The WORST Unit!

I have a superstition about Knights. Once I was playing an Emperor game and I had made some early gains against the Zulus. But then, my army of knights just hit a stone wall. About 90 percent of the fights they got into- Against phalanx, against militias, weak units in comparison, in the field, in city squares. My knights would lose ALL of these fights, or nearly all.

I don't build knights anymore. The medeival period I generally shun warfare on higher difficulty levels. I wait for stronger attack units to come around.
 
Lazarus Plus said:
I have a superstition about Knights. Once I was playing an Emperor game and I had made some early gains against the Zulus. But then, my army of knights just hit a stone wall. About 90 percent of the fights they got into- Against phalanx, against militias, weak units in comparison, in the field, in city squares. My knights would lose ALL of these fights, or nearly all.

I don't build knights anymore. The medeival period I generally shun warfare on higher difficulty levels. I wait for stronger attack units to come around.

Yeah, Knights should have been given a stronger attack than Chariots, like 5 maybe. Catapults are the only weapon that even has a chance against a fortified Musketeer, and not much of one.
 
Yeah...
That's why I usually change the strengths of the units in some scens if I see they're too stupid.
The really fun thing is:
When I give a good AP/DP/HP/FP to something like Settlers - they can KILL even a Tank!!!
I once made a scen where everything had stats >= 5 and up to 100///12.
And then saw a Tank eradicated by a couter-attacking (aka defending) Settler!!!
 
WHOA!
That totally rocks Civ2! You are da bomb... not.. what are you, like, thirteen? Grow up man. Anybody can edit the properties of the units. Wait? Are you talking about Civ2? You got the wrong forum.

Sheesh.
 
THREAD NECROMANCER HERE, rawwwrrr



I was just playing around with a Prince-difficulty war game where I teched monarchy and chivalry and sort of "leveled out" from there to focus on conquering. I decided that I couldn't justify knights. Like other people have been saying, perhaps they should have had attack strength 5. Use chariots and save the bulbs. At one point I had a knight fortified at the enemy gates to defend catapults I was landing there (he was the highest defense value in the area available to me), but an enemy chariot sallied forth from the city and gg'd the whole stack.



I agree that legions are bad units but at least they have a niche. If you need to build additional defenders beyond your obligatory phalanx (for martial law purposes), make the additional defenders legions. The legions cost the same as a Phalanx, but can defend your terrain improvements through offense. They excel at attacking barbarian cavs and legions.

Ironclads are a lackluster unit as well, but they can bombard coastal cities without decreasing the pop. A single ironclad earned me 40 civ points because it would otherwise have been impossible to capture a city that had two wonders in it. After my cats had dealt with the phalanxes, the ironclad was required to take out two chariots while the city pop was 2.
 
No doubt I say the submarine is the worst unit. Legion and Cavalry aren't my favorites but they will do sometimes when they are cheapest unit and you just want to save a city from being taken by enemy.
Saw earlier post that Battleship wasn't worth building (well I often buy them hehehe) but they are one of my all times favorite unit.
Fighters aren't that good either but how do you remove 3 bombers outside your coast? I take them out with a fighter, they can do some scouting and sometimes kill transports/settlers etc.

no again, submarines are slow, weak etc, I cannot understand why they doesn't have 6 in speed or something, they should be Transport killer but no.
 
Back
Top Bottom