My top 5 least used units

NukeRaider33 wrote:

you and I are the only ones who even the rocket fighter. I am sure it would have made everyone's list if they remembered.

I have never produced a nuclear aircraft carrier in a competitive 22-player (or smaller) game, simply because the games are usually over by Day 40, and the required research time and slots aren't available until then.

I try to use all the units that seem efficent

1. Rockets- I feel it's a waste of an airfield to build something that does so little. I understand they are cheap, but I'd rather build strategic bombers.

2. Railroad gun- It's way to slow to be considered useful. The only uses I can see for it is island hopping and defending coastlines.

3. Rocket fighter- They are expensive early game and can be avoided by just using artillery when they're around.

4. Militia- I only build about 4 militia units during every game and that's just to recapture territory that has rebelled behind the front.

5. Nuclear battleships- During late game, I usually have plenty of battleships to work with so it seems useless at that point. I understand that they hold more speed and firepower, but they are just an expensive upgrade to the original. Plus, you just can't have battleships without destroyers so the speed boost isn't as good as it is on paper.

1) Armored Cars: They are fast, which is nice for a blitz but tanks can outperform them in every aspect (except speed). Considering most people just spam tanks like there is no tomorrow, "Armored" Cars is kind of meh for me.

2) Militias: Only requires barracks lvl 1 which can be done anywhere and almost instantly but those resources are better distributed to other units I could train. They might serve their purpose on certain maps but as time goes, people just go for tanks and motorized/mechanized inf so... yeah, just no. I believe there are some folks out there love to use them for preventing rebellions or recapturing rebelling areas when the main forces are away somewhere out there.

3) Rocket Fighters: I personally failed to find the use for these unit. Interceptors can do better.

4) Heavy Tanks: They are strong but way too slow for my taste.They could be used offensively and defensively but given their speed, they tend to arrive too late or just simply die before they can even reach their destination. These big girls are good but just not fit my style of murd... I mean conquering others.

5) Tactical Bombers: Hahah, I intend to say "April fools" but... this is not april. Seriously, these girls and other planes requires some active management to make full use of them imo. I'm not as active as I used to in the past so I don't really build them as much as I used to. Still, I love these girls and build them. Still my fav (because they are a beautiful sight) and there are other units that can fill this slot but I think I just start to find use for other units as well and I just want to try some stuffs in my mind.

6) Infantry: lol, jk

I am going to make this list 'backwards' as to not do an instant reveal of my #1(cause who wants that?)

6. aircraft carrier- yeah i know it can hold bombers and interceptors and acts as a mobile airfield, but these guys are expensive and hard to produce. Besides that they do their job fairly well of being a defensive airfield on the move

5. strategical bomber- I never saw the use for these bad boys, but when i did they were mediocre excuses for bombers

4. Motorized infantry- while they do have a small niche for speed units, they make me create level 2 barracks, which are a big no no later on in game when food becomes the lifeblood of a player

3. armored cars- a better edition of the motorized infantry, the armored car is a real speed demon and acts great as a scout

except for the fact it is a waste of production, has horrible stats other than the speed, and can be taken out with ease and does not have that much use later on

2. tank destroyers: just get a heavy tank for petes sake!

1.rocket fighter: only useful for a few days, but expensive to research and a waste of a slot when its stats cannot be upgrated, and even then it is far worse than the cheap interceptor

MontanaBB wrote:

The following are the units that I produce the least:

1. Militia: Not completely useless, but pretty close. A militia regiment is weaker in most respects than a conventional infantry regiment, and it's slower than molasses. It does have a smaller daily upkeep in terms of food and manpower than conventional infantry, but it costs just as much to feed militia as it does commandos! They do have a +75% strength bonus in hills and forests terrain, but this slow-moving defensive unit is more likely to end its existence on the wrong end of an artillery barrage or a tactical bomber airstrike.

2. Heavy tanks: The heavy tank brigade is costly and slow to produce, it's slow-moving, and has the highest daily oil upkeep of any ground unit. It's great on defense, if you have air superiority, but it's bomber bait if you don't. I'm not completely against producing them, but I rarely am stuck in a defensive war against a major opponent ---- the scenario in which I imagine them being most useful. The heavy tank brigade consumes twice as much oil daily as a tactical bomber squadron, and it's far less versatile.

3. Tank destroyers: The tank destroyer brigade is a relatively slow-moving unit, and is far stronger defensively than offensively. In the end game in which oil consumption is usually a major factor, I would rather produce two or three non-oil-consuming anti-tank regiments rather than one oil-consuming tank destroyer brigade. For those reasons, I rarely produce them ---- see my comments above regarding heavy tanks.

4. Cruisers: Among the various naval units, cruiser squadrons are primarily an anti-aircraft niche unit for fleet defense. However, in competition for research time, production time, and resources, it's cheaper and easier to produce two destroyer squadrons instead of one cruiser squadron, especially since enemy submarines are usually a much greater threat than enemy naval bombers. My opinion might change quickly, however, if I were confronted with a major naval war with an opponent who had invested heavily in high-level naval bombers.

