Muwahid Foot Soldiers: What are your thoughts?

[Quietus]

IMO Muwahid is a liability that's why I rarely train them. If you meet a bunch of Camels in the desert, these guys are toast.

Even if you survive, you have to protect them from fresh camel reinforcements or ghulams. Muwahids also can't soak multiple units and an invitation for trouble. If the AI managed to put two units on these, they break quickly.

With the Saracens, you are practically worry free. Just don't let the AI flank at the back.

In addition, you have to merge and retrain them again and again since they don't have enough soldiers (not very cost effective). Their casualty rate is high, just observe.

[EvilNed]

I don't agree with Quietus. I've used them many times against camels (mostly bedoiun) and they held their own, and more often than not, the camels routed. The Muwahids have a high endurance, it seems, for I could keep them in the battle for a long time, before they became inneffective/tired. I think their casualty rate is decent, not more or less than any other spearman unit.

They are excellent at taking on cavalry and protecting the flanks. I've had no problems fighting more than one unit with them.

[Martok]

They are excellent at taking on cavalry and protecting the flanks. I've had no problems fighting more than one unit with them.

I generally agree with your post EvilNed, but especially that last part. I usually use Saracens to hold the center part of the line, with Muwahids on either flank and often behind the Saracens as well.

I just usually don't use them as the "meat" of my army--not because of any particular inferiority on their part, but because Saracens are simply better-suited to hold the middle of my formations. With their larger numbers and better overall defense, they're ideal for withstanding massed frontal attacks, especially if the enemy employs cavalry to charge the front line.

Muwahids, on the other hand, with their faster foot speed and improved morale, are better used as a sort of "rapid-response" unit. Hence why I find them more useful to protect the flanks, especially against enemy cavalry trying to get around my main position. They're also pretty good at plugging any gaps that form in my line--particularly in offensive battles where I don't have a lot of cavalry, and getting fresh units to quickly reinforce a flagging assault is crucial.

[CherryDanish]

One other thing to remember, while they have an excellent charge value, you will not get the most out of these troops unless you keep them in formation. Let them form up before you march them into the flank. They also have large shields, decent vs archers.

[Kommodus]

I'm glad to have read the comments of several people on this thread, since I've recently started a campaign with Egypt on High/Hard, and have been considering whether or not to include Muwahids in my army.

My only experience with them comes from an earlier Almohad campaign, in which I found them rather unimpressive. Of course, this was because I expected them to act more like traditional spear units, and instead found them getting repeatedly thumped by cavalry in head-on fights. There were simply too few of them, they lost their cohesion too quickly, and they were too vulnerable, both in melee and to arrow fire. Nevertheless, I continued to include them in my armies, mostly because the only other spear unit the Almohads have is the lackluster Nubian spearmen. When playing as the Turks, or presently as the Egyptians, I've stuck to the much more solid Saracens almost exclusively for spear infantry.

Now, I remember reading in the unit guide that Muwahids were fast on their feet, and that this made them better for flanking, particularly against cavalry. This sounds reasonable, and is obviously the way I should have been using them as the Almohands. Nevertheless, I may prefer camels for this task, since they have better bonuses against horsemen. Of course, camels have serious weaknesses as well - they are weak in head-on fights, vulnerable to missiles, and weak in trees. Muwahids share these weaknesses, but camels have them even more so. I suppose it could go either way.

Ultimately, I think that Muwahids are a little too specialized for my taste. They can flank, but not as quickly as cavalry, and cavalry is useful for other tasks as well. They may have great morale, but how useful is that when they simply can't win their assigned fight? They will lose to other spearmen, being outnumbered, and they will get cut up by swordsmen. As I've said before, they can't even take on horsemen from the front effectively, especially if the horsemen are heavily armed and armoured (and not too tired).

Even if Muwahids are great at the one task of flanking cavalry, that's just not enough for me. The Turks and the Egyptians both have excellent cavalry for guarding the flanks of their armies, which are more geared towards mounted units anyway. For both the Turks and the Egyptians, Muwahids are superfluous.