Worst UU

[Vonreuter]

I love Jaguars. Woodsman III supermedics win wars, even modern ones, and Woodsman III isn't that far away when you start with Woodsman I.

Furthermore, Montezuma's playing style and traits (well, the Aggressive part) should make sure you get to Woodsman III before the time window closes.

Plus they are cheaper, get to move at double speed in forests with WMII, and look pretty awesome. That makes rushing both quick and enjoyable.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

I love Jaguars. Woodsman III supermedics win wars, even modern ones, and Woodsman III isn't that far away when you start with Woodsman I.

Furthermore, Montezuma's playing style and traits (well, the Aggressive part) should make sure you get to Woodsman III before the time window closes.

Plus they are cheaper, get to move at double speed in forests with WMII, and look pretty awesome. That makes rushing both quick and enjoyable.

I think that it is worth noting that Woodsman III + Medic III actually requires 7 promotions... you need either Combat I or Drill I in order to unlock Medic I.

So, while an average unit will need 7 promotions (1 = 2XP, 2 = 5XP, 3 = 10XP, 4 = 17XP, 5 = 26XP, 6 = 37XP, 7 = 50XP), one of Monte's Jaguars starts with TWO of those promotions, since his Melee units start with Combat I promotions.

Therefore, you're looking at a difference of 50XP for a non-Aggressive, non-Charismatic Civ to get a Woodsman III + Medic III unit, while Monte only needs 26XP.

A cheap Barracks = 3XP, leaving you only needing to gain 3XP in battles in addition to the 20XP that comes from the Great General.


Now, who was saying that Jaguars are a bad Unique Unit?


I like obsolete's idea about making the Ballista Elephant a resourceless unit... perhaps that idea would be a good addition to a Mod like the PIG Mod.

 

[Yxklyx]

...


I like obsolete's idea about making the Ballista Elephant a resourceless unit... perhaps that idea would be a good addition to a Mod like the PIG Mod.

If Khmer already has Ivory then there's nothing to gain from it. Since historically these elephants carried mounted crossbows and since crossbows get first strike, give them 1-2 first strikes or something like that.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Crossbows getting first strike is pretty mad since they take so long to load (except machine loading crossbows).

 

[Ataxerxes]

Regular workers are fine for me. Like I said, lets see one defend India from my Praetorians. It's why India always falls first when they are in my games.

You're conveniently missing the point. The use of the fast worker is to develop the land faster to counter other Civs. I like war with a tech edge and the fast worker helps get you there. It isn't glamarous (neither is the Skirmisher, but nobody votes for him) and the advantage doesn't show up in a blaze of glory at once, but it gives a small advantage all through the game. At almost any one point in the game there's a better UU, but over the game as a whole it's one of the best.

This is a worst poll. Comparing anything to Prats and saying you like Prats better so they must be worst doesn't make sense. No one sane votes the Prat as even average. For determining worst, try comparing fast worker to the Panzer. Fast worker gets me to tanks first, you won't get your Panzer before I destroy you.

India falls first in your games because the AI plays India poorly. Neither leader builds anything like enough units and gets steamrollered. A Civ in human hands and AI hands are entirely different. AI's performance is more affected by its' "personality" than by traits, UB or UU. Alexander has an OK UU that synergizes with the aggressive trait but never does anything in my games because he techs poorly. Shaka's good but not #1 in human hands. As an AI he usually is among the leaders.

 

[Yxklyx]

Crossbows getting first strike is pretty mad since they take so long to load (except machine loading crossbows).

...but the Khmer had steam powered mounted crossbows on their elephants.

First Strike is generally used for the missile weapons in Civ 4 (longbows, crossbows).

 

[Skwink]

You're conveniently missing the point. The use of the fast worker is to develop the land faster to counter other Civs. I like war with a tech edge and the fast worker helps get you there. It isn't glamarous (neither is the Skirmisher, but nobody votes for him) and the advantage doesn't show up in a blaze of glory at once, but it gives a small advantage all through the game. At almost any one point in the game there's a better UU, but over the game as a whole it's one of the best.

This is a worst poll. Comparing anything to Prats and saying you like Prats better so they must be worst doesn't make sense. No one sane votes the Prat as even average. For determining worst, try comparing fast worker to the Panzer. Fast worker gets me to tanks first, you won't get your Panzer before I destroy you.

India falls first in your games because the AI plays India poorly. Neither leader builds anything like enough units and gets steamrollered. A Civ in human hands and AI hands are entirely different. AI's performance is more affected by its' "personality" than by traits, UB or UU. Alexander has an OK UU that synergizes with the aggressive trait but never does anything in my games because he techs poorly. Shaka's good but not #1 in human hands. As an AI he usually is among the leaders.

Well you are right, Fast Workers make my conjured lands a lot nicer, just too bad they couldn't do anything to help their poor country.

 

[obsolete]

It's why India always falls first when they are in my games.

I'm pretty certain it has more to do with the level, than the UU.

 

[Bei1052]

2. UUs that come too late (Panzer, Seal)

The Panzer doesn't suck because it comes late. It sucks because the computer doesn't really build that many armored units (not that I've seen, anyway), not to mention that anti-tanks are a lot cheaper hammer wise and just as good against the few armored units that the computer does build. The Navy SEAL, however, is just all around awesome.

 

[Iranon]

Anti-tanks are still not as good at it and not part of a fast offense. They don't cut it against Modern Armour either, which the Panzer handles just fine. Very useful if you are usually at a tech disadvantage in the endgame. Tanks also come at a reasonable point for cutting off research and attempting world domination with what you have, so depending on level and playstyle this can come up in a good part of your games.

