Why Are Praets The Best?

[obsolete]

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

You rock!!

 

[FidelZandro]

You rock!!

not entirely
it was a monarch game
like someone said, it's like playing 1 or 2 settings easier, so monarch -2 (=warlord?) is actually not very impressive
i do understand your sarcasm, but i was only trying to make a point about the praets...
the game wasn't interesting at all, you see...
building praets, praets and nothing but praets till 1000AD is no fun and the game was already won.
i kept playing and got a diplomatic victory in around 1820AD, because everyone but zuma, washington and hc was my vassal.
I actually got very arrogant and sloppy, declaring war without looking at diplomacy (ah hell, who's going to stop me anyway) and building all kinds of useless buildings and units.
So that's why imho praets are the best, but at the same time no fun at all...

 

[Molybdeus]

I don't think they're that great. Good UU, but overrated in my eyes. People blow them out of proportion because the AI is stupid... But personally, I'd take either of the Chariot UU's over them.

The difference for me is that War Chariots and Immortals are kind of "win more" units. You can beat archers with normal chariots, but Praetorians let you do things (like win without a long siege attempt vs. longbowmen and beat their counter units) that normal swordsmen just can't do effectively.

 

[Pacifist46]

Earth Map with Rome, Emperor/Epic, I wiped out:
France
Spain
Germany
Greece
Russia
Persia
Arabia
and Egypt
all before 1AD by simply building Praets in virtually every city virtually all the time. I went on to win the game by Domination with over 200,000 points

Not bad considering I normally play Monarch and struggle with that.

 

[Iranon]

That's not a true test of the Praetorian. You could easily have comparable conquests with Germany... without any military benefit beyond a starting location conductive to a quick axe rush.

 

[obsolete]

Earth Map with Rome, Emperor/Epic, I wiped out:

You used a speed-cheat while warmongering... That is pretty sad.

 

[NoDot]

You used a speed-cheat while warmongering... That is pretty sad.

Come now, Obsolete. We all know that Marathon is the Speed Cheat you should stop with the Lesser Builder Cheat.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

You can cut down 3 european civs with just warriors on emp/epic earth 18...

Prats are an amazing UU. They are the only UU given such a whopping increase to its base strength that hasn't had it nerfed away. Intelligent humans can counter them, AIs below deity can not.

IMO keshiks hold similar power just because the stock unit they're based on is so strong, and that the UB powers them further. However, if you just compare the base UU ability, prats have the #1 bonus in the game - A flat 33% strength added! Could you imagine if other units had that?!

~ 10 str maces, 20 strength cavalry, > 18 str rifles, almost 27 str infantry! Ownage!!!!!

The only other good base str increase UU is the cataphract, and that thing unfortunately is a knight replacement, which places it awkwardly on the tech tree. Even with that somewhat weaker UU though, just trading for guilds and throwing flanking on those suckers/striking before the AI gets rifling = lots of cities, quickly (like a faster cuirasser push). Base str increases are strong on UUs!

 

[Fei Kelei]

My last two monarch games were as Julius and Kublai just to try out their UUs, since it had been a long time since I had played as either civ. I had to play the map, though, and in my Roman game the obvious thing to do was REX to 10 cities because the land and my position were so good, so my praets never killed anything but barbarians (though they were great for taking out a couple of barb cities on hills).

I did get a nice demonstration of the power of Keshiks in my next game, though, when I took out Hammurabi and his Hindu holy city in the BCs. Poor fool had only built one spear before I knocked out his copper, and his bowmen were useless. My only problem with Keshiks is that Horseback Riding is such an expensive tech that it really screws your research if you don't have many other civs around to trade with, especially since you're probably going to be crashing your economy. Also, they have zero synergy with the Mongol leaders' Aggressive trait, making that almost a complete waste of a trait. I bet they'd be a lot of fun with Cyrus.

 

[Levgre]

In multiplayer, yes, you can stand up against praets with aggressive axemen. You sacrifice your normal edge you have for being aggressive, to simply compete with the praets. And unless you are careful with having spears, the Roman player can exploit your large number of axemen by using cheap chariots(or more expensive but nearly as devastating against Axes, shock HAs).... or they can just use Horse Archers(perhaps eventually elephants) for stack defense against your predominantly axemen army. Normally in MP the aggressive player has the advantage of being able to mix more swords and spears into their army, because the swords can compete better with other melee, and you need less axes to counter. A well-balanced stack is required to usually be successful on offense, and AGG normally has the best ability to do this.

