What's your least favorite unit?

HerrDoktor

Mad Scientist
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
333
I'm not asking what's the worst unit, as some may argue that some units are underrated, people don't know how to use them, and so forth. In fact, what I want to see is somebody disagreeing with me and the others and showing how to use such units. In other words, what units you build the least or simply ignore? Why?

My ignore list:
  • Chariots, unless lacking in iron and copper
  • Explorer, by the time I can build these, I have the map revealed or trade with overseas partners, as they're drooling for my maps
  • Cuirassier, better wait a tiny bit for cavalry
  • Grenadier, as every other unit with a bonus against a single unit in a single epoch
  • Machine gun, what's the point in having a substandard unit just because it does not take collateral? Better counter-attack the cannons while you can.
  • Paratroopers, you have to devise and entire tailor-suited strategy just for them. But I use marines a lot.
 
I'm not asking what's the worst unit, as some may argue that some units are underrated, people don't know how to use them, and so forth. In fact, what I want to see is somebody disagreeing with me and the others and showing how to use such units. In other words, what units you build the least or simply ignore? Why?

My ignore list:
  • Chariots, unless lacking in iron and copper
  • Explorer, by the time I can build these, I have the map revealed or trade with overseas partners, as they're drooling for my maps
  • Cuirassier, better wait a tiny bit for cavalry
  • Grenadier, as every other unit with a bonus against a single unit in a single epoch
  • Machine gun, what's the point in having a substandard unit just because it does not take collateral? Better counter-attack the cannons while you can.
  • Paratroopers, you have to devise and entire tailor-suited strategy just for them. But I use marines a lot.

Chariots are great for killing axes, scouting, escorting settlers, and the ocasional chariot rush.
Explorers make decent Medic units and can be useful on some maps like Terra, but yes, often useless.
Cuirassiers - Sometimes you're in the middle of a war when you get the tech.
Grenadiers - Turn up quite a bit before rifles and a lot better base strength than musketmen or maces, usually upgrade my CRIII maces to grenadier.
Machinegun - Don't use them much.
Paratroopers - Don't use them much, wish they had a slightly longer range.

Musketmen I don't use much unless I have a musket UU, the exception being Toku.
 
Chariots are great for killing axes, scouting, escorting settlers, and the ocasional chariot rush.
Explorers make decent Medic units and can be useful on some maps like Terra, but yes, often useless.
Cuirassiers - Sometimes you're in the middle of a war when you get the tech.
Grenadiers - Turn up quite a bit before rifles and a lot better base strength than musketmen or maces, usually upgrade my CRIII maces to grenadier.
Machinegun - Don't use them much.
Paratroopers - Don't use them much, wish they had a slightly longer range.

Musketmen I don't use much unless I have a musket UU, the exception being Toku.

Chariots -> feel no love for them, prefer to counter axes with my own axes.
Explorers -> never ever build any of these.
Cuirassiers -> I like them, decent improvement over knights, last a decent amount of time IF you put some effort into getting them. Are poorer then Cav, but will kick Pikemen/Olifants asses if properly upgraded.
Grenadiers -> only if fighting enemy rifles or if tech is slowing down to a crawl and these are the best units I can build
Musketmen -> I like them and build them massively.
Machinegun -> dont use them often, only at choke points, close to known back stabbers, yes Portugal, I mean YOU.
Paratroopers -> I love these guys, All hail PARA's....They are angels, they are my pride and joy. Kick ass, love them loads.
 
The only one that I never, ever use is the Explorer. Can't say I've found any use for it. As said before, when available, you've explored just about everything anyway.

Other than that I've found a use for most units in the game, though I tend to use these quite seldom:

Grenadiers - It's seldom I've needed these on normal speed. i quess on slower speed they'll have time to make a difference.
Ironclads - Same as above and with being bound to the coast makes them less appealing for me thus I usually sticks to Ship of the line and frigates until destroyer.

EDIT: Ah yes, forgot. I don't think I've ever built an "Anti-Tank" unit more than the one I built just to see how it looked... But that could be that the AI never really gets to get tanks early on me...
 
Ironclads are rather useful, mostly because of their movement rate :( It is
so easy for your enemy to escape.

Never built any explorer. Why should I?

