Worst UU

[Ataxerxes]

I personally find Aztec UU pretty useless...its good that it doesn't require any resources but what's good of a swordsman with a strength of 5?

Honorable mention also goes to Gallic warrior, khmer elephants, musketeer and oromo warrior

i mentioned musk and oromo because i almost always skip musketman and go straight for rifling.

I also think ship UUs are not that good either.

I used to think the Aztec UU was useless but it isn't that bad. Admittedly I prefer a Chariot or Axe rush to Swords (except for Rome). Monty can get awesome Supermedics with 26 XP. The AI often can't handle two move units (keep to the Forests and Jungles). They can also execute nice chokes and worker stealing.

Musketeer isn't bad if you get gunpowder early. I also go quick for rifling usually. Oromos are a pretty good UU although you might delay rifling slightly but getting Drill IV rifles on 5 XP is pretty nice. I'd actually rank Oromos above average.

Some UU's and UB's you have to vary what you do with other civs. I don't normally sword rush unless I'm Rome and I'll delay Economics if I'm Spain.

Portugal's UU ranges from adequate to useless depending on the map. This doesn't apply to the East Indiaman - it is awesome on the right map. You can really set back an enemy Civ on a water map with that unit. Between Astronomy and Chemistry you have a tremendous advantage so Dutch will often go for fast Astronomy.

 

[noto2]

What I don't get is why UU's and UB's aren't balanced for their era. A UB that replaces a monument, for example, will exist for 90-95% of game turns. In a 350 turn game it will be around for 320+ turns. A UB that replaces a factory probably won't even be around for 100, therefore the later elements should be stronger if they are to be balanced. It is better to have your UU/UB earlier, if you have a late element you should be rewarded for surviving that long.
Right now it's the opposite of that. War chariots, quechas, praetorians, vultures are strong UUs and SEALS and panzers are weak (well SEALS aren't weak per se but they come too late to matter).
It should be the other way around. Prats shouldn't be so strong and Panzers should be utterly dominating. The panzer should be so powerful that if Germany makes it to the industrial age and is at tech/production parity you are shaking in your boots.
The same goes for UB's. The mall and research institute are both actually incredibly strong UB's if we're just looking at their effects, but when you factor in how late the arrive they end up being lower tier. This just isn't fair when you consider how strong things like the terrace are.

 

[plasmacannon]

What I don't get is why UU's and UB's aren't balanced for their era. A UB that replaces a monument, for example, will exist for 90-95% of game turns. In a 350 turn game it will be around for 320+ turns. A UB that replaces a factory probably won't even be around for 100...

Actually, Monuments obsolete at Astronomy. So, that won't be around for 320 turns, more likely fewer than 200, but I get your point. They do come earlier and permit an early advantage.
I think people forget that the game can be started on different ages.
Starting in the Modern Age, America becomes pretty powerful.
It has a UB that give 20% more Gold and upto 3 more happiness than what it replaces.
Also, on huge maps one will spend a lot of time in the Modern Era, especially if Vassals, Space Race Cultural and Diplomatic Victories are turned off.
It's then, when America and even Germany become more useful. This is just not how most of us play though.

 

[lymond]

Actually, I thought existing Monuments remain in the city as long as they weren't put there by Stonehenge. You just can't build them. I may be wrong as I haven't kept track of that in ages. In Vanilla, I think they did disappear at Calendar which could be rather annoying. Regardless, the Mon UBs are not that spectacular anyway, although the Stele can be kinda nice sometimes even if it seems to not make sense for Zara.

Mall is actually a very nice UB relatively speaking, but yeah I rarely even reach that stage of the game. It's fantastic on Late Era starts. I don't think Research Institute is great in any situation - maybe the latest era start.

 

[noto2]

the research institute is still better than many UB's out there. It's situational, but if you are running a specialist economy (representation) and you are going for a space win, it's actually an above avg UB. If you are not in that situation, however, it's worthless. Still, it's better than the assembly plant. I mean, really...wth... 4 engineer slots at a point in the game when if you tried to run all engineers to pop a GE it would take forever since you've already poppped so many GPs thrroughout the game. At least it's cheaper with coal, but that's not enough of an advantage seeing how late it comes.

Plasma - you're right, I feel like they made the game with the modern starts and advanced starts in mind. I suppose in a game like that the panzer might actually be useful. The SEAL would be quite good too. Still, a bad decision on their part.

 

[Kallikrates]

I do not think that UUs and UBs could ever be balanced and at the same time keep some flavor to make them typical for the Civ. Because historically, of course, there were no Babylonians around in the middle ages and no Germans in the Ancient era etc.

So one could say that from gaming experience the latest era to make a difference in the game is the Napoleonic to late 19th century wars, say until infantry and artillery the latest. So give the Germans an improved Prussian Grenadier (+ one first strike or 25% vs. gunpowder or so) or the "Dicke Berta" (a famous cannon on the eve of the first World War) and whatever units figured in the war of independence or so for the US. Not sure about UUs, though.
And, as has been mentioned, apparently there are some people playing advanced starts and scenarios in which the modern units might be more important.

 

[Fippy]

I think it's mainly fine, there are bad UUs and bad traits..so we can pick bad leaders etc. sometimes

Just puzzling that units like war chariots exist, someone must have noticed that +1str so early on mobile units is too good?
Then later, they give Seals first strikes..why not 1-2 first strikes instead for WCs and str4 still, nobody would talk much about them but they'd still be useful.