And this is just talk mainly about defending against praets or fighting them 1 on 1. Aggressive players are supposed to be able to be, well, aggressive. Once the romans get catapults, with their praets good luck attacking with an axe army when your units are only 1 collatoral damage hits away from losing to the praets. I just calculated the odds, a healthy combat 1 praet attacking a shock axemen at 4.5 health (1 collatoral damage) has a 65.9% chance of winning.

Fact remains, that the praets give the Roman player more flexibility against the AGG player, because the Praet takes up the role of axe/spear/sword.


But that edge given AGG ends relatively quickly if they get a great general and start making shock praets, so you have to play very conservatively as to not let them get a GG before you do, which can be hard, especially with an imperialistic rome.

Rome can be beat by depriving them of Iron, getting better land, etc. or just ganging up on Rome, but the Praet can have a larger influence, and quite often has an influence on the course of the game unlike any other unit.

 

[Pacifist46]

That's not a true test of the Praetorian. You could easily have comparable conquests with Germany... without any military benefit beyond a starting location conductive to a quick axe rush.

You probably could, I couldn't. My point was to illustrate that Praets are indeed the best UU in the game because I could play at Emperor with them whereas normally I would struggle on Emperor. Even on 18Civs.

Oh, and everyone plays on Epic these days

 

[zunarb7]

Praetorians are a rush civilisation like jags and Zulus and even Mali, if you don't capitalise on the advantage quickly upon acquiring Iron then even axemen in well fortified towns/areas will make meat of them, particularly if you have a few more than they have, and you may as praets can be relatively expensive. That said vs the computer they are powerful, as the computer is dense, but in a team game they can be accounted for and dealt with if you know they are there and you know what you are doing. For me the strength of Civbeyondthesword is no one nation is particularly great or the greatest, it all depends on how you play the game, your style if you will. I like the civs which have horse units and tank or rifleman/musket units, but then I've never been much on rush games, although I do play them if I chose random civ for a laugh.

Rome can be beat by depriving them of Iron, getting better land, etc. or just ganging up on Rome, but the Praet can have a larger influence, and quite often has an influence on the course of the game unlike any other unit.

Good tips Levgre.

In a non team game where you have the misfortune to be near them or if you're one on one, the best defence is a good offence, start harassing them as soon as you get bronze or chariots even and they will crumble. Let them get Iron and consolidate and you are dead. If you are on a team of players then as you say, just gang up on them with the pillaging tactics. The other teams remit should be to defend Rome so that it can start farming praets, so it's not always that easy. If you're going to allow praets though most people know how to tackle them, the best games in my experience are when everyone goes random anyway, that way you get to see how flexible people are.

 

[obsolete]

My point was to illustrate that Praets are indeed the best UU in the game because I could play at Emperor with them whereas normally I would struggle on Emperor.

How does this exactly illustrate pratts are the best UU. The only thing it illustrates is you can`t even handle Emperor. And why should we listen to someone who can`t even handle emperor...

Good question...

Moderator Action: Discuss the topic - not other posters.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Tephros]

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

Well they're the same base strength. War elephants cost 60 versus praets 45. Even if we assume the war elephants have an extra promotion due to stables, the praets are going to more than compensate for that with terrain bonuses for defense and fortification, city or not. What I will agree with is that war elephants are superior against mounted units except other war elephants, and that war elephants are better for in-the-field offense.

How does this exactly illustrate pratts are the best UU. The only thing it illustrates is you can`t even handle Emperor. And why should we listen to someone who can`t even handle emperor...

Good question...

Wow. That's insanely rude. And as to your earlier rude comment, wth is wrong with warmongering/playing on a faster speed than normal? I chose marathon because I like to play huge maps. Do you like to do domination games on huge maps with quick speed and anything else or anybody else who doesn't play that way is beneath you?

 

[obsolete]

I asked a legit and honest question, if you know the answere please share.

I am getting tired and tired of seeing the same old history repeat. Someone comes on here, and ends up screaming FOUL... ZOMG.. OVERPOWERED.... and then we end up with a stir again in the community and another silly debate on what UU needs to be nerfed, all the while the guy touting can`t even win a decent level if his life depended on it.

