Printable View
OK this two units you can get as russia...only problem is the arer mostly the same with minute differences in shield i think, attack is the same...recrutment cost is pretty much the same think a little difference of 20 30 florins....
So is it a choice of fashion?? Choose the most hardcore looking axe wielding vodka drinking, son of the Volga??? i can't seem to decide which are better...
They're identical as far as I can see except in the way they look. It's a bit odd and a bit sad - a missed opportunity perhaps to add a bit of variety to the Russians' heavy infantry.
There are other factions where there are pairs of identical units with different names. The French have Noble Knights and Chivalric Knights, the English have Spear Militia and Levy Spearmen, etc.
It really boils down to availability. Once you get a fortress you get a small recruitment pool of Dimounted Boyar Sons, and it's not until you improve your barracks that you get the other unit and can then spam heavy infantry.
A bit off topic, but here it goes.
This is what I've been wondering for a long time. Do people generally prefer typical axemen (i.e. Russian ones, maybe Venetian Heavy Infantry...) over their more Knightly counterparts without armour piercing capabilities? I find axemen ultimately more interesting and all-round useful, even if they maybe can't take charges quite as well as foot knights (not sure, as my foot knights aren't on the receiving end usually).
When playing as Russia, I personally like to use an axe line supported with a lot of missile troops. I usually don't use lots of heavy infantry with other factions, they usually just strike key points or function as reinforcements while cavalry and missiles rake in the kills.
Early on it's mostly 1/2-2/3 -strength horse archer stacks, which never lose their usefulness anyway.
I've often wondered the same. I mean it's a bit of a no-brainer: why bother with swords when there are axes, maces and hammers that halve the value of armour? Venetian Heavies rock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliburn
They do have the exact same stats, even morale and cost. That is just sad.:shame:
Dismounted English Knights are absolutely pure class. Undoubtly one of the best infantry in the game.Quote:
I've often wondered the same. I mean it's a bit of a no-brainer: why bother with swords when there are axes, maces and hammers that halve the value of armour? Venetian Heavies rock.
I think the point is to draw your infantry from two pools, rather than one. Theoretically that doubles your recruitment pool and regeneration if you develope both lines. Same with French Cav.
My favourite faction for infantry is
Scotland
because you can recruit highland nobles who are only 90 florins more than the shield and AXE regular highlanders and they will quickly give you Swordsmith Guild.
Especially i've noticed that Highlander (axe / buckler shield) can stand their ground against DFK even, and when I play as Scotland i end up with many many highlander and highland noble units that i retrain and keep at Silver Chevrons sometimes up to Gold.
Such has also been my experience with the Scottish infantry. They remain effective even into the Timurid invasion period. Once the highland noble swords get to silver chevrons with weapon and armor upgrade they are extremely effective and even more importantly - frugal.
Boyar sons have free upkeep while dzurinja has not. So if you wish to strenghten yur defences then boyar sons all the way. For an offensive army it is the same, but with the amazing variety of shooters and cavs available for the russians you dont need axemen in an open battle. I take two of them though for each army for sieges.
Free upkeep didn't even notice that thx for the info:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheetah