Which unit do you think is the most unless?

[SirDunco]

Well there is the Warriors-Even early on they are uselle cause soon u will get the phanlax which is a hell of a good defender...

The Catapult- In Civilization1 i used to win the game as soon as i got theese, just by taking some and attacking, now they are useless.

Destroyer- Very weak...I even saw it loose to a galeon once. I think that says it's share...

The Best unit on the other hand is: The Armor on land, Stealth Fighter in the air and the Battleship on water...For those of u who have Tes of Time, The Best unit is the Entrix(until u get it it's the Ra-Maru)...

P.S.: Hotwizers are great fighters

 

[ArmOrAttAk]

Catapults are great for taking walled cities early in the game. And leo's upgrades them all the way to artillery, which have more FP than armor.

 

[Darius]

I've already gone through what things make warriors great two or three times around the forum, and I guess I won't even bother again, you're just plain wrong. But fine, keep on wasting 20 shields on phalanxes for martial law far from your front lines, where the 2 defense points are not ever needed. Waste waste waste, it's your ass not mine.

 

[Rodgers]

For all of you who think that Warriors and Chariots are rubbish - YOU ARE WRONG!

Try building vet warriors/chariots at the start of a game - you can churn out loads v quick - then leave them doing nothing until you get Leonardos Workshop - hey presto! dozens of vet muskateers and cavalry just waiting for the order to ATTACK! Plus, in the meantime you have plenty of cheap garrison troops to protect against barb attacks. Nice.

Crappiest unit has to be legion - the name promises so much yet how many dozens have i lost against the walls of enemy cities in return for bugger all gain?

 

[duke o' york]

I just thought that I'd point out that you lose the veteran status of a unit when it is upgraded with Leo's but this does not detract from the usefulness of warriors. I still don't like chariots though and will only use them for exploring when I get them from huts for free. Mind you, as has been proven here before (was it proven or just argued?), two warriors is better than a horseman for exploration.

 

[Dell19]

Probably argued...Just one warrior can be better than a horseman if you are playing on a world map and have to explore a large forest. As they both travel at the same speed but the warrior is cheaper...

 

[unknown_spirit]

Originally posted by duke o' york
I just thought that I'd point out that you lose the veteran status of a unit when it is upgraded with Leo's...

I thought the same. It is irritating, tho innit, losing veterancy? I see no point in it whatsoever. Sure, It's good to upgrade, but lose vet too? It ain't fair!

 

[Ace]

Originally posted by unknown_spirit


I thought the same. It is irritating, tho innit, losing veterancy? I see no point in it whatsoever. Sure, It's good to upgrade, but lose vet too? It ain't fair!

It may not be fair, but a regular rifleman is much better than a veteran warrior, and the "price is right"

besides, if you pick the right fight, your rifleman will become a veteran.

 

[Rowan]

Originally posted by Smash
most useless for me
aircraft carrier
nukes
marines
frigate

I wonder why air craft carriers are useless?

 

[starlifter]

My personal choices (no particular order):

Bomber - I have never produced one; Profoundly worthless. Attack once --> Die.

Helicopter - Tried it a few times, but not worth much except as naval escorts.

Marines - Worthless to produce.

Captured Marines can make a fine Freight in only one turn, when disbanded in a 20-shield city.

Horsemen - Loathe HBR and horsemen in early game. Barb NONEs can become Cavalry NONEs, however.

Frigate - 2 choices with this fine waste... Attack a city and die, or die at sea with 2 units on board. Vet Ironclads and Galleons instead.

 

[Jed]

Originally posted by Cilpot
I have never built the "archer"... I think its quite useless compared to spearmen and legions.

Other useless units:
- Marines (weak, weak, weak)

Okay, too many of you say that the Marine is useless. Your all wrong. Have you ever defended your city with a Marine? They are great. Armor's always lose to Marines. But their not good on the offensive.

-Jed

 

[Demetrias]

ya then armor would loss to an alpine troop too. They both l have a defense of five.

 

[starlifter]

Okay, too many of you say that the Marine is useless. Your all wrong. Have you ever defended your city with a Marine? They are great. Armor's always lose to Marines. But their not good on the offensive.

OK, to be fair to Marines... they are a specialty unit, and a transport of Vet Marines can give you 8 atttacks on a city from the ocean, and this will not reduce the pop of a non-walled city. But there are more efficent uses of resources in most cases.