I would never build chariot, but in one game I had no access to iron nor copper. Saladin started a war, so I was forced to use them. Although weak, chariots are still better than warrior :)

Didn't convince myself to use helicopters and paratroopers. There is nothing better than solid tanks, bombers, infantrymen and marines :)
 
Explorers and Ironclad for reasons stated above.

Grenadiers are moderately useful, but again only if I have upgraded them from some CRIII maces, tend not to build them overall.

I quite like machineguns, and always have a couple in my offensive stack just to take any damage which otherwise would've been taken by an offensive unit. As well as some in any cities in danger of being attacked.

Generally don't waste the hammers building Ship of the LInes either, will make do with existing Frigates or build Destroyers.

Anti-Tank units, well not too fussed over them but generally have a couple sitting in any border or possible target cities of my own, similar to machinegun uses above.
 
I'm sorry, it should be:

Ironclads are rather USELESS (not useful)
 
I agree with most comments, but I also like the machinegun, also because i go for railroad pretty fast and at that point they're the best defenders.
I also like chariots, you can build them pretty early, and they can kill all barbarians [for a very long time] ideal for scouting.
I don't really build a lot of archers, only if it's the cheapest unit to put in a city. But then again, it also has it's uses of course.
Crossbowmen i also ignore most of the time, they're strong against macemen of course but that's about it. I consider catapults obsolete when you get engineering.

This may be a little of topic, but what the hell are you supposed to do with these vultures? They're exactly as strong as axemen [7.5 vs 7.5] in combat with melee units. So they have only a little edge over archers and mounted units, but archers you'll be wanting to destroy probably are sitting in cities in which case you're better of with swordsmen.
 
You may add anti-tanks and ironclads to my list. But I like choppers - not because they're particularly good, just because they're my hyper-upgraded cavalry - WITH BLITZ. Did you ever tried a blitz chopper? It may attack whopping 5 times in a turn. Now you go figure this against a backward guy with no SAM infantry.
 
Cavalry and Cuirassiers. I don't I've ever built one. I much prefer CR III rifles for warring in that era. People seem to like them though, so maybe I'm missing something. :confused:
 
Ironclads suck, anti-tanks don't exist in my warlords games :(. I never really use the explorer, although people do use him as a medic as it is RARE that an explorer is the target of an attack.

I almost never make machine guns either. I like warmongering. I prefer offensive units, or units that can at least attack. I've never used paratroopers...i don't even know if they're new to BTS, because I've never cared to try to get them. Too much teching/work to set up...it's easier just to load a massive stack into transports and laugh as my giant wave crushes the enemy on the other continent, then marchers around their country side sticking my flag everywhere.

Grenadiers, however, I do use. They upgrade from the powerful city raider maces, making their city attacking power in that case upper echelon for their time. Their bonus to rifles extends their life, as defending cavies vs CR 2+ grenadiers don't exactly hold up well. Their base strength beats middy troops outright anyway. Really grenadiers aren't obsolete until infantry...which you can upgrade them to for even more promotion-abusive hell.
 
My ignore list:
  • Chariots, unless lacking in iron and copper
  • Explorer, by the time I can build these, I have the map revealed or trade with overseas partners, as they're drooling for my maps
  • Cuirassier, better wait a tiny bit for cavalry
  • Grenadier, as every other unit with a bonus against a single unit in a single epoch
  • Machine gun, what's the point in having a substandard unit just because it does not take collateral? Better counter-attack the cannons while you can.
  • Paratroopers, you have to devise and entire tailor-suited strategy just for them. But I use marines a lot.

Well I agree with you on explorers and machine guns, the others though not so much...

Chariots are actually the perfect settler and worker escort units with their double movement. They are one of the cheapest military units out there, and have an extremely valuable niche role as anti-axeman, a unit which can have a fairly lengthy period of dominance in the ancient era and can't be stopped by archers nor even reliably by more axemen... If you're fighting axemen with more axemen, basically you're looking at even odds which IMO is very wasteful of hammers in this time period when hammers are pretty scarce. As for the techs to get chariots, well you're gonna need the wheel early in pretty much every game, to hook something up... And animal husbandry you're gonna need fairly often too, to hook up cows, sheep, pigs, etc. Great unit, definitely underrated.

