Most overrated unit

[Ironsword]

Controversial, but I'd say Halberdiers, good, but not that good.

[Drunk-Monk]

Feudal knights, hard to build very easy to kill...

[Kamakazi]

Feudal knights, hard to build very easy to kill...

lol agsin i agree with you monk...we seem to think a lot alike

[seireikhaan]

Gendarmes. The requirements to train them are absolutely insane, even harder to get than Chivalric Knights, and Gendarmes aren't even as good, not even close because they lack a real good charge and have no armor piercing bonus.

[bondovic]

I don't have a clue, since I don't know how people rate the units - but one I don't like given the requirements is Lithuanian cavalry.

[Heidrek]

Chivalric Knights and Gothic Knights. Just plain not worth it. You want your cavalry to break the enemy with their charge, not stand and fight it out and take losses. They're noice to have, but most of the time is just not necessary. you Royal Knights come freely with each new heir and are just as good or better despite their small unit size.

I actually prefer Feudal Knights simply because they are easier to build and pack a similar punch on the charge.

[Martok]

Pikemen. They're of course very good against cavalry and most infantry, but are ridiculously vulnerable to flanking attacks and missile fire. (Naturally, SAP are the exception to this rule, but of course they can only be trained in Switzerland.)

Also, I find that most gunpowder field units (excepting cannons & bombards) are of questionable worth, particularly given their cost and build requirements.

[macsen rufus]

In the vanilla game, then pikemen do seem to be one of the biggest wastes of space/effort. When I want to play with pikes I'll do it properly and fire up PMTW

I also recall being a bit underwhelmed by Gendarmes, the one and only time I've ever tried them. So far I've never had any of the Gothic units - probably finishing the game before finishing the tech requirements, and playing the wrong factions

But I do find that every unit needs to be used in the right way to get the best out of it. Halbs are a good case in point - heavy armour, anti-cav, AP attack, but total scaredy cats And THAT's where your gunpowder units come in - they scare the living daylights out of halberdiers... but what bugs me with gunpowder units is that as soon as you start fielding them the weather turns to complete and it rains for the rest of the campaign

[caravel]

Chivalric Knights and Gothic Knights. Just plain not worth it. You want your cavalry to break the enemy with their charge, not stand and fight it out and take losses. They're noice to have, but most of the time is just not necessary. you Royal Knights come freely with each new heir and are just as good or better despite their small unit size.

Gothic Knights I agree, it takes so long to tech up to them that you've usually finished the campaign before they become available anyway.

On Chivalric Knights though I disagree. Chivalric Knights on the other hand do take quite some teching up but are worth it, have a good charge and more importantly can be dismounted to Chivalric Foot Knights at any time - and when you have CFKs you don't need halbardiers.

I actually prefer Feudal Knights simply because they are easier to build and pack a similar punch on the charge.

Feudal Knights actually take far too much to tech up to. As a turtling player I usually find that when I can finally train feudal knights it's the high era and they're obsolete anyway.

[m52nickerson]

On Chivalric Knights though I disagree. Chivalric Knights on the other hand do take quite some teching up but are worth it, have a good charge and more importantly can be dismounted to Chivalric Foot Knights at any time - and when you have CFKs you don't need halbardiers.

I think Chivalric Knights are over rated. The best use for them is as foot knights. Even then they are only really needed in castle or bridge battles.

Halberdiers work fine in the open field if backed up right. it also helps if they are trained in a province with a cathedral. Plus they are much cheaper.

[Roark]

Lancers are the only cavalry that are actually better than Chivalric Knights... and you guys are saying that they're... overrated?

What more do you want?

You want your cavalry to break the enemy with their charge, not stand and fight it out and take losses.

Chivs have a charge of 8, which is the maximum for cavalry, bro.

[Caliburn]

In my opinion, armour and weapon upgrades break the balance of the game, just as well as valour bonuses from generals... This makes bow units less useful afer the mid-point of Early era. Having removed Armour and Weapon upgrades, archers remain a potent and a useful force. No more +3 armour Peasants or Fanatics with 20 man losses from huge masses of salvos ("then we'll fight in the shade!"). They never lose their usefulness as HA killers anyway, although Arbs usually work much better.

Arbalests, on the other hand, are never useless in my battles. They cause a lot of casualties, outrange almost everything, and force the enemy to make a move unless they want to get shot to death. A few units of arbalests work well even with cheap early units like spearmen and javelins supported with Mounted Sergeants, such stacks are perfect for ambushing and baiting even decent enemy armies.

One thing about the armour upgrades, though. They make Constantinople a much sweeter prize, don't they? +3 defence to Ghazi infantry is already a heart-warming idea...