good for softening up your enemies' metropolis. If the AI was better at defending, I think bombers would be a must. I could see them turning the tide in a MP game.

Longbowmen could be a candidate for civs with resources to build knights. Not that a cheaper alternative to a knight may be useful, but I never do get around to build them cause the knight is just so much better.

 

[alpha one]

Cossacks, F-15 and Man -O-War ist the worst units I can figure.

 

[Homie]

The F-15 and Cossack may be bad UU because they aren't much better than the unit they are replacing. But they are not by a long shot as bad as the Man-O-War and Explorer. Those 2 units are the 2 units you can never ever use because they come too late in the game.

When you finally get the science to build Man-O-War the iron clad is just around the corner. In one of my games I got the science and then immediately started building the Man-O-War, but before it was finished I had discovered Steampower and there was the iron clad, a far better unit.

The same with the explorer, they are both ok units but come so late in the game that they are practicly obsolete.

 

[SunZsu]

Can we change their attributes via the editor? ....... or maybe "create" a whole new unit - wouldn't that be cool! ........

personally, though, can't figure what Firaxis had in mind when they made paratroopers and helos so useless, esp. helos, and aircraft as well ....... I don't even bother w/Stealth

_______________________________________________

the Great Khan and his glorious Horde would like this

 

[Homie]

Longbowmen are great if you don't have iron and horses, they have the same attack as knights. And they don't take as long to build.

 

[skaternate]

I vote explorer, it would be a pathetic game if I actually used on of these to explore unknown territory.

 

[DaDoo]

Catapult are ok if you are in the offensive a lot in ancient era. I used to have them keep up with my swordsmen. The only real problem is that they take quite a long time to build due to the fact that your cities at that time usually don't have too much in terms of production...

most useless unit in my opinion? fighters and jet fighters.. and maybe SAMs too... I have yet to see the computer use bombers at all... This will change in PTW tho... I think..

 

[Dearnen]

I agree with most everyone, but I have a few thoughts on the use of artillery units.

Catapults are of limited use. Sometimes they are useful in a seige, but generally they don't help much and get captured as often as they are used successfully.

Cannons are more useful. Their stronger punch helps more in taking cities and destroying improvements. They can also help in defense. Like Catapults, though, they are prone to capture.

Artillery can pay off big...for a while. Once Infantry have been deployed, cavalry becomes virtually useless, leaving Artillery as the best offensive weapon. A force of Infantry and Artillery may be slow, but it's tough to kill and quite destructive. Though, an opposing force of similar composition can hold it off. WWI trench warfare. When flight is developed, though, artillery drops in value greatly. The longer range of bombers and their ability to avoid capture at the front make them far more valuable, IMHO. Once I have bombers, I generally disband most of my artillery. The development of tanks also lowers the value of artillery. The tanks move too fast for artillery to keep up and the enemy's tanks have a good chance of capturing your forward deployed artillery.

Radar artillery is all but useless. Few games reach the point where radar artillery could be deployed, but it isn't missed. It's too slow to keep up with the Mech. Infantry and Modern Armor. Bombers provide much better capabilty. However, if the front moves to fast beyond the range of your bombers, they too can lose their usefulness. Of course, by then you're probably winning the war anyway.

 

[Homie]

Artillery are great, ok for offence but a must for defense. Bombers are so weak that I don't use them. Catapults are so weak that I wonder if they really work, even if I capture them I usually disband them because I don't want to pay 1 extra gold per turn for such a worthless unit.

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by skaternate
I vote explorer, it would be a pathetic game if I actually used on of these to explore unknown territory.

They are useful only in war for harassing the enemy and hitting resources. I actually modded them into slightly different partisan units.

All the units after gunpowder have been changed in my mod.

 

[bobgote]

Catapults are fine for the era they're in. I build them once i have enough military. They, like all artillery units, are great for taking cities, and defending them. They work fine, as taking 1-2 health off enemy units before attacking is very handy.

Explorers can be used, but not to explore.

Man-o-war can be useful given the right circumstances.

The musketeer is great, as they are used to counter attack the cavalry etc that have just attacked them. in wiping out the force, instead of allowing them to retreat, you significantly weaken them.

Bombers are very useful, i don't know what you're complaining about. Like artillery, but more versatile. And as they are useful, so are the fighters to counter them. (since the AI use bombers, you need fighters.)

As UU's go, the worst is the F-15 as jet fighters are only used for interception anyway, and extra stats make little or no difference.

As everything else goes, the privateer is useless. The purpose it was used for is lost in the game.

 

[Bretwalda]

I use arty a lot. On the railroad I move them along in stacks of 15+, defended by armies of infantry (armies are rarely attacked by AI anyway). These stacks can bombard the defenders of any enemy city down to 1 health - and than comes the cavalry/tanks/armor, taking it easily. If placed well you are able to do it in every or every second turn... (while your attacker heal in a barrack...)

 

[JuicyCivNewbie]

You're underrating explorers, in reality they are a misnamed unit if anything. They make excellent scouts when posted in enemy territory (they can stay there for a long time with no ill effects) and as such can be set up before you declare war to pillage all of an enemies resources on the turn you declare war. After doing that they can quickly withdraw from enemy land, avoiding their units etc. to be used in another conflict later in the game.

 

[Homie]

No I do think that if you place an explorer in enemy territory they will ask you to remove it.

And as for the catapult, it rarely does any damage to enemy units, and why not build an attack unit instead, you are bound to get at least one health off the enemy unit that way. They aren't that much cheaper.