Heavy infantry

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

Hail

Could someone, please, tell me which is the best heavy infantry in EB. i believe it´s the roman legions after Marian. Thanks

[Zradha Pahlavan]

Not sure, but from my expierience Seleucid Thorakitai are pretty damn tough. It depends on a lot on how you intend to use these infantry.

[Strategos Alexandros]

Legionaries are definitely not the best heavy infantry. What sort of heavy infantry do you want to know about? Line infantry or shock troops?

[tls5669]

The Gaesatae, both gaulish factions get access to this unit, of course their Solduros units are pretty good too.

Cordinau Orca, a lot of factions can recruit this unit form Singidunum.

Elite Thracian infantry and Indian guild warriors, both basically the same unit but with kick ass AP 2 handers.

Dubosaverlacica, and Ordmalica, both recruitable in Ivernis by several factions.

Thorakitai, the games tank, recruitable by AS.

Lusotannan have a couple, the Dosidataskeli, the games other true tank, and the Ambakaro.

Germanic heavy infantry, their stats arent all that impressive, but fully upgraded they can have the highest attack in game.

KH gets the greek heavy hoplite and the Spartan hoplite, very good units in their own right, Spartans are better killers of the two.

And of course, im biased towards Carthage, so I think the best infantry unit is The Sacred Band Infantry.

[Connacht]

According to stats, the best HI in EB should be Cordinau Orca (Scordisci elite infantry), recruitable only in a settlement between Illyria and Dacia (I don't remember the name, sorry). Correct me if I am wrong.

However, many other soldiers are still impressive, like Indian Guild Warriors or the Ambakaros.


but fully upgraded they can have the highest attack in game.

Hmmm, this can be possible only if German heavy infantry can get more attack points than other units by upgrading them, but I never noticed that.
Otherwise even with 3 gold chevrons and the sword upgrade they would surely become tanks, but still inferior to stronger units also with the maximum level of chevrons.

Other units quoted by tls5669 are not labelled as heavy infantry in game but as spearmen, however I agree that many guys like Thorakitai Agematou Basilikou ("Thorakitai and nothing else in the name" are other lighter units) or Dubosaverlacica are probably the best footmen in EB - after the Vasci Shock Troops (https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/lusotannan/lus_dosidataskeli.gif) that should have the best stats in the game for a foot soldier if I am not wrong.
Greek noble hoplites and Spartans are pretty nice friends too.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

Legionaries are definitely not the best heavy infantry. What sort of heavy infantry do you want to know about? Line infantry or shock troops?

Line infantry
But arent´t the legionaries supposed to be the best heavy infantry in the game as they certainly were in real life.

[Hax]

But arent´t the legionaries supposed to be the best heavy infantry in the game as they certainly were in real life.

No, they weren't. There were better soldiers around.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

What about the praetorians. I´ve heard they´re the best line heavy infantry in EB.

[Centurion Crastinus]

The Gaesatae are pretty damn tough. Plus they are naked which would be extra intimidating I think.

[Ludens]

The Cohors Reformata and Imperatoria are arguably the best regular infantry. They are flexible, well-armed and armoured, good morale, good unit size, widely available and not very expensive. But they certainly are not the best infantry of any kind, and they weren't historically. Just because the Romans generally won battles doesn't mean that their standard infantry could defeat the elites of other nations.

In fact, you might even say EB's reformata are too strong. When well trained and well led they were formidable fighters, but historically this did not always happen. During the Roman civil war, army formations were often hastily raised and performed poorly. EB's assumes that all legionaries were well prepared.

As elites go, I find Praetorians somewhat undistinguished. They don't perform that much better ordinary legionaries and they lack the specialization of other nation's elites. However, since the standard post-Marian infantry is so good, you don't need your elites to be exceptionel. For line-infantry, I think you can't beat phalanxes: a line of Argyraspidai or Macedonian reformed Pezhetairoi is almost invincible, provided you guard your flanks and rear. If you want something more flexible and less specialized however, Roman infantry is a good choice.

BTW, the Dubosaverlacica, Ordmalica and Dosidataskeli that tsl5669 mentioned are not recruitable anymore. They can only be seen in custom battles and MP.

[Cullhwch]

Are the Seleucid tanks still recruitable? I didn't see ANY of them when I killed their empire with the Aedui. OTOH, they most certainly used LOTS of Hypaspistai and Peltastai Makedonikoi.

Oh, and any sort of armored longsword infantry is generally VERY powerful. Fighting Hypaspistai and Solduros becomes an absolute nightmare after you remove their less lethal spear attacks. For even more fun you can switch your Gallic faction's (give Gaul a try) Solduros skin with that of the Eleutheroi. It's just too pretty.

This
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/aedui/aedui_solduros.gif

turns into this handsome creature
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/eleutheroi/gaul/rebel_solduros.gif

[tls5669]

The Cohors Reformata and Imperatoria are arguably the best regular infantry. They are flexible, well-armed and armoured, good morale, good unit size, widely available and not very expensive. But they certainly are not the best infantry of any kind, and they weren't historically. Just because the Romans generally won battles doesn't mean that their standard infantry could defeat the elites of other nations.

In fact, you might even say EB's reformata are too strong. When well trained and well led they were formidable fighters, but historically this did not always happen. During the Roman civil war, army formations were often hastily raised and performed poorly. EB's assumes that all legionaries were well prepared.

