Are swordsmen useless?

[Enigma_Nova]

If Enemy has Mass Axes
Then Defend with Archers, attack with Horse Archers
If Enemy has Mass Archers
Then Attack with Mass Swords
If Enemy has Mass Horse Archers
Then Defend and Attack with Spears
If Enemy has Mass Spears
Then Defend and Attack with Axes

If the enemy has some Spears, some Axes and some Horse Archers attacking and some Archers, Spears and Axes defending
Then attack with Axes to bring down enemy axes, and Sword down the rest on offense, while keeping roaming Spears and Horse Archers on defense with some Axes and Spears as backup in your bases

Axespam fails to Horse Archers on defense, and also fails to Horse Archers on offense. If the enemy adds in some spearmen, you'll need to either Axespam the city (if high on spears), Horsespam the city (if low on spears) or wait until Crossbows.

[Grumbold]

I don't build swordsmen usually since they are too situational. Archers are a good general purpose defensive unit, axemen are a good general purpose offensive unit. Swordsmen are useful for attacking archers but poor against axemen. If a city is defended by both, they're stalemated until something removes the axemen, which normally means killing the archers first, leaving the swordmen with nothing to do.

Most units have a good reason to be built in Civ but I think swordsmen are the exception.

[Last Conformist]

The AI doesn't seem to like defending with axes, so swords are good in SP. Can't speak about MP, really.


What I don't get is the logic to axemen. I'd rather expected swords to be the anti-melee unit, and as someone mentioned, axemen have no obvious counter.

Not that the city attack bonus on swordsmen has any obvious rationale either.

[Yaga]

You know what this discussing really needs is someone with too much time on their hands doing some World Builder tests.

[Bhruic]

The problem really seems to be that you can't make an anti-axeman unit. As the axeman is a melee unit, anything good against it is going to be good against spears and swords as well. So if you gave bows a bonus vs axemen they'd be good against swords too, making it harder for swords to take cities. If you gave horses a bonus vs axemen they'd be good against spears too, making it harder for spears to defend against them. Either way, you ruin another unit to fix the axeman problem.

Bh

[Common Sensei]

Originally posted by Possibility
I would think a +20% attack bonus against cities instead of 10% would help the swordsman, that would rase their attack to ~ 7.2 instead of 6.6. And probably make them a little more worthwhile to make.

Possibility

The only reason I think they went with 10% instead of 20% is that with just Barracks, an Agressive civ can buy City Raider I right off the bat, and is one fight away from City Raider II.

As is, an Aggressive civ that buys City Raider I right off produces Swordsmen that attack cities at 7.8 strength. With 20% base, that becomes 8.4 strength.

We're looking at a 0.6 strength difference per 10%. I agree they should be 20% at attacking cities, myself.

[Mujadaddy]

Originally posted by Yaga
You know what this discussing really needs is someone with too much time on their hands doing some World Builder tests.

Quite unnecessary, I assure you..

(CommonSensei) The only reason I think they went with 10% instead of 20% is that with just Barracks, an Agressive civ can buy City Raider I right off the bat, and is one fight away from City Raider II.

Anybody can do that with barracks, not just aggressive civs... Swordsmen default promotions are City Raider I, Combat I, and ummm... the forest defense I think..

As is, an Aggressive civ that buys City Raider I right off produces Swordsmen that attack cities at 7.8 strength. With 20% base, that becomes 8.4 strength.

We're looking at a 0.6 strength difference per 10%. I agree they should be 20% at attacking cities, myself.

NO NO NO NO! City Raider does NOT increase the strength of the Swordsman! It REDUCES the City Defense bonuses, whether walls, culture, or "City Defense" bonuses. The math is better for the attacker that way----but don't think that you're getting a strength bonus; you're reducing the enemy's bonus. Not the same thing (but better for the attacker)...

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Bhruic
The problem really seems to be that you can't make an anti-axeman unit.

A Maceman

[Possibility]

A maceman? Hmm, lets see, the axemenn tech can be the very first tech you research in the whole game, where as the tech for macemen come almost 1/3 of the way through the game. Its not a very viable counter.

And horse archers arent counters since they are more costly then axemen (as someone already pointed out).

Possibility

[Enigma_Nova]

No, the counter to Axemen is Crossbows, but your enemy will probably have macemen by then.

[Bhruic]

The point is that you can't make a unit to specifically counter Axemen. You can only make a unit that counters melee units. Such a counter means it will apply to Spearmen and Swordsmen, which wrecks the balance they've achieved now. It's unfortunate that they don't have another 'class' that axemen could fit into.

Bh

[MasterDave]

I have won most of the non-ladder games I have been in, and finished in second out of six in the one ladder game that played to completion ( I don't really like the ladder rules that much as it emphasis turtling and maximizing score in a limited time frame, and not really building an empire,conquest, or any other long-term strategy other than maximizing one's score).

In multiplayer lots of people defend with archers. In those instances, when I attack early I will make a stack of axes and swords in a ratio of 3:2 or 2:1 typically. If they are defending with axemen, then swordsmen are not as effective.

Swords also work well vs. cavalry units, where the extra attack factor makes them better at attacking or defending vs. horses.

I think that swordsmen should cost the same as axemen. Swordsmen are defnitely NOT useless, but Axemen are generally more useful in more situations and should not also be cheaper.

[Krill]

The counter to the axeman is the chariot, or better yet, the Horsearcher...Personally, I upgrade the chariots with flanking and use them as artillery

[Enigma_Nova]

People have already stated that a Spearmen can stack with an Axeman and your only effective counter to this is a spam of Axemen (unless the amount of spearmen is so low you could overrun them with Horse archers).

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Bhruic
The point is that you can't make a unit to specifically counter Axemen.

Why is that a problem? So the Axeman is a good, well-rounded unit. Then what?