How do I know if a unit is better than another?

Hey guys, the thread title says it all, so I wanna know what are the deciding factors which make a unit stronger than another?
Are the stats in the game enough to compare or should I use the unit compare system instead?
How important is the number of soldiers of a unit?
And what is important in what situation?(siege, open battle, defending, attacking etc.)

So what do you think are the deciding factors?

In the moment I play a campaign as Saba, so why not show me an example with my 3 basic light infrantry troops that I can recruit, nubian spearmen, ethiopian light spearmen and native hellenic spearmen. I think the Ethopians are the best, because of their better defense skill. Between the other two I dont really have a clue who I think is better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexokrat

Hey guys, the thread title says it all, so I wanna know what are the deciding factors which make a unit stronger than another?
Are the stats in the game enough to compare or should I use the unit compare system instead?
How important is the number of soldiers of a unit?
And what is important in what situation?(siege, open battle, defending, attacking etc.)

---

You can look up the complete stats in the export_descr_unit file, or in the units documentation (maybe somebody else can provide the link).

Quote:

---

In the moment I play a campaign as Saba, so why not show me an example with my 3 basic light infrantry troops that I can recruit, nubian spearmen, ethiopian light spearmen and native hellenic spearmen. I think the Ethopians are the best, because of their better defense skill. Between the other two I dont really have a clue who I think is better.

---

Of these three, Ethiopians are the best by far - they actually have some rudimentary armour, including metal helmets. Plus better morale and discipline than the others.
Nubians are decent in melee (compared to other light units), but utterly pathetic against missiles. Still, they can be put to good use against non-missile cavalry, as flankers and even as temporary line holders.
Pandas are more of a mobile annoyance than an actual unit. Think of them as zerglings. Very numerous and with slightly better protection than Nubians, but less fierce. They can be used to intercept cavalry units or to chase away skirmishers. In fact, for a number of roles, as they are surprisingly versatile. Still the weakest of the three, in an overall comparison.

My advice - use the Ethiopians wherever you can - or the Sabaean levies, who are about the same.
When moving further towards Egypt, it might be necessary to bolster their ranks with Nubians. The latter also make good garrison troops (a duty for which the Ethiopian Spearmen are too expensive, unless your city lies in the war zone).
Towards the rest of Asia, you may be forced to rely on Pandas. As long as you remember to always back them up with other troops, they'll do fine (unless pinned against some crazy elite force).


BTW, it's surprising how all German players are Saba fans.

Hellenic Native Spearmen = Pandas = Pansies! Dangerous only in overwheming numbers....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexokrat

So what do you think are the deciding factors?

In the moment I play a campaign as Saba, so why not show me an example with my 3 basic light infrantry troops that I can recruit, nubian spearmen, ethiopian light spearmen and native hellenic spearmen. I think the Ethopians are the best, because of their better defense skill. Between the other two I dont really have a clue who I think is better.

---

Which stats are most important really depends on what you want to use the unit for. The online unit guide here gives you more information than the in game unit descriptions do. In fact, two of the most important stats, lethality and morale, are not in game unit descriptions. Morale is probably one of the most important stats all around, as it tells you how long the unit is going to be able hold against the enemy before routing, and whether or not it will rout immediately after getting flanked or may be able to hold out for a while even though they are completely surrounded. Generally, in EB, I view a morale of 11 as "average." Anything below that is relatively poor morale (although they may still hold well if used correctly), and units with 11 morale will hold very well if not too much flanking/rear pressure is put on them. I view a morale of 13 as "semi-elite/professional," although of course many non-professional, non-elite units have morale this high, but it is definitely above average morale and these units will hold well even under pressure. Finally, I view a morale of 15 or higher as "elite." There are non-elite units that have morale this high, but most elite units have morale in the 15-18 range, and units in this morale range are difficult to break. I guess the terms "high" and "very high" might be better than "semi-elite" and "elite." You also must consider whether a unit is "trained" or not, and whether is has high "discipline" or not when considering morale. Units that are "trained" or "highly trained" and/or are "disciplined" or "highly disciplined" will lose morale at a slower rate. Units that are "untrained" or "impetuous" will lose morale at a faster rate. Some high morale "barbarian" units break faster than would be expected because they are "impetuous." I believe the "impetuous" trait also means that they may charge without orders.