As elites go, I find Praetorians somewhat undistinguished. They don't perform that much better ordinary legionaries and they lack the specialization of other nation's elites. However, since the standard post-Marian infantry is so good, you don't need your elites to be exceptionel. For line-infantry, I think you can't beat phalanxes: a line of Argyraspidai or Macedonian reformed Pezhetairoi is almost invincible, provided you guard your flanks and rear. If you want something more flexible and less specialized however, Roman infantry is a good choice.

BTW, the Dubosaverlacica, Ordmalica and Dosidataskeli that tsl5669 mentioned are not recruitable anymore. They can only be seen in custom battles and MP.



Hmmm thats funny, I use those units, but I still have 1.0 on my machine. Even with 1.1 they could still be hacked into the game. 1.0 runs great on my machine, its modded heavily, and im too lazy to install 1.1, just for a few more units and tweaks.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

The roman legions are the most organized and disciplined heavy infantry of their time and because of that i think they´re also the best heavy infantry, i know they were not as armoured or as individually skilled as some of the elites.
As for the phalanks, i think there´s one problem with them, i know the EB team can´t do anything to correct this, and it´s their hability to reform after a flank or rear attack. But, perhaps in EB II something can be done since CA removed the lethality witch in turn, i believe, allowed the phanlanks to reform.

[Olaf The Great]

Heavy Line Infantry-Elite African Swordsman
Heavy Elite Infantry-Stat-Wise You'd think Solduros or Cordinau units would win, however the Germanic Variant of these, while having slightly lower defensive stats, have 3 things going for them.
1-Mercenary use-Even in early times you can recruit these as the Sweboz as Mercenaries, then upgrade (And retrain!) in cites.
2-Heavy hitting-Their good lethality swords and spears have an added bonus, they're the only unit(Except Casse?) that can get Tier 3 weapons(gold). Also, along all other Germanic core units, they can get up to 4/5 experience immediately after being trained.
Unfortunately the Bodyguard version cannot get 2 extra attack.
3-Stamina and Morale-Unlike most elites which suffer from low stamina, they have very good stamina and very high morale, I've never seen these guys rout, ever.

Heavy Spearmen-Any of the three Man-tank units, obviously

Shock Infantry-Okay hands down, ANY of the two handed units can chop up a battlefield single handedly. They can slaughter Levies, eviserate cavalry, F-Up other elites, and such.
A few shout-outs...

Kluddae Lugii-If you're sweboz you can get an easy 4/5 chervons out of these guys, and they also have battle standards for morale, pair these with Hearthmen and you're unstoppable. (20 attack straight from trained...oh my. (British are slightly better versions of these guys, but because they're not Sweboz they don't get extra chervons) Both units are Beautiful.
Bastarne and Drapania-Yes these are the lowest tier Two handed swordsmen.The epitome of "Glass cannon" Against infantry heavy army these guys can make up your entire force, they're 40 man units(only 2handers like that) and cheap.

[Cullhwch]

Yeah, I've had a unit of Drapanai take on Hypaspistai and kill 1:1. Uphill. They're nasty.

[chenkai11]

As for the phalanks, i think there´s one problem with them, i know the EB team can´t do anything to correct this, and it´s their hability to reform after a flank or rear attack. But, perhaps in EB II something can be done since CA removed the lethality witch in turn, i believe, allowed the phanlanks to reform.


What do mean by that? Reforming after the phalanx attacked or being attacked?

[Cambyses]

Im not sure whether you mean the best HI that you can recruit in EB or which were actually the best troops in that time frame?

Either way it surely isnt the Roman post Marians on a man vs man basis, as the conditioning and culture of those men just doesnt match up with what some of their rivals could accomplish.

Whether the Romani were the faction able to field the "best army" overall is another question entirely however. And one I wont even attempt to answer :)

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

What do mean by that? Reforming after the phalanx attacked or being attacked?
Being attacked

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

Im not sure whether you mean the best HI that you can recruit in EB or which were actually the best troops in that time frame?

Either way it surely isnt the Roman post Marians on a man vs man basis, as the conditioning and culture of those men just doesnt match up with what some of their rivals could accomplish.

Whether the Romani were the faction able to field the "best army" overall is another question entirely however. And one I wont even attempt to answer :)


Best troops in that time frame.
Post Marians were extremely hardened man that lived to fight. And i think that they were not as well equiped as some elites but nobody was just as disciplined as the legions, therefore, i beleive post Marians were the best army avaibable.

[Cambyses]

I will have to disagree with you there Lucio. Because in several of the cultures the Romans were fighting against the elite troops would have been conditioned almost from birth to be warriors. The most famous example of course being *the myth?* that all Spartan children were left exposed on a mountain on the night of their birth, so only the fittest survived. Then attending the military academy that went on from the day they could walk. They did almost nothing at all for the early part of their life that wasnt preparing them for battle. Ok, so thats maybe an extreme case, but many other cultures also had this kind of attitude that the warrior class/caste existed for that purpose alone. In fact in several places, notably India, there was also a religious aspect. These peoples believed they had no other purpose on earth than to be a warrior.