Marines defend the same as Alpines to my knowledge and experience... so I build Alpines, but not Marines. This is mostly an issue of mobility. Marines=1 move. Alpine=1 move but..... all terrain as road.

If you really believe the armor losing to Marines comment, you can consult either Sodak or SlowThinker, both of whom are experts in combat and have done lots of research on it. They might provide more info for you. My guess is you are attacking Marines in a Walled city with a tank and wondering why the tank died. My advice is to never bother making a tank unless it is Veteran, and remember is does not shoot through schools, errrr, shoot through walls (like Howies do) . Further, its FP (firepower) is only one, not two. But tanks have 30 hit points, to a Marine's 20.... so tanks attack with 15 (vets, remember?), and marines defend with 7 (vets, unless captured from the AI). But marines behind walls defend with 5+5+5+2=17, so it should be close. And the marine will usually win if the city is on a river, hill, etc. Finally, sometimes the combat resolution rules are not intuitive.... talk to Slow Thinker to get referrals to posted details .

BTW, I am not at all interested in Marines for their mediocre attack.
So that's my own opinion of Marines, and why I don't regard them highly compared to tanks, howies, spies, and stealth fighters. For that matter, vet artillery can cream a marine, usually behind walls, too.


From a great John Wayne movie:

"They were expendable..."

 

[unknown_spirit]

How can you NOT like Marines? I build them in droves. I use them mostly for amphibious assaults on enemy cities, and also as mopper-uppers after a tank Blitzkrieg. Armor hits 'em, Marines scrape 'em off the pavement of my new province! Plus, as mentioned, they're great base defenders.:tank: :soldier: :soldier:

 

[Ace]

Why on earth would you want to use slow moving marines to mop up with? Mech inf will do just as well and makes for a much stronger defensive unit to nail down your conquests.

Personally, I think the marine unit is neat, and its unique functions are very good. That said, I rarely build them because I much prefer pounding AI coastal cities with battleships and cruisers, than walking in with my tanks to occupy. I have, occasionaly, used them to assault coastal cities, before battleships become available. A boatload of marines appearing next to a coastal city can be davastating.

If marines do not reduce a city pop point when attacking from a ship, (I had not realized/noticed this) than they do become more important.

Question: do city walls and/or coastal fortresses effect marines attacking from ships?

:tank:

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Originally posted by Ace
If marines do not reduce a city pop point when attacking from a ship, (I had not realized/noticed this) than they do become more important.

Question: do city walls and/or coastal fortresses effect marines attacking from ships?

It looks like marines attacking from a ship do not reduce the city population. Costal fortresses don't have an effect on the attack, but city walls do.

 

[unknown_spirit]

Originally posted by Ace
Why on earth would you want to use slow moving marines to mop up with? Mech inf will do just as well and makes for a much stronger defensive unit to nail down your conquests.

I generally have my MechInfs doung the Blitzkrieg with my Armor, and since Marines are so slow, they may as well do the mopping up while the armor and MechInf plough through towns further away. No point marching Marines too far if the faster units can get there. also, of course, the MechInf would be better at the front anyway, because of their speed.

 

[Ace]

So, Basically, the only thing "wrong" with marines is their movement factor of one. No mobility, which can be offset by their use on railroads.

After rereading this whole thread, I think its safe to say that there IS NO one "most useless unit"!! It appears to hinge on each individuals style of play. It seems that for every unit that has been nominated for that title, someone has leaped to its defense and pointed out its usefulness.


:tank:

 

[kmad]

Cruise Missile


earlier today, i had one (1) battleship by itself, my opponent launched somewhere in the nighborhood of 18 cruise missiles at it and failed to kill it.

 

[Pongui]

That really is ridiculous. The battleship icon represents maybe a few battleships plus various escorts, one single cruise missile icon represents dozens of missiles.

For the people who still compare civ2 combat with reality, I think it helps to remember that the icons don't just represent a single, say, dragoon, or even a multitude of dragoons. The dragoon icon is MAINLY dragoons or an army FEATURING dragoons. That's why an armor unit (an army featuring armor) could be damaged by a dragoons unit.

My most useless pick is the explorer. The explorer should be a sort of ocean diplomat with 6 movement points.