No one has problems with newbs... it`s when they start touting their horn that it gets silly. If he had some decent experience he would have known better... Obviously if it was so over-powered everyone would be all prancing around deity with the pratts.. which already have been nerfed once due to the touters. We don`t see that... so maybe it`s time to ask WHY you don`t see that.

These ZOMG-Overpowered-ZOMG rants do more harm than good...

 

[Fei Kelei]

I completely agree. No more having an opinion about anything in the game unless you play at Deity. Never mind that 99% of the more than 3 million people who bought this game play at levels well below that.

I know that the whole "Praets are the best"/"Praets are overpowered" argument is at this point, but there's no need to be an ass about it.

(I'm enjoying your Industrious-Deity series, btw. Very educational.)

 

[Civman33]

Earth Map with Rome, Emperor/Epic, I wiped out:
France
Spain
Germany
Greece
Russia
Persia
Arabia
and Egypt
all before 1AD by simply building Praets in virtually every city virtually all the time. I went on to win the game by Domination with over 200,000 points

Not bad considering I normally play Monarch and struggle with that.

Btw, when is your next 18 civs version going to be made?

 

[AfterShafter]

The difference for me is that War Chariots and Immortals are kind of "win more" units. You can beat archers with normal chariots, but Praetorians let you do things (like win without a long siege attempt vs. longbowmen and beat their counter units) that normal swordsmen just can't do effectively.

Well, here's my reasoning. Iron working, and the expensive Praets, are a huge investment in tech and hammers for a monstrous, slow moving unit that, if you don't get iron, is pretty much going to result in a *huge* and possibly unrecoverable setback on higher difficulties. I know some people play with the mindset of "Oh, didn't get iron? I'll just restart" and that artificially inflates the wonderousness of Praets a bit in my eyes. The fact is though, on higher difficulties, Praets are an extremely cumbersome and high-investement unit technologically and resource wise, and going for them pretty much leaved you trapped into either Praet Rush or slow death. And what's more, that rush isn't even guaranteed to work on Immortal +...

Contrast this to the War Chariot or Immortal. These are cheap, low tech, fast units. Even on Immortal I find I can safely and relatively easily invest the time and resources required to gettings their pre-requisite techs and still be able to change tracks if I don't get horses, if I find Shaka, or something like that. When I DO get them, they are fast moving, excellent pillagers, great city attackers, get reinforced much more easily than Praets (fast movement and such) and I find their mobility, paired with their ease to get and logistical superiority to Praets makes them a just all 'round better package when things really get tough. When things aren't so tough (IE - lower difficulty), when you can get away with huge investments with unsure payoffs, when you're playing in scenarios stacked in the Praet's favour (Earth 18 civs), they do seem wonderful... But when the going gets tough, I find Praets just don't stack up.

Even if Obsolete is a bit blunt/rude/whatever you want to call it, there is a certain degree of truth to what he's saying. Praets are a death sentence on Deity. Too much investment even if they are a good unit. Most people who do think they're all that and a bag of chips are playing on lower difficulties where the huge investment of Praets flies a lot better. For me, the true test of something's power is how well it fares under the worst situations... And that's a test that Praets fail pretty badly in my eyes. Praet rushing on Immortal + leaves me restarting much more often than not. Chariot UU rushing has a much greater success rate, in part because of their lower overhead costs, and in part because they get reinforced more quickly and can switch from a hard to a soft target a lot more easily... If you're plugging along at 1 move per turn with Praets, anywhere you go will be reinforced before you get there - with Chariots, I move from the city with four archers and three spearmen to the one with two archers in a jiffy, and I end up taking a city rather than losing a ton of units.

 

[deanej]

Praets are no more of an investment than a regular swordsman (except for the higher base cost). Do people not build swordsmen at higher difficulties? Also, the only 2 move units before tanks are the horse units, workers, and settlers, and the horse resource is even rarer than iron.

 

[Levgre]

you are describing probably the worser way to use praets on deity. I'd say on deity what is better is using them for a medieval war, and on the merit of them being equal strength to a maceman, being able to skip machinery and go for other military techs or economy techs.

And I don't agree with only looking at the worst case scenario, deity is a just a different game-style in a way. You can have lower difficulty level games that are otherwise just as hard or harder. On deity the brunt of the difficulty goes on economy, making the more economical sound choice better for the early game (HBR rather than Iron working).