The Romans overcame this as they did not fight so much as individuals as many (although not all) of their rivals, they fought only as a unit, that was their strength and the discipline of their training, IMO precisely because they were well aware they could not compete 1v1 on skill with other elite warriors. These Roman legionnaires would have grown up on farms or running errands on the streets, very very few of them would have had any military training or experience before they joined the army as an adult. With a few months training I refuse to believe they could then overtake the skills and knowledge that a warrior elite - from say Dacia - had spent his whole life developing.

Having said that experienced Roman troops who had seen and survived battle for 15 years would have been able to stand up to anyone, Im sure.

What the Romans did have in their favour was in almost every case better logistics, a larger standing army and a paranoid drive to annihilate any other "rival". They were also very adaptable. In EB's time frame they frequently lost - often badly - at first against an opponent. But due to their tenaciousness and ability to learn how to deal with every circumstance they ended up on the winning side at the end.

Anyway, sorry for the long post, but I just got carried away. :beam:

[Cbvani]

Its an EB loading screen quote - ten soldiers wisely led will beat a hundred without a head. The Roman Legionnaire was a strong dude, certainly, but his strength was the army and discipline, not his uber-training.

On a personal aside, I think post-marian reinlisted veterans should be slightly tougher than they are, given their experience in battle.

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

I agree with both of you Cambyses and Cbvani. I´m sorry i did not make myself clear, for me the roman legions are the best avaibable not for their individual skills, cause as you said there´re warriors trained from birth, but because of their strict discipline and the fact that there´re also very tough man makes them, from my point of view, the best of the bests. As for the experienced roman soldiers i totally agree with you.
Cbvani, i agree with you about the Evocata.

Thanks everyone for your answers.:2thumbsup:

[Olaf The Great]

In the end I'd "the best" heavy infantry in an "Arena" of sorts would be one of the high-end two-handers

But that's against an infantry heavy army with a lack of missiles, which only the Greeks have.

[Carthaginian General]

In the end I'd "the best" heavy infantry in an "Arena" of sorts would be one of the high-end two-handers

But that's against an infantry heavy army with a lack of missiles, which only the Greeks have.

I've labbed loads of different units, and my conclusion is that Iberian Assault Infantry are the de-facto best Heavy Infantry in the entire game. They are available to Carthage (and no, the Lusotannans don't have them). They've beaten everything I've pitted them against and that includes the Ordmalica (a Lusotannan unit), which have also beaten everything I've pitted them against. In fact, the only units these two lose to are the Tank trio of their fellow Lusotannans and the Arche Seleukeians. The Iberian Assault Infantry managed to kill around 32 of the Lusotannan tanks that sacrificed 1 point of Attack for like 5 points of Defense, putting their stats at around 17 Attack and 38 Defense. Three of these Iberian Assault Infantry units, with silver weapon/shield upgrades and 3 golden chevrons, also managed to defeat twenty units of Spartan Hoplites, with half of their unit strength remaining after the battle (yes, the Spartan hoplites had them completely surrounded before you think I did it piecemeal).

Bottom line is that the Iberian Assault Infantry are batshit insane aliens from Mars. There's nothing they can't handle except units that aren't recruitable in the campaign, and before you mention Late Pahlavan Kataphract Elites, they defeated them as well.

Other very powerful units include: Ordmalica (Lusotanna) and Thracian Elite Infantry. The other elite units are beaten by these two units as far as I know, but they still have their uses, and neither of these two units is particularily durable.

[Cullhwch]

I'm fairly certain that the Iberian Assault Infantry, while good, will get absolutely manhandled by the British, Thracian, and Indian two-handers. It might even have problems against the comparatively lowly Neitos, and certainly won't beat sword-wielding Hypaspistai. Aren't the heavy Iberians nearly identical to the Pedites Extraordinarii?

[Celtic_Punk]

best line infantry- one of the tanks, supported by spartans or classical hoplites(these guys can take on makedonian phalanx's!)

best flexible infantry? hmmmm from what ive had a taste with itd have to be falxmen. the falxmen dont run very easily, and their falx is well.... A FALX >:P superb for hacking limbs and heads off indeed. victim suffers from its deadly AP bonus! OORAH!

then again, in my casse turned Goidlic campaign ive relied on Claddaca alot, and they havent let me down yet. The point is celt heavy infantry is superior to Roman.

The best heavy infantry is too broad a statement to narrow it down to one unit, it must be narrowed down to best heavy infantry for cost effectiveness, or best heavy infantry no budget. not just performance in battle. infact ive found makedonian and epirot elite phalanx's are no match for classical hoplites or spartans.

[Carthaginian General]

I'm fairly certain that the Iberian Assault Infantry, while good, will get absolutely manhandled by the British, Thracian, and Indian two-handers. It might even have problems against the comparatively lowly Neitos, and certainly won't beat sword-wielding Hypaspistai. Aren't the heavy Iberians nearly identical to the Pedites Extraordinarii?

https://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/Salem1234/IberianAssaultInfantry.jpg
https://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/Salem1234/IberianAssaultInfantry2.jpg

Still don't believe me? And well, don't know.

[Cullhwch]

Interesting. Try running the same tests but with yourself in control of the two-handers. Player controlled units have an odd tendency to win. If you're right once again I'll concede the point without hesitation.

[Carthaginian General]

Interesting. Try running the same tests but with yourself in control of the two-handers. Player controlled units have an odd tendency to win. If you're right once again I'll concede the point without hesitation.

