Why Are Praets The Best?

[TheMeInTeam]

If they were invincible I'm sure they would have been nerfed by now. I'm surprised they haven't been, actually.

Me too. Redcoats and cossacks were, and yet as they came later they were arguably less powerful. A prat has a 33% str increast past what a sword has, which is actually comparable to a 16 str redcoat with pinch (only aggressive grenadiers would win vs them, very similar theme as agg axes vs prats).

Same deal with cossacks, although admittedly they probably were a little high at 18, they essentially had no counter at all.

 

[Unconquered Sun]

A combat 1 promotion on the axe is sufficient to tip the ratio in its favour if it attackes the praet, but give even odds if being attacked by the praet.

5.5:4 if attacking praet, and 8:8 if defending against praet.

It's 5.5:5.33 if attacking.

 

[Willem]

A combat 1 promotion on the axe is sufficient to tip the ratio in its favour if it attackes the praet, but give even odds if being attacked by the praet.

If you give the Axe Combat 1 then you need to give it to the Praet as well and the odds remain the same.

Willem, small note, but keep in mind situational modifiers (eg. +50% vs. melee) are always attached to the defender so in your example you are really making the assumption that the axe is defending, but you did not state this.

I don't believe that's the case with Axemen. The 50% bonus applies to both attack and defence IIRC.

 

[Thedrin]

I don't believe that's the case with Axemen. The 50% bonus applies to both attack and defence IIRC.

What he means is that the modifiers are applied to the defender. If the axeman attacks the praetorian, the praetorian's strength is divided by 1.5 to 5.33. If the axeman is defending, its strength is multiplied by 1.5 to 7.5.

The above doesn't apply to the combat bonuses, which are used to increase the promoted unit's base strenth, or the penalty for attacking across water, but I believe it applies to everything else.

 

[PieceOfMind]

It's 5.5:5.33 if attacking.

Yes, you are right. I thought I had edited my post already with that correction (I noticed it when I posted) but it seems not. I'll fix now instead. Doesn't change my point luckily.

If you give the Axe Combat 1 then you need to give it to the Praet as well and the odds remain the same.

Why do I have to give it to the praet? It's just an example of how you can tip the odds in the axe's favour.

The praet could be going for CR promotions. It is very obvious that if they both have identical promotions the praet will always win, especially combat promotions because they always adjust the base strength of the unit they're on (hence more significant on praet). The fact is though, if you catch a praet with your C1 axe you can have the odds in your favour. It's even better with a shock axe obviously.

If the praets start piling on the combat promotions though, things won't be looking good for any unit trying to kill the praet.

Willem, small note, but keep in mind situational modifiers (eg. +50% vs. melee) are always attached to the defender so in your example you are really making the assumption that the axe is defending, but you did not state this.

I don't believe that's the case with Axemen. The 50% bonus applies to both attack and defence IIRC.

No you're confusing what I meant.

The 50% vs. melee is always applied to the defender. It of course applies both when the axe is attacking and defending but when the axe is attacking the 50% is subtracted from the bonuses to the praet, not added to the axe's strength. It's an important difference but an often ignored one.

 

[Willem]

Why do I have to give it to the praet?

It's not an accurate comparison if the Axe has a promotion and the Praet has none. Though of course he could be going for CR as you mention.

It of course applies both when the axe is attacking and defending but when the axe is attacking the 50% is subtracted from the bonuses to the praet, not added to the axe's strength. It's an important difference but an often ignored one.

OK, I see now.

 

[Iranon]

Praetorians come early enough to have a major impact, and are competitive for long enough that they will almost never go to waste (discount macemen aren't bad at all).

Personally, I think early archer killers more reliably have a game-changing impact for their ability to effortlessly snag another capital. Their utility outside of a rush is also not bad at all... the chariot UUs are perfecbly viable into the medieval era as support troops while Quechuas allow cute upgrade tricks and dirt-cheap garrison troops if you avoid hunting, in addition to effortless barbarian control.

These won't do too well in polls because the people who favour very early hitting power split their votes between 3 units while Praetorians have no direct competitor.

