Upgrading does not make economic sense!

[parachute4u]

XP is not as hard to come by as one thinks... Catapult stack and attack after two suicides usually earn you some easy kills... So if you got a lvl 4 warrior or something and wanted to spend a wad making a riflemen, you'll soon find that it's not going to help that much having a lvl 4 riflemen because you don't wanna risk him by dying first...

In my most recent game(monarch), I took a break from researching, to rush some banks (got the pyramids). After that (during the war, I ran 5 turns of 10% science while pillaging and selling techs to AI allies. After that the only thing, that could take the greek capital safely (4 longbows, 1 pikeman in it) were 4 city attack swordsman, that I upgraded to riflemen, costing me a fortune, but saving me from wasting my entire army on fortified longbows (I suicided a cat, which died to first strike without doing any damage ). I think you have to consider the circumstances... As always.

edit: I actually took the time to research rifling after realizing my swords don't upgrade to musketmen...

 

[KAuss]

I run catas into archers all the time... They usually do enough dmg to allow anyone to take the city after...

Still, upping the troops to swords isn't 100%... If you lost all your swords, then you would of just wasted all of your money...

It would of been a better fight if you built up a big enough force to take a capital city though... As those are usually the best cities the other civs can provide...

I would much rather do that and rush a theater in the new capital over spending on swords and totally losing out on the research...

Thats just me though...