Hadn't noticed that before... Anway, they got their asses kicked by the Thracians, but it came down to a difference in a few men. In other words, it's extremely even but the Thracians win out in the end. I'm fairly confident that if neither side had routed, the Thracians would survive with 3-5 men. If you weaken the Thracians with some missiles before combat, they lose to the Assault Infantry, and it shouldn't be hard.

[Celtic_Punk]

just goes to prove my motto, "Missiles win the battle before it is fought"

[Moros]

When you do test always do multiple ones, and switch the unit's side. The AI unit tends to do a bad charge in 1vs1 fights and some other stupid things. Also note that because of lethality it's every attack has a certain chance to be succesfull, but if you're lucky you might have more succesful hits than the AI. Whether or not you have an equal or lesser lethality value.

[The Celtic Viking]

I'd just like to point out that asking for which unit is simply "best" is bullshit. Best for what? Best at what? You have to be very specific and narrow it down to one point before talking about the "best" makes any kind of sense.

[Cbvani]

I'd just like to point out that asking for which unit is simply "best" is bullshit. Best for what? Best at what? You have to be very specific and narrow it down to one point before talking about the "best" makes any kind of sense.

How about this: Average number of survivors after any given battle per mnai of upkeep.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Which, IMO, only goes to show you've missed the gist of his post; for clarification:
what kind of battle?
what situation deployed in?
what abuse taken?

I mean, based on your post one could argue that a Unit of Akontistai retreated at the start of a battle must be the 'best' unit of the game. Why, it's got a full 242 or 100% men left; it costs a meagre 102 Mnai upkeep hence you'd be paying less than 0.5 Mnai for a survivor. That they'll get pretty much wiped out by nearly every other unit in every other type of situation doesn't seem to make a difference then.

[Sorn]

As far as all-around usefulness goes. Early and Late Hastati and Principes are pretty damn good. In conjunction they can do pretty much anything you need Heavy Infantry to do for an exceptionally low upkeep.

[Carthaginian General]

Which, IMO, only goes to show you've missed the gist of his post; for clarification:
what kind of battle?
what situation deployed in?
what abuse taken?

I mean, based on your post one could argue that a Unit of Akontistai retreated at the start of a battle must be the 'best' unit of the game. Why, it's got a full 242 or 100% men left; it costs a meagre 102 Mnai upkeep hence you'd be paying less than 0.5 Mnai for a survivor. That they'll get pretty much wiped out by nearly every other unit in every other type of situation doesn't seem to make a difference then.

I was going to explain, but then I decided not to bother, and here I am again.
There are various meanings of best. If a unit is extremely weak against cavalry but extremely good against infantry, then it'll never be the best unit, whereas a unit that is powerful against infantry and decent against cavalry may very well be the best unit, because it cannot easily be disposed of and will make a good account of itself, no matter what it goes up against, provided no other unit is better in a few/some/several/most/every area than that unit is. If I'd have meant a specific purpose, I'd have said that, for example if I was looking for the ''best'' unit against Hetairoi. Obviously, that question can't really be answered, so you give the generally good units against Hetairoi as recommendations, and then let the other guy decide for himself. Note that this does not mean that units such as Pahlavån-i Grivpånvar are worse than for example Successor Medium Cavalry just because they're more general purpose. You basically have to apply some common sense to smooth out the edges instead of just applying raw logic.

In short, read ''best heavy infantry as ''best general-purpose heavy infantry'', and so on, unless the typer specifies what the unit is supposed to be the best at. Also, for many, best has no absolute meaning and it can simply be read as ''very good'', as I'm sure you know.

[The Celtic Viking]

I was going to explain, but then I decided not to bother, and here I am again.
There are various meanings of best.

Well, of course there are! That's kind of the whole point with my and TA's posts. Unless you clarify what you mean when you say "best", talking about it is completely pointless because one may be the best at killing stuff, but another may be best at cost-effectiveness.


If a unit is extremely weak against cavalry but extremely good against infantry, then it'll never be the best unitWrong. If we're talking about killing cavalry, then it very well may be the best unit.


whereas a unit that is powerful against infantry and decent against cavalry may very well be the best unit, because it cannot easily be disposed of and will make a good account of itself, no matter what it goes up againstI believe it could be the best all-around unit, yes. However, it could not be the best anti-cav unit, nor could it be the best anti-infantry unit. Do you see what I mean? You cannot just pick one and say "oh, this is the best unit in the game" without specifying what it is you mean when you say "best". There is no unit that is best at everything - that is why you need to be very specific when talking about which is "best". This goes for absolutely anything else in the world as well.


provided no other unit is better in a few/some/several/most/every area than that unit is.Not exactly correct here. If there is no unit that is better in just one teeny weeny little thing you can always say that that unit is the best at that one thing.


If I'd have meant a specific purpose, I'd have said that, for example if I was looking for the ''best'' unit against Hetairoi. Obviously, that question can't really be answered, so you give the generally good units against Hetairoi as recommendations, and then let the other guy decide for himself.You seem somewhat confused. We can ask which unit is best at killing hetairoi, and we can answer that question as well. What we do is we make several tests (for each unit), pit them against the hetairoi making sure that every variable is the same (or at least as close to that as we can come) except for each unit being tested, and see which one kills the hetairoi the fastest. It's the specified questions about what is best that works. It's the unspecified ones that are pointless and can't be answered.