 

[Joshua368]

Same deal with cossacks, although admittedly they probably were a little high at 18, they essentially had no counter at all.

18 strength with two movement and available way early at Military Tradition. Wow, I wish I had gotten to play with them!

 

[Roller123]

18 strength with two movement and available way early at Military Tradition. Wow, I wish I had gotten to play with them!

And Catherine was cre/fin too.

 

[dankok8]

Cossacks in vanilla were almost as mad as Praets - 3 times the base strength of the defender Longbowmen (18 vs. 6) - more than Praets which have a 8:3 ratio against Archers. Still, Cossacks came late compared to Praets.

Praets were and are just ridiculous in SP - they don't obsolete until Rifling; no military UU has nearly as long a lifespan. They are like Macemen without the +50% melee bonus except they can be built with Iron Working and cost 45h compared to 70h for Macemen. When I do get CS + Machinery, I may build one or 2 Macemen and give them Shock for protection against melee, but still use Praets (many are highly promoted) with siege until Rifling. I may add a Longbow or 2 if I can to help against Crossbows who are a real threat to Praets/Maces.

In MP, many people will be Aggressive and will have no problem spamming CI/Shock Axemen and these can counter Praets cost-efficiently early on. Thus, Praets lose some of their power in MP.

 

[Tephros]

Um, yeah, maybe because praetorians are better at both attacking and defending cities than any other unit in the classical era. Shock praetorians are better versus melee than shock axes in general. CR Praetorians are as good versus archers as macemen. CR Praetorians are much better versus cities than either CR axes or CR swords regardless of what's defending.

Basically, if you have praetorians, you don't need to build axes or spears. You might build some war elephants if they have a lot of horse archers or something. And catapults to take down defenses.

You like to sacrifice jaguars? Have fun. I'd prefer my units survive to get another promotion.

 

[obsolete]

Why are Praetorians said to be best unit in all of the game?

People say many things. For some, the less they know the more noise they seem to make...

 

[PieceOfMind]

Um, yeah, maybe because praetorians are better at both attacking and defending cities than any other unit in the classical era. Shock praetorians are better versus melee than shock axes in general. CR Praetorians are as good versus archers as macemen. CR Praetorians are much better versus cities than either CR axes or CR swords regardless of what's defending.

Basically, if you have praetorians, you don't need to build axes or spears. You might build some war elephants if they have a lot of horse archers or something. And catapults to take down defenses.

You like to sacrifice jaguars? Have fun. I'd prefer my units survive to get another promotion.

You touched on a good point. Praetorians are going to be similarly good defending cities as they are at taking them.

The only thing to watch out for would be CR2 or CR3 axes but then the praet could just attack them from the city he's defending - no point letting that axe's CR promotions get some use.

 

[obsolete]

If those axes come from someone like SB, you had better build some archers, or they will will be laughing as they take you all the way down to the graveyard.

 

[Tephros]

If those axes come from someone like SB, you had better build some archers, or they will will be laughing as they take you all the way down to the graveyard.

Sitting Bull? The dog soldiers have 4 base strength, and they have +100% versus melee. That means that unpromoted they are going to be equal to a praetorian, as the bonus halves the 8 base of praets. Given equal promotions, the praetorian should win. Though yeah, archers probably would still be more cost-effective against dogs. I had said you wouldn't need to build axes and spears.

 

[obsolete]

Uhhhh, why on earth would you be attacking a city without promotions? And by the way, Pratts don't get city-garrison promos, but dogs DO get city-raider. So Pratts are in a heap of trouble...

Comparing the price of a dog... their resourcelessness, and earlier time to build.. You gota be kidding me if you think the Pratt has any sort of advantage here. It fails miserably against the dog, and MUST have other mixed units to help it out.

 

[Tephros]

Uhhhh, why on earth would you be attacking a city without promotions? And by the way, Pratts don't get city-garrison promos, but dogs DO get city-raider. So Pratts are in a heap of trouble...