Grenadiers I find to be bloody brilliant. They come earlier than rifles, and they are head and shoulders above muskets in usefulness. Muskets just don't have the strength to really dominate, whereas grenadiers will walk all over any medieval units (including those silly muskets) on the board. Meanwhile, if you're fighting an AI with medieval units, he is likely teching hard towards rifling, and with the gren's bonus vs riflemen, you are already fielding an army to deal with them. With that bonus vs riflemen, and the fact that grens come a lot more cheaply tech wise, I think there's actually quite a large window of opportunity for grenadiers to dominate, and I typically use this period to make significant gains in power during domination/conquest games.

The others I don't find to be quite as strong as chariots and grenadiers, but they do have their uses... They also tend to have a fairly narrow window of opportunity where they really shine though, which I agree is a real deal killer... If a unit has a real advantage for only 10 or 20 turns there's not a lot you can do with it IMO.

As for my choice for the most useless unit that I make a point of not building/researching, I'd have to say Horse Archers. HBR is a dead end tech, and so I usually get it via trade much later on, around the time I'm researching guilds or construction, when I know I'll be building knights or war elephants. HAs I just find aren't versatile enough to justify the investment in them during the classical age. Horse Archer based UUs, on the other hand, can be pretty good... Particularly Keshiks. Other than that or an Immortal rush though, I don't even consider researching HBR on my own.

A fairly close second would be machine guns. I've had games where I built some to defend my cities and then watched them sit there doing nothing for centuries... The tech for them you're going to want anyways, so it seems like they're a "free" unit you get with railroads, but even so they're pretty crap and have no versatility. Usually if you're on the defense, that doesn't mean simply hiding in your cities waiting for the siege... Hell no, that's a good way to get choked to death by pillagers. Better to spend the hammers on infantry or hell even cavalry, so you can defend your resources. What good is a city that's had all its tiles destroyed, and is surrounded by weakened troops but can't reach out and finish them off? Not much. Sure you could build a mix of infantry and machine guns, but let's face it-- if you just made an extra infantry instead you'd have a lot more options.

My final pick for a useless unit would have to be Ironclads. Frankly, it is infuriating that they are so slow. So slow in fact, that other than sheer dumb luck, you will never be able to use its superior strength and armor plating to actually go out and kill another ship. I guess they could be used to park on your fishing boats or something, but IMO that's a waste of hammers when you could just build more frigates, which are easy to level up XP wise, and which can actually (gasp!) cross the ocean when needed. Ironclads bite in the base game, they really ought to have 3 movement points so they can at least catch the odd caravel or something.
 
With the way the AI will send amphibious attacks directly from ships, I find machineguns make great coastal city defenders.
 
It depends on the tech path Im following, other than the explorer and Ironclad I cant think of an absolutely useless unit.
 
Machineguns are very useful if you want to take over another continent that is inhabited by a psycho. Instead of taking a city right off the bat, I'll include a bunch of machineguns that are promoted to defend the hell out of hills and or forests in my stack and park the whole thing on a forested hill in his territory. 3 turns, zero losses, and 3 GG's later I will commence the subjugation of a SODless zululand with nothing to fear. Note though, that this does not work if you are invading somebody who won't attack against impossible odds. They'll just wait for you to come off of your hill and then attack.
 
Definetly ironclads is the least fav for me. I'm amazed ho people don't like MGs :lol:

I use them a lot especially in war as artillery stack defenders, and explorers are great medics :crazyeye:
 
Machine guns and SAM infantry. I don't like machine guns because the AI spams ridiculous amounts of cavalry, which are better countered with infantry. I don't like SAM infantry because having to resort to them to deal with aircraft has never been an issue for me.
 
I used to hate my archers. I'd build them with pop/rush overflow for cheap happiness under HR, and they'd basically hang out for 5000 years and never see any action at all, as I'd actively deal with any invasion rather than waiting for them to knock on my city doors. Meanwhile, my axemen have a life expectancy of about 10 turns.

Then I found myself in a situation where I had no recourse but to archer-rush Charley (monarch or emperor dif). My god, the carnage...I would've court-martialed the general who ordered such a massacre if that general wasn't me. After sending about 30 archers off to certain death in what was ultimately a successful rush, I am forced to grant them a least a little respect.
 
I hate anti-tanks.. I mean they're supposed to counter tanks but are just equal to them in power unpromoted! IMO it should be more like the difference between SAM infantry vs. Gunships :rolleyes:
 
Top Bottom