Peasants -- can they be more than fodder?

[Nelson]

My peasants only get garrison duty. They occasionally get to sortie and fight rebel peasants but never travel with the real armies.

[AntiochusIII]

Ah...peasants. Sure, they have their uses on the battlefield. Fodder, numbers, and all that.

But, unfortunately, that makes the game easier for me; therefore I do not use them.

For those who like to complain about a lack of challenge, why not stop using them?

Strategy map not a challenge? Too bad. Try not use peasants in cities. I don't garrison with peasants--keeping order thus becomes a challenge to me now: the upkeep for other units isn't cheap. Besides, I intend on creating a proud empire and not a one-generation feudal "conquered area" and the police surely needs to be more than just a bunch of thugs (as many lowly cases) and neighbors (ala the American Revolution "patriots") keeping "order" and support for me as the peasants seem to represent. They need to be at least a semi-professional force, or citizen armies (hoplites?).

And in battles, you receive more of a beating by enemy arrows and forces if you can't just pin them down with numbers from your peasant forces.

My only use for them is populating frontier cities since I always like to exterminate, let rebel, exterminate again, wipe out all buildings, and rebuild from the ashen ruins of Rome. By that time the population of those cities reach a record low in decades--a few smaller towns fell back to the 400 limit. Also, it lifts population/squalor pressure off my core cities.

[LordKhaine]

Well minefields weren't used till WW1.. so I don't see any proper use for them . Other than abuse their shockingly cheap costs for keeping order in a city, and to move population between cities.