Note that this does not mean that units such as Pahlavån-i Grivpånvar are worse than for example Successor Medium Cavalry just because they're more general purpose. You basically have to apply some common sense to smooth out the edges instead of just applying raw logic.Err, what? Did you just say we shouldn't be logical about this? Of course we should! You've just realized how your argument logically leads to absurdities, but instead of discarding it then and there, you simply resort to saying that "we shouldn't use logic". Of course you would propagate that, because not using logic is the only way to accept your claim.


In short, read ''best heavy infantry as ''best general-purpose heavy infantry'', and so on, unless the typer specifies what the unit is supposed to be the best at.So in order for the question to make sense you must first change the question asked? Not only that, but you must change the question so that it is *gasp* specified. But that's what we're saying! You really do confuse me, good sir. :shrug:


Also, for many, best has no absolute meaning and it can simply be read as ''very good'', as I'm sure you know.

Bollocks. "Best" always mean that there is none better. Something can be very good and yet still not the best, thus best != very good.

[gamegeek2]

For best overall infantry, I'm sorry, but the prize must go to Triarii and Thorakitai. The Triarii are 15/27 MONSTERS that my Epeirote Thorakitai (who are every bit as cost efficient, with slightly lesser stats but javelins) have to deal with constantly :wall:

(though not for long :yes:)

For best infantry on stats, the prize goes to the Dosidataskeli. If it's campaign-only, then the Thorakitai Agematos Basilikou (TAB) take top prize.

[Carthaginian General]

Well, of course there are! That's kind of the whole point with my and TA's posts. Unless you clarify what you mean when you say "best", talking about it is completely pointless because one may be the best at killing stuff, but another may be best at cost-effectiveness.

Wrong. If we're talking about killing cavalry, then it very well may be the best unit.

I believe it could be the best all-around unit, yes. However, it could not be the best anti-cav unit, nor could it be the best anti-infantry unit. Do you see what I mean? You cannot just pick one and say "oh, this is the best unit in the game" without specifying what it is you mean when you say "best". There is no unit that is best at everything - that is why you need to be very specific when talking about which is "best". This goes for absolutely anything else in the world as well.

Not exactly correct here. If there is no unit that is better in just one teeny weeny little thing you can always say that that unit is the best at that one thing.

You seem somewhat confused. We can ask which unit is best at killing hetairoi, and we can answer that question as well. What we do is we make several tests (for each unit), pit them against the hetairoi making sure that every variable is the same (or at least as close to that as we can come) except for each unit being tested, and see which one kills the hetairoi the fastest. It's the specified questions about what is best that works. It's the unspecified ones that are pointless and can't be answered.

Err, what? Did you just say we shouldn't be logical about this? Of course we should! You've just realized how your argument logically leads to absurdities, but instead of discarding it then and there, you simply resort to saying that "we shouldn't use logic". Of course you would propagate that, because not using logic is the only way to accept your claim.

So in order for the question to make sense you must first change the question asked? Not only that, but you must change the question so that it is *gasp* specified. But that's what we're saying! You really do confuse me, good sir. :shrug:



Bollocks. "Best" always mean that there is none better. Something can be very good and yet still not the best, thus best != very good.

Yeah, so there we go. The best all-around infantry unit was what the author asked. He didn't specify the question, he just asked what the best all-around infantry unit was (the default assumption you'd be wise to make would be that if there's no specification, it means the author is requesting an all-round sort of thing). Indeed there's no unit that's best at everything at the same time. But there likely are several very good all-round units, and then, each poster recommends what they think is the best unit.

Indeed. So why's that so different for infantry? take a good infantry unit, pit it against another good infantry unit and continue like this until you find the unit that wins. Best also doesn't have to be absolute, like I've said. It can simply mean that it's among the best, ie. very good. You'll have to read posts asking ''what's the best infantry unit?'' like ''what are the infantry units that are most flexible while still dominating their fellow infantry?'' and then, let the author decide. If you wouldn't be so adamant about this then there wouldn't be much of a problem, recommending all-purpose excellent units isn't hard.

Well that's a nice word-bender right there, I said you should smooth out the rough edges of logic with common sense. You don't seem to be able to answer this simple question of what a very good infantry unit is, while I can. I'm not saying I'm better than you or anything, just incase you think so after reading this. After I re-read what I said, and your reply to it, I guess I just won't bother, since you're not even arguing the point (and what you did argue is based on a fallacy anyway).

No, but I guess you just haven't gotten to the point in life that you can tell me whether an old heap of scrap or a brand new car is the better one, since the question isn't specified. And then you resort to your old tried-and-true word-bending tactic. Unless isn't the same as must.

So saying ''this soccer team is one of the best'' is a moronic statement? You can't actually say something like that?

Oh, and I won't reply to your reply because I've frankly had enough of debating different opinions for a lifetime.

[Grriffon]

To me roman legionaires aren't even on the radar of best infantry in EB. Everyone is just so brainwashed by media that they assume roman legos are the be-all end-all of infantry.

Picking a single best for me would be hard however. Top 3 or Top 5 is more doable.

I'm *VERY* fond of the Elite Liby-Phonaecian axemen that Carthage can recruit. Something along the lines of 28-30 defense, and they use AXES. Their lethality is off the charts.