Lethality is also very important. This determines what percentage of successful hits the unit makes against an enemy result in kills. Units with a low attack can actually be very deadly if they have a high lethality, because even though they score less successful hits, those hits that are successful are very likely to be kills.

If you want to use a unit offensively, as a flanker/assault unit, the most important stats are generally charge, attack, lethality, and whether the weapon is armor piercing or not. Drapanai, for instance, have terrible defense and basically no armor, but they are great flanking troops (if you keep them away from missiles) due to these previously listed traits.

If you want to defend/hold a line with a unit, defense, armor, shield value, and morale become more important. Additionally, the tightness of the unit formation is especially important for defending.

With missile troops you run into a whole new line of stats, like range and amount of ammunition, that must be considered. For cavalry, it really depends on the type of cavalry, speed and range may be most important for light skirmisher cavalry, while charge is most important for lancers. Really, it's difficult to say what makes a unit good because it really depends on what you want to use that unit for. I would say that overall, morale is one of the most important stats in EB though, simply because the slow kill rate in EB means that battles generally depend on breaking the morale of the enemy while maintaining the morale of your own troops.

As for Saba, the Ethiopians are the best of the light spear troops you listed, but once you can get them, use Sabaen Levy Spearmen instead. They aren't much better in the defense department, but they have 13 morale, which is quite good.

If you like to be creative with tactics, speed is one of the most importants things. Alas it's the only stat that is not included in the unit guide. So you have to get the taste of each unit to find those that suit you the best. One very nice aspect of EB.

Ethiopian Swordsmen, on the other hand, are quite worthless. Stick with your spearmen.

If you really need light infantry for your army, don't bother with Pandas. Arabian skirmishers are will surprise you with their effectiveness. Skirmishers in general can, in a pinch, hold a line quite well, with ranged capabilities to boot. Against cavalry, they will shatter like porcelain, however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

Ethiopian Swordsmen, on the other hand, are quite worthless. Stick with your spearmen.

If you really need light infantry for your army, don't bother with Pandas. Arabian skirmishers are will surprise you with their effectiveness. Skirmishers in general can, in a pinch, hold a line quite well, with ranged capabilities to boot. Against cavalry, they will shatter like porcelain, however.

---

I remember the only way Parallel Pain was able to be decisive in battle against our enemies was by holding with Saba's levy spears. The only way he was able to ward off any enemy cav charges was by counter-charging with his own medium Sabaean cavalry. It worked!

well the best way to know is always to try it out on costom battle... still, as it have been said already, Moral will often decide wich is the best... even if you're outnumber 4 or 5 to one. For example, Germanic units have in general very high moral, comparatively to gaul or even cassee (when not using champion) a unit of germanic swordman can easily hold their own against multipkle ennemy, provided that your general don't die. and thus giving you time to rout the numericaly superior ennemy. I'm speaking about germanic situation because I gues that there are similitude between Saba and Sweboz in the fact that the two faction are often outnumbered in battle...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Very Super Market

Ethiopian Swordsmen, on the other hand, are quite worthless. Stick with your spearmen.

If you really need light infantry for your army, don't bother with Pandas. Arabian skirmishers are will surprise you with their effectiveness. Skirmishers in general can, in a pinch, hold a line quite well, with ranged capabilities to boot. Against cavalry, they will shatter like porcelain, however.

---

Arab skirmishers can hold off light cavalry since they have spears. Arab/Germanic/Brythonic/Dacian/Baktrian skirmishers are quite deceptive troops. They can all hold off cavalry at need (although the Dacians are generally the best of these, they have the most trouble against cavalry because they don not have spears or AP weapons).

I don't knopw for the others, but German skirmisher can also hold their own against medium grade infantry. i just love them!