One point in favour of Seleucid basic elephnats (applies to all elephants, but most likely to be actually useful with the Seleucid ones) that I think might arguably bump them up a touch is the utility value in that you can use them to knock down wooden walls in one turn without having to wait to build a ram, occasionally useful if you're trying to get your Seluicid phalanxes into settlements to get defender's advantage.
Mercenary Barbarian Cav I would rank in mid decent, as they are so readily available from the start of the game, not to mention as Julii it will usually be a bit before you have stables of your own so they can form your early cav core very well.
Funny thing, I am just reading Conn Iggulden's Emperor series where Julius Ceasar employs huge numbers of Gaul cavalry for his Gaul campaign. :) Thanks for the comment.
Camel carapatants and Numidian camels aren’t bad, in fact they can easily route most cavalry units (especially camel cataphracts) Their only real problem is that they can only be recruited and retrained in provinces that have the camel ressource
I found out that parthian horse archers actually have less armor than scythians so they're even less comparable than expected Also I really love long shield cav, to me it's the light cav that feels the most like a heavy cav, really reliable. And gothic cav take two turns to train so I had a hard time justifying going for them instead of noble cav in my germania campaign. Thanks for the vid and the insight !
In my opinion, Cappadocian cav should be ranked higher, at least in high decent. They are only a tier 3 stable, they will beat all the other cavalry in decent tier bar elephants and maybe praetorian cavalry. They might even beat Legionary Cav, whilst having the exact same requirements
Some ranking with whom I can't agree. The basic Scythian horse archer in S tier => You say that the noble Scythians (the lancers) have a problem because they do not have shield so they suffer a lot from arrows. Ok it can make sense but then what will a unit without shield nor even clothes will suffer from arrows? The basic bowman is destroyed by the arrows and when you face harder opponents (as you say) this unit becomes worthless. I understand that at the start of the game, they are great but in the middle and end of the game, no more. Numidian javelins throwers in A => Eastern infantry for me. They are insanly bad. They should be harassement units but they have low range and few ammunitions. They just have a pathetic shield and no armor and a knife for close fights. That means that if they are hit they die. They can run around other units but if the ennemy has some bowmen or even javelins throwers the Numidians will suffer so much. And even if you can escape all the missiles, what will you do. Throw 2-3 volleys. Ok it will create some damages but not that much and then what? You end up with a unit unable to engage in close fight and it becomes worthless. The companions belong in S. How can bowmen on chariots be in S? Again they do not have shield. At range they suffer from arrows and cavalry units can easily hunt them down. And in mêlée, they are destroyed so hard that even barbaric cavalry beats them in close fight. And manage these units is a pain. One unit ok but what will you do with one unit? When you have 4 or 5 of them, they take so much place that the ennemy will catch them. The lack of shield hurts more range units because they are meant to stay in range of other units. A companion unit will be hit by arrows but its goal is to close the gap as quickly as it can so it will suffer less.
Thanks for the comment. Good points. Companions require quite intensive microing with hit and run to perform well, and even then they will suffer quite heavy casualties. Imo Horse Archers, e.g. can use Cantabrian circle to mitigate arrow damage or stay out of if situation so requires. About chariots, they tend to be rather powerful against cavalry :)
I do not get how anyone can rate any javelin unit in this game, mounted or on foot, as anything other than trash tier. They are super weak in melee, they do next to no damage with their throws, and both their range and ammo amount are just utterly pathetic, I see no use for them at all, no situation that would make them better than any real archer or horse archer unit, or even just another melee unit for reserve or flanking.
Thanks for the comment. Agreed regarding Horse Archers. However, their speed can make them rather good in hitting the enemy in the back. And in various tests even Militia Cavalry tends to perform quite a bit better than Greek Cavalry :)
You underestimate camels a lot, you should know that camels are designed to counter cavalry, therefore you cannot compare them against infantry, camels are very good for facing factions that have strong cavalry, they are even good against chariots, but their use is always to support your cavalry army.
I don't know, I feel they even underperform in Cav-Cav battles, but that might be personal impression. Against anything but Heavy cavalry, I think they underperform for their cost in campaign.
Just because their main purpose is to counter cavalry does not mean their performance against infantry is not relevant. Next to no enemies use only cavalry after all, so the total performance does matter a lot when deciding the overall value of a unit.
I have the opposite view for headhunting maidens and scythian nobelwomen (noblewomen are strictly worse than the noblemen and are built in only setlements with the t3 version of the maidens. They are the lackluster unit imho. Headhunting maidens with armor piercing are one of the best melee cav in the game, able to defeat urbans with hammer and hammer flank charges with minimal losses. Scythia also lacks much way to deal with heavy armor and the maidens are the only real answer they have.
Woah, I've played hundreds of hours of rome total war, and I never knew that Carthaginian and Seleucid elephants had different stats.
Yea, the basic ones do. Seleucid version has -4 morale, -2 attack, and -1 charge. :) Thanks for the comment.
Been playing the game for almost 2 decades now and I never noticed either, lol
One point in favour of Seleucid basic elephnats (applies to all elephants, but most likely to be actually useful with the Seleucid ones) that I think might arguably bump them up a touch is the utility value in that you can use them to knock down wooden walls in one turn without having to wait to build a ram, occasionally useful if you're trying to get your Seluicid phalanxes into settlements to get defender's advantage.