5. Strategic bombers: Another niche unit: good for destroying enemy industrial complexes and infrastructure, but mediocre against enemy ground units. In my worldview, I would rather quickly capture your industrial complexes and resource-producing provinces intact, rather than destroying them slowly ---- so I focus on destroying enemy ground units, and that implies a strong tactical air force, rather than a big strategic air force.

What units do you use the least, and why?

The unit in the entire game that i hate the most is the strategic bomber. In general it is meant to destroy infrastructure and ICs so as to stop the production of new enemy units, but then the real game starts after day 30 when countries with excess of 500 vps fight each other. In this situation using a strategic bomber is worthless. I does absolutely nothing. You need to build a level 3 airbase to bpoduce it. It can only harm those enemy building that are close at the border but a player with 500 provinces is likely to have quite a lot depth in his territory. So the entire purpose of this bullshit unit fails here. Further, if i am confident of rapidly grabing territory soon, why the heck would i damage all those buildings close to the frontline that i am anyways going yo capture in a day or two as a result of a brief push of tanks?

Armored cars: These guys are absolutely useless. Hypothetically, their high SBDE means they could be used as meat shields for mech-infantry, but I can't fathom why you'd want your high-value spearheads to be completely vulnerable to tanks or anti-amor units.

Tank Destroyers: They are to expensive to simply be static defenders. They aren't horrible units on paper but they are impractical for executing and defending against the speed-based tactics that dominate the meta.

SP anti-air: They just get chewed up escorting armored spearheads. They seem to be meant for SP artillery tactics. But I have never favored that strategy and so don't build SP anti-air units.

Rocket fighters: I have no idea under what circumstances these things would be practical. Either you build interceptors or your have 8 anti-air units in every major stack.

Commandos: They are to slow for the speed-based meta and can't be produced en masse for giant wave attacks. And they aren't worth getting just as static defenders.

(I used to have strat-bombers on this list unitil I figured out they can be used to extend the effective range of your tac-bombers. Put a stack of them with your stack of tac-bombers and suddenly those tac-bombers can fly with escorts out to their maximum range. I find them very handy for this reason alone.)

Gitargy wrote:

Armored cars: These guys are absolutely useless. Hypothetically, their high SBDE means they could be used as meat shields for mech-infantry, but I can't fathom why you'd want your high-value spearheads to be completely vulnerable to tanks or anti-amor units.

Tank Destroyers: They are to expensive to simply be static defenders. They aren't horrible units on paper but they are impractical for executing and defending against the speed-based tactics that dominate the meta.

SP anti-air: They just get chewed up escorting armored spearheads. They seem to be meant for SP artillery tactics. But I have never favored that strategy and so don't build SP anti-air units.

Rocket fighters: I have no idea under what circumstances these things would be practical. Either you build interceptors or your have 8 anti-air units in every major stack.

Commandos: They are to slow for the speed-based meta and can't be produced en masse for giant wave attacks. And they aren't worth getting just as static defenders.

(I used to have strat-bombers on this list unitil I figured out they can be used to extend the effective range of your tac-bombers. Put a stack of them with your stack of tac-bombers and suddenly those tac-bombers can fly with escorts out to their maximum range. I find them very handy for this reason alone.)

The point of armored cars is their speed. If you can kill the enemy army with something else (like air), they can take the ground faster than anything else.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

The point of armored cars is their speed. If you can kill the enemy army with something else (like air), they can take the ground faster than anything else.

K.Rokossovski wrote:

The point of armored cars is their speed. If you can kill the enemy army with something else (like air), they can take the ground faster than anything else.

L5 Armored car brigade - 75 kmh

L5 Light tank brigade - 63 kmh

L6 Motorized infantry regiment - 69 kmh

L6 Mechanized infantry regiment - 69 kmh

As an alternative to maintaining an entirely separate research line for the ACs, I would strongly prefer to use the more versatile light tanks in the role of fast scout/capture unit. In the late game or longer games, I would strongly prefer mechanized infantry over ACs because they are a superior fighting and occupation unit in all battlefield scenarios, and the mech infantry is superior to light tanks in all scenarios except one in which the LT has only a marginal advantage.

That said, I recognize that mech infantry has substantial additional costs of production and maintenance, and the requirement of another research line often precludes mech infantry's use in shorter games and smaller maps. Armored cars may represent the inexpensive alternative, which can be sacrificed as needed. And if you're in a sacrificial mindset, it's only a short leap to hitting the "forced march" accelerator for 150% of the AC's normal top speed.

I was recently defeated by an enemy that built nothing but tac/int (hundreds) and AC's. And I'm not the easiest conquest. So yeah, I assure you, the method has merit.