 

[maurcus]

No one seems to have mentioned the Numidians who are in that class of units that might-not-be-better-than-the-original-and-might-be-worse. However, I have to think that the Panzer and the SEAL are the worst because of how late they are. Has anyone, at any time, ever won a game, or even taken a big step forward specifically because of them?

I have many times, actually. Late game aggression lightens the monotony of space or time victories. or it secures a domination/conquest victory that took to long.

 

[Izuul]

Already mentioned other places, but Numidians start becoming valuable on Immortal and really shine on Deity. You will be fighting metal units, not archers, so they are very useful.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I think it's mainly fine, there are bad UUs and bad traits..so we can pick bad leaders etc. sometimes

Just puzzling that units like war chariots exist, someone must have noticed that +1str so early on mobile units is too good?
Then later, they give Seals first strikes..why not 1-2 first strikes instead for WCs and str4 still, nobody would talk much about them but they'd still be useful.

In their twisted logic, redcoats were somehow too good while prats skirms and war chariots weren't...despite the former coming three eras later and having a comparable bonus. Cossacks ate it needlessly too. The balance changes made no sense.

 

[Iranon]

To be fair, high-level players liked to tech on a compact empire and break out with Rifles or Cavalry. It's a sound cookie-cutter approach that's easy to perfect without being obviously degenerate, and Cossacks/Redcoats helped that quite a bit.

Still, other plays are as powerful or more so. Balance changes should be backed by solid theory, not reactions to current fashions... those were definitely not needed.

*

A few remarked early on that Skirmishers had serious potential... but it took long enough before they got the respect they deserve.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Still, other plays are as powerful or more so. Balance changes should be backed by solid theory, not reactions to current fashions... those were definitely not needed.

Firaxis in both civ IV and V are notorious for "reactions to current fashions".

- Nonsensically selective UU nerfs
- Barb galleys x4
- Nerfed spread culture espionage mission after someone on the forum demonstrated a culture win was possible (but costly) that way
- Introduced a bug in overflow just to stop protective wall-whips into gold
- Civ V military stuff, starting but not stopping with mounted
- Quite a few civ V AI tendencies (some justified however)

Unfortunately, much of the community thinks along these lines too. This is why "everyone" thinks that IND/PHI would be overpowering, that "balanced resources" are bad in HoF, and that certain tactics are "exploits" while others that provide equally abusive advantages over hapless AI are perfectly fine in the community's eyes (for example, tech trading is widely acceptable, but subsidizing AI for resource-->gold trades isn't, despite the former contributing much more than the latter overall).

It's also why so many people rate the praetorian as a #1 UU on a consistent basis, when really it only truly shines on slower speeds.

 

[Izuul]

Praets are fun with catapults. They are essentially cheaper elephants that are even stronger when attacking cities (albeit not as good in the field). They also don't require researching an extra tech.

Pure praet rushes begin to labor on immortal and are hardly effective on Deity.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Praets are fun with catapults. They are essentially cheaper elephants that are even stronger when attacking cities (albeit not as good in the field). They also don't require researching an extra tech.

Pure praet rushes begin to labor on immortal and are hardly effective on Deity.

Don't get me wrong, I still consider them a top 10 unit.

As you point out though, pure prat rushes are indeed less amazing on high levels. They're expensive units to throw at 2-3 AI axes and an assortment of 2-3 archers and a spear/city. They help in catapult times, but so do a lot of things and from a *balance* perspective by then an equal-tech opponent could strip your stack with collateral and cause serious grief with combat axes or shock HA. The AI sucks though so it wouldn't do something like that with any consistency .

 

[Izuul]

It's been awhile since I've played a game like that, but the big advantage to using praets is that you don't have to suicide as many cats before attacking b/c CRII and CRIII praets can wreck stuff once city defenses have been bombarded.

A couple spears and some shock axes in the stack will keep them from defending counters most of the time.

 

[Fippy]

Well to be fair, Praets are like a free win on Emp and lower, so it's easily understandable how they get many votes. I also don't think most Imm AIs have much of a chance if you really push them.

 

[Izuul]

Yeah I can't imagine winning an imm game with just praets but you can crush a couple AI and put yourself into a position where it would be hard to lose.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Well to be fair, Praets are like a free win on Emp and lower, so it's easily understandable how they get many votes. I also don't think most Imm AIs have much of a chance if you really push them.

True enough. Only unit spammers with AGG like GK/Monty/Shaka/Ragnar are big problems; a lot of their axes wind up with shock and attacking into that is straight up painful.

 

[drewisfat]

Firaxis in both civ IV and V are notorious for "reactions to current fashions".

It's also why so many people rate the praetorian as a #1 UU on a consistent basis, when really it only truly shines on slower speeds.

Lol? People only think prates are good because its a trend?? Most of the praet fan crew are not as active posters and lower level players or slower speed players. They are not basing this on some kind of opinion piggybacking lol. As someone who has mostly just lurked for years I can tell you if there's any sort of fashion opinions it's from the experienced deity posters who routinely compete for who likes war chariots and slavery the most Not to say those aren't great ofc.

Both war chariots and praets should both be free wins even on deity. War chariots dominate more, for sure, but iron is more easy to obtain than horses.

 

[Manco Capac]

Nooo, again about praets. Loops.

I thought Duckweed concluded about those since a year ago.