Comparing the price of a dog... their resourcelessness, and earlier time to build.. You gota be kidding me if you think the Pratt has any sort of advantage here. It fails miserably against the dog, and MUST have other mixed units to help it out.

Unless you're talking about CR3 dogs, the fortified praetorian is still going to have better than even odds. Hammer by hammer it's even.

Spoiler :

However, an archer is going to be better and cheaper than the praetorian defending against dogs in a city. This doesn't contradict what I said earlier. What I said earlier was that the praetorian makes axes and spears not necessary.

So no, I'm not going to avoid building archers when faced with dogs. But as far as being "in a heap of trouble," or "failing miserably" if your only defender is a praetorian, not so much. Definitely not optimal though.

 

[FidelZandro]

And praets are one of the longest lived units in the game. The can slaughter archers even without any siege units for most cities and are even effective city attackers against longbows (with siege) especially when promoted. Ever play the earth18civs map as Rome?

Yeah, actually still playing it.
I have twice the points/landmass/population/power of anyone else.
Took Paris, Berlin, London and Madrid all before 500 AD.
By the time i wiped out Greece, Russia and Arabia as well, it was 1640
It's totally ridiculous
And they last forever as well, which is very handy.
Just save some cash to upgrade them once to infantry and you're done.

It's just too easy.
Macemen (with upgrades), longbowmen (with siege), musketmen, no problemo for my 3000-year-old preats

 

[popejubal]

The 50% vs. melee is always applied to the defender. It of course applies both when the axe is attacking and defending but when the axe is attacking the 50% is subtracted from the bonuses to the praet, not added to the axe's strength. It's an important difference but an often ignored one.

This does bring up an interesting point on whether it's a different decision for Praetorians to choose Combat I vs. CR I, etc. than it is for other units. Because attack bonuses are always applied against the defender instead of in favor of the attacker while Combat promotions are applied directly to the base strength of the unit, regardless of who is attacking.

Comparing Praetorians to Archers with CG I, 20% culture
Archer gets +50% city defense naturally, +20% for CGI and 20% for culture for a total of +90% strength

Praetorian with CR II: 8 strength
Archer: 3*(1.90-.40) = 4.5 strength
8/4.5 strength ratio = 1.78
8/(8+4.5) = .64 chance of winning the first combat round.

Praetorian with Combat II: 9.6 strength
Archer: 3*(1.90) = 5.7 strength
9.6/5.7 strength ratio = 1.68
9.6(9.6+5.7) = .627 chance of winning the first combat round.


Comparing Praetorians to Archers with CG II, 20% culture on a hill.
Archer gets +50% city defense naturally, +50% for hill, +40% for CGII and +20% for culture for a total of +160% strength.

Praetorian with CR II: 8 strength
Archer: 3*(2.60-.40) = 6.6 strength
8/6.6 strength ratio = 1.21
8/(8+4.5) = .5479 chance of winning the first combat round.

Praetorian with Combat II: 9.6 strength
Archer: 3*(2.6) = 7.8 strength
9.6/7.8 strength ratio = 1.23
9.6(9.6+7.8) = .5517 chance of winning the first combat round.


You can see that when the combat bonuses are close, the CR promotions give more bang for the buck, but when you have lots and lots of defensive bonuses to overcome (as is the case against most archers, longbows, etc), then Combat promotions are better.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Um, yeah, maybe because praetorians are better at both attacking and defending cities than any other unit in the classical era. Shock praetorians are better versus melee than shock axes in general. CR Praetorians are as good versus archers as macemen. CR Praetorians are much better versus cities than either CR axes or CR swords regardless of what's defending.

Basically, if you have praetorians, you don't need to build axes or spears. You might build some war elephants if they have a lot of horse archers or something. And catapults to take down defenses.

You like to sacrifice jaguars? Have fun. I'd prefer my units survive to get another promotion.

Technically speaking, elephants are classical units X_X. They will beat prats anywhere but when the prats are defending cities. Consistently.

Comparing prats vs dog soldiers in MP is another issue entirely. Good luck hooking up iron in a timely fashion if NA is anywhere NEAR you. You better settle ON it, haha!