Thanks for the comment. A good point :)
Always love these videos!
Thank You! :)
Mercenary Barbarian Cav I would rank in mid decent, as they are so readily available from the start of the game, not to mention as Julii it will usually be a bit before you have stables of your own so they can form your early cav core very well.
Funny thing, I am just reading Conn Iggulden's Emperor series where Julius Ceasar employs huge numbers of Gaul cavalry for his Gaul campaign. :) Thanks for the comment.
The eastern early generals with the javelins have always given me a problem...especially playing as the seleucids...I've lost so many militia hoplites
Thanks for the comment. Well, they are only Militia Hoplites ;D
The game of my childhood.
Indeed a Quality old game ;) Thanks for the comment.
Camel carapatants and Numidian camels aren’t bad, in fact they can easily route most cavalry units (especially camel cataphracts)
Their only real problem is that they can only be recruited and retrained in provinces that have the camel ressource
Agreed on those. Additionally, my main qualm with them is the slowness :) Thanks for the comment.
I found out that parthian horse archers actually have less armor than scythians so they're even less comparable than expected
Also I really love long shield cav, to me it's the light cav that feels the most like a heavy cav, really reliable.
And gothic cav take two turns to train so I had a hard time justifying going for them instead of noble cav in my germania campaign.
Thanks for the vid and the insight !
Thanks for the comment. Ah, I hadn't realized that armor difference on horse archers either :)
Which tier are the Rohirrim?
A good question :D Thanks for the comment.
In my opinion, Cappadocian cav should be ranked higher, at least in high decent. They are only a tier 3 stable, they will beat all the other cavalry in decent tier bar elephants and maybe praetorian cavalry. They might even beat Legionary Cav, whilst having the exact same requirements
Thanks for the comment. Hmm. You may be right there :)
Some ranking with whom I can't agree.
The basic Scythian horse archer in S tier => You say that the noble Scythians (the lancers) have a problem because they do not have shield so they suffer a lot from arrows. Ok it can make sense but then what will a unit without shield nor even clothes will suffer from arrows? The basic bowman is destroyed by the arrows and when you face harder opponents (as you say) this unit becomes worthless. I understand that at the start of the game, they are great but in the middle and end of the game, no more.
Numidian javelins throwers in A => Eastern infantry for me. They are insanly bad. They should be harassement units but they have low range and few ammunitions. They just have a pathetic shield and no armor and a knife for close fights. That means that if they are hit they die. They can run around other units but if the ennemy has some bowmen or even javelins throwers the Numidians will suffer so much. And even if you can escape all the missiles, what will you do. Throw 2-3 volleys. Ok it will create some damages but not that much and then what? You end up with a unit unable to engage in close fight and it becomes worthless.
The companions belong in S. How can bowmen on chariots be in S? Again they do not have shield. At range they suffer from arrows and cavalry units can easily hunt them down. And in mêlée, they are destroyed so hard that even barbaric cavalry beats them in close fight. And manage these units is a pain. One unit ok but what will you do with one unit? When you have 4 or 5 of them, they take so much place that the ennemy will catch them.
The lack of shield hurts more range units because they are meant to stay in range of other units. A companion unit will be hit by arrows but its goal is to close the gap as quickly as it can so it will suffer less.
Thanks for the comment. Good points. Companions require quite intensive microing with hit and run to perform well, and even then they will suffer quite heavy casualties. Imo Horse Archers, e.g. can use Cantabrian circle to mitigate arrow damage or stay out of if situation so requires. About chariots, they tend to be rather powerful against cavalry :)
I do not get how anyone can rate any javelin unit in this game, mounted or on foot, as anything other than trash tier. They are super weak in melee, they do next to no damage with their throws, and both their range and ammo amount are just utterly pathetic, I see no use for them at all, no situation that would make them better than any real archer or horse archer unit, or even just another melee unit for reserve or flanking.
Thanks for the comment. Agreed regarding Horse Archers. However, their speed can make them rather good in hitting the enemy in the back. And in various tests even Militia Cavalry tends to perform quite a bit better than Greek Cavalry :)
You underestimate camels a lot, you should know that camels are designed to counter cavalry, therefore you cannot compare them against infantry, camels are very good for facing factions that have strong cavalry, they are even good against chariots, but their use is always to support your cavalry army.
I don't know, I feel they even underperform in Cav-Cav battles, but that might be personal impression. Against anything but Heavy cavalry, I think they underperform for their cost in campaign.
Hmm. I might be biased here. My main qualm is the lack of speed :) Thanks for the comment.
Use em as a counter charge for against heavy cav, dont use em for frontliner @@JJ-ce8gz
Just because their main purpose is to counter cavalry does not mean their performance against infantry is not relevant. Next to no enemies use only cavalry after all, so the total performance does matter a lot when deciding the overall value of a unit.
@@Triplebrc but it does quite decent damage against it, the main problem will be horse archer and light cav who can hit and run
I have the opposite view for headhunting maidens and scythian nobelwomen (noblewomen are strictly worse than the noblemen and are built in only setlements with the t3 version of the maidens. They are the lackluster unit imho. Headhunting maidens with armor piercing are one of the best melee cav in the game, able to defeat urbans with hammer and hammer flank charges with minimal losses. Scythia also lacks much way to deal with heavy armor and the maidens are the only real answer they have.
Thanks for the comment. A good point regarding maidens :)