 

[Fleme]

If the AI is that much more advanced, it'll have gunships, mobile artilleries and its stacks will mainly consist of mechanized infantry. Panzer has no mileage on any of those units. I've also fought deities at a technological disadvantage and you get out of those holes with nukes, not panzers.

 

[obsolete]

The Navy SEAL, however, is just all around awesome.

I don't think so....

 

[Farm Boy]

I don't think so....

Much better than Jaguars

 

[Bei1052]

Anti-tanks are still not as good at it and not part of a fast offense. They don't cut it against Modern Armour either, which the Panzer handles just fine. Very useful if you are usually at a tech disadvantage in the endgame. Tanks also come at a reasonable point for cutting off research and attempting world domination with what you have, so depending on level and playstyle this can come up in a good part of your games.

So you're saying that the Panzer is good if you're at a rather significant tech disadvantage? I'm sorry but, to me, that's not much of a compelling argument as to why they're useful. Outside of deity and maybe immortal, and even then I'm not so sure, there really aren't that many instances where you're going to be trying to launch a late-game war against the computer when you're lagging in the tech race sans nukes. As I pointed out before, the usefulness of the panzer is directly linked to the number of armored troops the computer builds. I have personally never seen the computer build a significant number of armored units, and most certainly not enough to justify the panzer. Generally, any late-game stack I see the computer with has a large number of infantry/mech infantry, about fifteen or so siege, maybe ten or so anti-tanks and SAM infantry and a couple of gunships/armored units. Maybe it's different for everyone else, but that's what it is for me.

Anyway, I'll give you the fact that anti-tanks sucks when you're trying to conduct a fast offense. Of course, in those cases, you could just build a gunship which gets +100% against armored units and are cheaper to build (not to mention that, most of the time, you'll be able to build gunships before you can build tanks).

I don't think so....

What's wrong with the Navy SEAL? If you're trying to use them for something other than their purpose (amphibious invasions) then, yeah, they'll probably suck, but they absolutely rock for doing what they're supposed to do.

 

[Xanikk999]

I really like William of Orange of the Dutch's traits. However I think the East India man is trash. I think having a navel transport as a UU is a real let down.

I do like the Dutch's UB though. Extra hammers for river AND coastal tiles really make coastal dutch cities along a river powerhouses late game.

 

[Fleme]

The SEAL really do come so late that they have no impact and that is a severe detriment on any late UU. The extra first strikes and march do not add up at that point because stock units are more than capable of the task at that point. A SEAL is not considerably stronger than a regular marine when attacking infantry from the sea and as a part of a regular stack they're inferior to regular infantry, both when green and with promotions. Sure, there's the novelty of the option of having an unit that has a ton of first strikes towards the end of the game but at the risk of repeating myself, they're not a real improvement over the stock unit and come too late.

To add to their shortcomings, they're only useful on naval invasions which usually are only the very first step of invasions and considering those first steps you either soften your targets up with nukes or just land so you can soften them up with your artillery. If you prefer planes for softening them up, then any unit can do the mop-up. Either way, there's no specific niche for the SEAL to fill that would make it stand out. Admittedly having free march is great but still, for your regular jarhead, infantry is better with its +25% against gunpowder.

Late UUs, in order to bring something to the table, would need to have tangible benefits such as + , free useful promotions such as pinch, morale or others. Alternatively, they could have something unique like decreased collateral damage or the like. Late game stacks are generally so large that units are just mass and in that mass the late UUs do not stand out in any way.

 

[Iranon]

I never said the Panzer was good and don't think it is - even Deity games are often decided before this time and I agree that armoured forces are rarely the main concern.

For offensive use: You can take over the world with tanks, but not with gunships, so if you can build gunships before tanks you aren't even trying.
A more likely question for the hardcore warmonger is 'all commerce on gold for rushbuying tanks, or keep some research and support your offense with nukes a little later?'. Either way, Panzers can prevent a minor Oops.

For defensive use, this depends entirely on what the opponent has... tech paths and army composition can vary quite wildly at this time for my experience (and I also don't have that many games to draw experience from - my games tend to be over before there's a full-fledged modern war).

We agree at least about the Anti-Tanks then. My line on enemy armoured units is 'not enough to build specialised and slow counters for, but enough to enjoy a bonus against them given to a useful generalist'.

 

[plasmacannon]

Some of these Empires havd great leader traits and/or UBs so, if their UU ends up being a little less spectacular, I think that is a good thing.

Wiliam van Oranje was voted in the Top 3 leaders in the game in our last poll here, with Huayna Capal and one of England's leaders.

Roosevelt is a Great leader, when, you want to beat others to the Great Lighthouse and he has 2 good starting food techs.
His UU and UB may come too late. The UU may not always have a usefulness, but, this is what you get for the Traits you may want.

I may not like France's UU, some don't like its UB, but, I like DeGaulle, for his ability to build Stonehenge and its benefit for his CHA Trait. France is another that has good starting techs.

 

[strangestranger]

IMO, the worst UU is the Navy SEAL.
For such a late UU, it doesn't really have a good advantage compared to the unit it replaces.
Panzer are good if you find yourself backward in tec, they can defeat Modern Armors.
The SEAL bonuses are really weak in comparison... March and +1-2 First Strikes.
While the panzer CAN help you to turn off the tables in a war, the SEAL just doesn't cut it.

 

[vicawoo]

March is pretty amazing for cleaning up collateralled units. With a decent medic, you're at full health by the time you move to the next city, without stopping to heal.