Whats the purpose of lancers? need buf?

[apocalypse105]

So i was wondering lancers whats there puropse can anybody tell me? Does anybody use them?

They have a bonus against mounted units and have a movement of 4..
THe only purpose i can thinx of is killing cavalry and artillery from fast movement


If there is a counter for a cavalry unit then the cavalary unit must have a certain ability that makes you want to build lancers to counter him.


For example if a cavalry unit has more strenght then a rifleman. Then you must use your cavalry against rifleman, lancers against cavalry and your rifleman against lancers makes more sence ...

Still dont know why they put this thing in the game i have never build it only get it from city state and i am like gift the unit keep it!!!

I rather build cavalry instead because i mostly dont get alluminium so i go for cavalry and upgrade them to tanks

 

[Drawmeus]

That's what they're for - killing cavalry. As you've noted, that's a rather narrow niche, unfortunately.

 

[apocalypse105]

That's what they're for - killing cavalry. As you've noted, that's a rather narrow niche, unfortunately.

Well if there where more cavalry diversity i would say usefull...

I mean in the renaissance they used cavalry to flank the rifleman and atack.....

 

[badger_md]

They serve two roles.

First, and most important, they act as spotters for your artillery. You move your lancer to within range of the enemy city, shoot the city with your artillery, and move your lancer safely out.

Second, they act as an emergency meat shield. You move your lancer inbetween the enemy unit and your valuable (and slow to replace) artillery so the enemy takes out the lancer instead.

Allied military CS love to give away lancers, so you usually don't even have to build them.

Try keeping one with your industrial/modern era army and see if the above uses are helpful.

 

[thadian]

and lancers become one of the more convenient and cheap units to replace that can shield mechanized infantry or anything else. except air strikes but we all know the AI doesn't do that. if it did, it might be unwinnable if it used its excessive buffs to rush up 18 bombers.

 

[da_Vinci]

Another lancer use is the mop up when defending in your own land.

Ranged unit, or a melee unit (funny to think of small arms as melee) leaves a 1-2 HP enemy after a combat. On your roads, the lancer can rush in and kill it, and retreat to safety, over huge distances.

Works in enemy territory too, but less range there.

dV

 

[thadian]

as easy as it is to just not build lancers due to their position in the tech tree.

However when i got one as a gift from a military CS, i was able to make it join up with my paratrooper and serve as a meat shield. From that day on i always try to keep about 2 of them in wierd locations or CS's behind enemy lines so if they do charge in and i can't defend, i can run in and pillage for 3 or so turns before the ai turns around and comes back giving me a little bit more time.

 

[Randall Turner]

i can run in and pillage

This. Resource pillaging is one of the major advantages players have over the AI. (And don't even bother to upgrade to AT guns, wait until you get helicopters.)

 

[wcbarney]

So i was wondering lancers whats there puropse can anybody tell me? Does anybody use them?

I have always found lancers to be pretty useless. However, when they are upgraded to anti-tank guns, and then again to helo gunships, then they become one of the most powerful ground units in the game. You can promote the helos to Mobility I & II, so you have a powerful 8-move unit that can attack & can then retreat & heal on the same turn -- this promotion is carried forward from the lancer, and is not available on trained-from-scratch helos.

 

[Callonia]

If you asked me a two weeks ago about lancers I would've laughed, but after this week with AI rome using them against me, If u could tech fast enough to grab lancers in medieval era fast. They're really powerful attack units seriously.

My Medieval army got flatten hard by combination of knight/lancers. Longswordmen lol.

What made it more worse is that caesar actually have good promos on them, flat lands and rough lands lvl 2s. They kept on countering me by using right promos against me. One shot after one shot xD

Their only weakness is that they don't like being on defense, -50% penalty meaning 22 str becomes 11 str.

I had to bring out my landsknechts.

 

[thadian]

If u could tech fast enough to grab lancers in medieval era fast

metullargy slingshot!

They can be very effective for sweeping away musket era units backed by treb's, cannons or archers to soften remaining pikemen. then they go obselete but become pillagers until they become heli-godships.

i thank the OP for this thread as it made me realize one of my favorite units in the game.

Also, they can clear the way for air strikes then move out.

Edit: Ottoman Sipahi Rush anyone?

 

[wcbarney]

... then they go obselete but become pillagers until they become heli-godships.

Good one!

 

[Jon the Bastard]

I used to find Lancers to be a complete joke. However, the last three games I've played I've used them... and to some success. I find them to be most effective against Rifleman actually. If you field a decent sized army made up of half Lancers, let's say... 4 Lancers, 2 Rifleman and 1 Cannon... you have a nearly impenetrable forward defensive force because the Lancers are so good at waiting on the flanks of the enemy and then running in and attacking and falling back.

The formation itself should look something like this:
----------Lancer----------Lancer
-----Rifleman
-----Cannon
-----Rifleman
----------Lancer----------Lancer

 

[Karl_Rove]

I'm missing something. What can Lancers do that Cavalry cannot? I always use Cavalry/tanks as pillagers/quick attackers. Why should I build Lancers instead?

 

[Montov]

I'm missing something. What can Lancers do that Cavalry cannot? I always use Cavalry/tanks as pillagers/quick attackers. Why should I build Lancers instead?

Lancer are faster (4 movement, Cavalry has 3). And Cavalry has 50% penalty against mounted, making the Lancer a clear favorite in a direct battle.

Lancers have their function. Cavalry needs a buff, like 20% bonus against gunpowder units.

 

[player1 fanatic]

I'm missing something. What can Lancers do that Cavalry cannot?

Move 4 tiles instead of 3.

 

[Karl_Rove]

Lancer are faster (4 movement, Cavalry has 3). And Cavalry has 50% penalty against mounted, making the Lancer a clear favorite in a direct battle.

Lancers have their function. Cavalry needs a buff, like 20% bonus against gunpowder units.

Movement is a plus, but I find it completely negated by the Lancer's penalty to defense. IRL speed is a defense but in-game a forest or river will ruin that option!

I've never really seen the AI field much Cav so I don't build any lancers for that either.

 

[apocalypse105]

Lancer are faster (4 movement, Cavalry has 3). And Cavalry has 50% penalty against mounted, making the Lancer a clear favorite in a direct battle.

Lancers have their function. Cavalry needs a buff, like 20% bonus against gunpowder units.

agree cavalry needs a boost

Whats the purpose of building a unit that has the same atack strenght of a rifleman but has penalty its the same story as the early:
Why should we build tanks if we have mechanised infantry. Good that they buffed tanks in the next patch.

 

[player1 fanatic]

In theory, move after attack feature of Calvary is supposed to make up for it.

 

[Strategist83]

Once again, like I've responded to so many other topics along the same line as this one: The only reason why you think Lancers aren't useful is you are playing against the AI. Against the AI (ie, a horribly unbalanced way of playing the game) you are correct, they aren't much use, because the AI is so piss poor a tactician that you can get away with almost anything and still beat it. Specialty units like the Lancer are thus not needed. But against real opponents - humans? Obviously useful.

You could make a second post where you state the exact same case for the Anti Tank unit. Once again, the correct response would be that nothing is wrong with the Anti Tank, but with the fact you are playing the pitiful excuse for an AI that CiV offers.