Indian infantry guild warriors are also true badasses. Those AP swords of theirs would cut through a legionaire unit like the proverbial hot knife through butter.

The Arche Seleukia Elite Heavy Spearmen deserve a mention if for no other reason than their amazing defense/armor. These guys are hard as hell to kill, especially without some sort of rear heavy cavalry charge. The downside is they use spears, which have low lethality and -4 ( i think) attack vs. infantry.

These would be my top 3 i think.


The aedui solduros, fanatic infantry, and mercenary thanes also deserve mention. The gaesate have two hitpoints and frighten infantry. The solduros are a tough sword wielding unit, and the mercanry thanes are the only unit (i think) that can get the golden sword upgrade. None of these 3 are "favorites" of mine, but I can't deny their strength.

I do LOVE the elite thracian infantry, but i'm not sure i would really call them a heavy infantry. Their 2 handed AP swords cause 10 kinds of Hell, but their defense isn't on par with the other superstars I'm mentioning.


While the Roman legionaires are reliable, fairly cheap, and widely recruitable, "best" is never a term I would use to describe them. Bland and mediocre fit better in my opinion.

[Cbvani]

I mean, based on your post one could argue that a Unit of Akontistai retreated at the start of a battle must be the 'best' unit of the game. Why, it's got a full 242 or 100% men left; it costs a meagre 102 Mnai upkeep hence you'd be paying less than 0.5 Mnai for a survivor. That they'll get pretty much wiped out by nearly every other unit in every other type of situation doesn't seem to make a difference then.

:balloon2: goes pop.
Yeah, I never considered that.
Damn you, per-mnai idea, you are useless.....

[The Celtic Viking]

Yeah, so there we go. The best all-around infantry unit was what the author asked.

Nope. I recommend you read the question again. He says nothing about all-around, he just says "best".


He didn't specify the question

But that's my point! He didn't specify his question, therefore it is pointless.


he just asked what the best all-around infantry unit was (the default assumption you'd be wise to make would be that if there's no specification, it means the author is requesting an all-round sort of thing).

No, he didn't. He asked which heavy infantry unit is "best", but you cannot answer that question. Best in what way? To make an example, the gaesatae are really good at what they do. However, they are too expensive and vulnerable to missiles to form the bulk of an army. For that, bataroas, a very good and cost effective medium infantry unit, is much better suited. However, a gaesatae unit has better stats than the bataroas, and will defeat them. So... which one is "best"? If you have learned anything, you would know that it is not that simple. The bataroas are better at forming the bulk of an army, and the gaesatae are better in a more specialized, elite role.


Indeed there's no unit that's best at everything at the same time. But there likely are several very good all-round units, and then, each poster recommends what they think is the best unit.

Sigh. There are several very good specialized units also. What you're failing to grasp is that you cannot just pretend that it was a different question that was asked because it suits you better. He did not ask for the best all-around unit. He asked for the best heavy infantry unit. That's not the same thing.


Indeed. So why's that so different for infantry? take a good infantry unit, pit it against another good infantry unit and continue like this until you find the unit that wins. Best also doesn't
have to be absolute, like I've said.

What do you mean by that? Do you mean that one unit may be best at one thing, but not best at something else? That's my point.


It can simply mean that it's among the best, ie. very good.

NO! SOMETHING BEING THE BEST CAN ONLY MEAN THAT THERE IS NONE BETTER! What are you not getting about this? Being the best is not just being "very good". Being "the best" doesn't even mean that it's good! It just means that there is none better.


You'll have to read posts asking ''what's the best infantry unit?'' like ''what are the infantry units that are most flexible while still dominating their fellow infantry?'' and then, let the author decide.

Again, what you're saying here is that you have to pretend that the actual question is not in fact what it is, but something entirely different. Yet you're arguing that the actual question works. That is confirming that the question asked is flawed, but still trying to maintain that it's not. Surely you can see how silly that sounds.


If you wouldn't be so adamant about this then there wouldn't be much of a problem, recommending all-purpose excellent units isn't hard.

For the last time: the question was not "which is the beast all-round heavy infantry unit", it was "which is the best unit". Pretending that it was otherwise is not a good argument!


Well that's a nice word-bender right there, I said you should smooth out the rough edges of logic with common sense.

No, this is what you said: "You basically have to apply some common sense to smooth out the edges instead of just applying raw logic." Emphasis added. Instead of logic. If you cannot see how that's telling us not to use logic, then you should learn what the word "instead" means.


You don't seem to be able to answer this simple question of what a very good infantry unit is, while I can.

You seem hellbent on changing the question. Of course I can give examples of very good infantry units! I cannot say which heavy infantry unit is "best", and neither can you.


I'm not saying I'm better than you or anything, just incase you think so after reading this. After I re-read what I said, and your reply to it, I guess I just won't bother, since you're not even arguing the point (and what you did argue is based on a fallacy anyway).

LOL! You're accusing me of committing a fallacy! But a fallacy is nothing but faulty logic, which you told us not to use! How ironic!

In any case, it is up to you to show me where I committed a fallacy, and how it is one. Just claiming that my argument is based on a fallacy is not enough.


No, but I guess you just haven't gotten to the point in life that you can tell me whether an old heap of scrap or a brand new car is the better one, since the question isn't specified. And then you resort to your old tried-and-true word-bending tactic. Unless isn't the same as must.

*Yawn* Ad hominem does not work on me, buddy. Try again.


So saying ''this soccer team is one of the best'' is a moronic statement? You can't actually say something like that?

Putting words into my mouth is not a good tactic either. I haven't said something is moronic, I've said something is pointless.

Your example is flawed anyway. A more correct one would be "this football team is the best", because the question here is which heavy infantry unit is the best, not which one is "one of the best". That statement is empty.


Oh, and I won't reply to your reply because I've frankly had enough of debating different opinions for a lifetime.

Then why did you start the debate in the first place? Oh, and it does sound somewhat closed minded as well.

[Carthaginian General]

Then why did you start the debate in the first place? Oh, and it does sound somewhat closed minded as well.

I didn't really intend for it to be a debate, that's why. I can assure you I'm not close minded, but I've got into the habit of avoiding passionate debates that won't ever end. I partly agree with you, but at the same time I don't. You've got a point in that he didn't specify the question, but that doesn't make it impossible to salvage an answer/opinion (otherwise, no one would have replied).

Yes I'm sorry, I got fallacy mixed up with misinformation, invalid argument or whatever you wanna call it.

[gamegeek2]

:focus:

[Lucio Domicio Aureliano]

To me roman legionaires aren't even on the radar of best infantry in EB. Everyone is just so brainwashed by media that they assume roman legos are the be-all end-all of infantry.

While the Roman legionaires are reliable, fairly cheap, and widely recruitable, "best" is never a term I would use to describe them. Bland and mediocre fit better in my opinion.

I think you´re underrating them... EB description on them says they can easily be considered the most organized and disciplined heavy infantry of the world. And this, i believe, can be translate as the best (overall) heavy infantry of the ancient world.
But one thing is for sure, roman legions of the old are not mediocre.

[penguinking]

The Roman legions were generally (but not always) well equipped, disciplined, and organized. Under a good general (such as Caesar) they were very effective. However, they were not really elite soldiers as such. Therefore, the toughest soldier in the game is probably Gaesatae, or perhaps Thorakitai.

[NeoSpartan]

Are the Seleucid tanks still recruitable? I didn't see ANY of them when I killed their empire with the Aedui. OTOH, they most certainly used LOTS of Hypaspistai and Peltastai Makedonikoi.

Oh, and any sort of armored longsword infantry is generally VERY powerful. Fighting Hypaspistai and Solduros becomes an absolute nightmare after you remove their less lethal spear attacks. For even more fun you can switch your Gallic faction's (give Gaul a try) Solduros skin with that of the Eleutheroi. It's just too pretty.

This
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/aedui/aedui_solduros.gif

turns into this handsome creature
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/eleutheroi/gaul/rebel_solduros.gif

Yep the spear really doesn't do them justice. I took it out even back in 8.1x. (I also did the same for similar troops for Cassy (Rylacaware or something like that), the Galatian version, and the Arverni's Arjos.

Oh with regards to the colors. I prefer the Aedui color, the red shield is just awesome.

[Tellos Athenaios]

All Seleukid tanks are still recruitable but the team decided that since they sort of represent an 'evolved' part of the Hypaspistai they shouldn't be available right away. To accomplish this they've been put under the Cataphract Reforms, this should make them appear roughly when they did/could have historically (we hope, can't accomodate the cheating player there).

[Subedei]

Dorkim Afrikanim Aloophim - Heavy African Infantry for Carthago.

Do not know about stats, but me likes them, as they look pretty cool....

[Frostwulf]

In EB it seems to me that the Gaesatae are the best when it comes to pure power and durability. Historically speaking it seems to me that the truly elite(taking picked men from other units to form another unit) Praetorian Guard did very well under the likes of Aurelius,Trajan and a few others. One event I tend to recall was under Aurelius when the Praetorian stormed a Marcomanni compound that the other Roman soldiers were having a problem with.

[Celtic_Punk]

well of course a hand picked unit could do better than regs... In Oman the SAS climbed a sheer rockface with over 40kg of gear AT NIGHT, remained undetected, and proceeded to totally own the rebels ontop. Crack commando teams have been kickin' ass since 1941 in North Africa. And Gods know how long elite handpicked units have in ancient warfare.

Anyone heard of the Devils brigade? these guys generally scared the shit out of the Germans in Italy. They did not even feel safe in their own camps because of these guys. The DB would leave stickers on the backs of dropped jerry's that said "Das Schlimmste ist noch, zu kommen!" which means THE WORST IS YET TO COME! when they didn't kill anyone in the german camp, theyd just leave the sticker on a door, so when Jerry would wake up in the morning and walk outside for his morning wee, he'd see that it was more than friendlies inside the base at night.

but then again, you get us Canadians at Vimy... regs storming what was thought an unassailable position, and utterly destroying the enemy, with (compared to other attempts by brits, aussies, and froggies) negligible casualties (roughly 10 000 if my memory serves me correct don't quote me on that though.. Its still a huge amount of human sacrifice for such a small bit of land... and such a small amount of ground taken. Infact due to the sacrifice at Vimy, the ridge is still canadian owned soil! Which just goes to show... We didn't give a crap about france in ww2, we just wanted vimy back! hehehe)

I do find the regular merc phalanx's you can recruit as the KH are (though not invincible by any means) quite handy, and make a good show of themselves inbattle. always holding, and holding on in dire circumstances, as long as you protect their flanks with classical hoplites (who are to my knowledge invincable :chinese:).

[ziegenpeter]

Kluddae Lugii-If you're sweboz you can get an easy 4/5 chervons out of these guys, and they also have battle standards for morale, pair these with Hearthmen and you're unstoppable. (20 attack straight from trained...oh my. (British are slightly better versions of these guys, but because they're not Sweboz they don't get extra chervons) Both units are Beautiful.

How that? The Sweboz get extra chevrons?

[Strategos Alexandros]

3x3=9 chevrons.

[Gleemonex]

Some slight off-topicness, sorry in advance.


Anyone heard of the Devils brigade? these guys generally scared the shit out of the Germans in Italy.

Have you ever seen the film? Jolly good fun -- especially the Canadian H2H instructor scene in the mess hall ~:joker:


but then again, you get us Canadians at Vimy... regs storming what was thought an unassailable position, and utterly destroying the enemy

As a fellow Canadian, I find that story as inspiring as any. But don't forget that the credit for that victory (beyond the sheer determination of any soldier doing his sworn duty) was spread out among Canadian innovations in training, logistics and tactics (the creeping barrage and trench raiding being the two most prominent examples). By the way, there are many excellent books on the subject, most notably Pierre Berton's Vimy.

In a desparate attempt to bring this post back on topic...

..nope, drawing a blank.


I do find the regular merc phalanx's you can recruit as the KH are (though not invincible by any means) quite handy, and make a good show of themselves inbattle. always holding, and holding on in dire circumstances, as long as you protect their flanks with classical hoplites (who are to my knowledge invincable :chinese:).

Alright, back on topic.

I find any legionary or phalanx, properly supported, makes a fine line troop, so to me "best heavy infantry" means assault units. In smaller battles that I can micromanage (perhaps <8 units per side), I like anything with an axe (or anything Thraikian). In larger battles, I like the sheer mood factor and bad-assedness of the Kluddargos (Casse Sword Masters) for RP value.

And how are classical hoplites invincible Chinese? I always thought they were Dorian :holmes:

-Glee

[Celtic_Punk]

touche my young Padawan! I have not had much experience with assault units... Though axes tickle my fancy. I prefer to put either axes or falxmen behind my hoplites to act as a reserve or flanking force. As soon as they wrap round the sides they chew through pre-engaged enemies like a jigsaw through butter(new phrase FTW) If you want the ultimate stormtroopers, renable the Goidlic shockinfantry on campaign . youll be sayin "GET SOME" in notime with these buggers https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/eleutheroi/british_isles/goidilic_ordmhornaght.gif

Ordmalica (Goidilic Shock Infantry) they will rock yer socks off!

[Carthaginian General]

Yeah man, Ordmalica are totally apeshit...

[ziegenpeter]

3x3=9 chevrons.

And that's not the case for any faction?

[Gleemonex]

I just like anything that reminds me of my precious Ghazi infantry. Mmmmm, ground crusader. Simmer in Naphta throwers for 3-5 minutes, flipping once, and add a pinch of camel spit.

-Glee

[Strategos Alexandros]

And that's not the case for any faction?

Eh? There can be up to 9 chevrons for any unit in any faction in any RTW mod. 3 bronze, 3 silver and 3 gold.

[Grriffon]

I have not had the pleasure of using the Ordmalica yet, but I just now tried reenabling my removed units and am starting a Lusotanna campaign to try both the vasci and the irish. I can't wait!

[Dutchhoplite]

https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/units/eleutheroi/british_isles/goidilic_ordmhornaght.gif



They look rather deadly ~:cool:

[Cullhwch]

Yep, Ordmalica more or less obliterate heavy units like Triarii.

[Cbvani]

Yep, Ordmalica more or less obliterate heavy units like Triarii.

These guys make me want my own hammer.

[Apgad]

I'm a big fan of any 2-handers. British Swords Masters, Rombo Rhomb Thracian Elite Infantry, Indian Infantry Guild and Long Bowmen, even the common Falxman to go with that big Irish fella. Am I missing any?

There's something about the purely offensive nature of it...

[Arutima]

I'm a big fan of any 2-handers. British Swords Masters, Rombo Rhomb Thracian Elite Infantry, Indian Infantry Guild and Long Bowmen, even the common Falxman to go with that big Irish fella. Am I missing any?

There's something about the purely offensive nature of it...


you missed the Lugian Swordsmen, wich are a nice addition, in any sweboz games

[Celtic_Punk]

Im going to do a sweboz campaign... starting tonight! >:D hehe northern europeans kickass!

[Carthaginian General]

Im going to do a sweboz campaign... starting tonight! >:D hehe northern europeans kickass!

Don't forget to put Sweden to good use. We didn't have several centuries of looting, raiding and conquering with nothing you guys could do about us for no reason ;P

[a completely inoffensive name]

Gaesatae. Best Heavy Infantry. Period.

Also, why is Carthaginian General still a junior member with 40+ posts?

[Celtic_Punk]

Don't forget to put Sweden to good use. We didn't have several centuries of looting, raiding and conquering with nothing you guys could do about us for no reason ;P

thats why im starting it!!@!