Armored cars: 1) Useful for recon when enemy is out of plane range. This is usually when my armies are advancing quickly. So, I don't have airbases close enough to the front yet.

2) After enemy units in a city are destroyed, AC are sometimes the fastest unit in my stack to be able to capture a province. Often a different type of unit is faster. As Roko pointed out, other units can be nearly as fast or even faster depending on the level of the AC.

Commandos: They are good for diversifying stacks. A commando with 10 attack points can keep a province from rebelling. They have 25 hit points versus 15 for infantry. They have less maintenance costs than regular infantry.

Sp AA: 1) Can help against Tac bombers when mixed with AA. 2) Can be useful when attacking within range of enemy air bases.

Like many games it depends on the scenario and what country/region you are playing.

Commandos - if you are playing as Turkey or Caucasus nothing is better for guarding your mountain regions and avenues of approach then these guys. Back them with some arty/AT/AA - great home guards. Fast travel / mountain bonus / Home Defense bonus

I tend to use ACs for quick attacks behind enemy lines, Quick grabs and initial attacks against the enemy. For me I use them to go around enemy stacks. Typically I've set them to forced march also. Even with good players and a little luck I've been able to catch a stack of planes or rockets at an undefended airport before they come on line.

As Montana mentioned the L5 speed of an AC of 75 combined with forced march puts you at 75+37.5=112.5!

While you still get good speed from a LT: 63 + 31.5 = 94.5!, ACs are cheaper to make if your going to abuse them with forced marches and don't actually expect them to live long. Nothing can catch them, so if your online more than your enemy...well...he isn't going to like you much.

While the enemy typically can knock these out quickly with air, its a burden and a distraction from the front line or main objectives. 4-5 of these ACs running around, hitting airports and just grabbing area. Not a bad strategy. The moral effect (real / and actual game moral) can be effective as even as he takes back the areas the moral is in the toilet. Give it a try.

Got to stand up for my little ACs!

I came on here looking for anyone that has effectively used Strategic Bombers. I've never had them used on me and I've never really used them (typically I don't want to bomb what I'm about to take). Anyone have any effective use of them? I guess the only reason I can think of is to put one in a stack with my fighters/bombers to increase their patrol range. But....typically....this can work against you as you have to spread your 25% hit every 15 min across potentially more units (i.e. and therefore have more ground units hitting back). Thoughts?

Adding a strat to a 5/5 air stack can be useful to add to the total hit points, and distracting enemy planes and AA from your valuable targets (tacs and ints). But that's about it. They're usually not worth researching, unless you're ABSOLUTELY sure that you'll never want a navy, in which case you have a lot of extra research capacity.

I think this list is somewhat map dependent as I see some things on peoples list that make sense in certain situations, NAV Bombers for instance are great if you have a large coastal area to defend or your on a Pacific 50 map. My list:

1. Rocket fighters - I have never researched nor used one. Not sure I have ever seen one in play either.

2. Militia - I use AA guns for quick province defense and anti rebellion instead.

3. Nuclear Bomber - I f I go nuclear I use the rockets as they can't get shot down.

4. Nuclear Carriers - I built some in a friendly supply drop game, but otherwise never have. Carriers are useful if you need to island hop across the Pacific, and on those maps I will build what I need to island hop my planes using regular carriers to cover the long gaps.

5. Situational: Rarely do I build Battleships, SAC Bombers, Heavy Tanks, Motorized Inf, Mech Inf or Tank Destroyers, but I like all 6. They each have a useful role but are map and/or situation dependent. Of these 6 Tank Destroyers are probably the most loved but most useless. As @K.Rokossovski said they are just to slow.

jamidan333 wrote:

I tend to use ACs for quick attacks behind enemy lines, Quick grabs and initial attacks against the enemy. For me I use them to go around enemy stacks. Typically I've set them to forced march also. Even with good players and a little luck I've been able to catch a stack of planes or rockets at an undefended airport before they come on line.

As Montana mentioned the L5 speed of an AC of 75 combined with forced march puts you at 75+37.5=112.5!

While you still get good speed from a LT: 63 + 31.5 = 94.5!, ACs are cheaper to make if your going to abuse them with forced marches and don't actually expect them to live long. Nothing can catch them, so if your online more than your enemy...well...he isn't going to like you much.

While the enemy typically can knock these out quickly with air, its a burden and a distraction from the front line or main objectives. 4-5 of these ACs running around, hitting airports and just grabbing area. Not a bad strategy. The moral effect (real / and actual game moral) can be effective as even as he takes back the areas the moral is in the toilet. Give it a try.

Got to stand up for my little ACs!

I came on here looking for anyone that has effectively used Strategic Bombers. I've never had them used on me and I've never really used them (typically I don't want to bomb what I'm about to take). Anyone have any effective use of them? I guess the only reason I can think of is to put one in a stack with my fighters/bombers to increase their patrol range. But....typically....this can work against you as you have to spread your 25% hit every 15 min across potentially more units (i.e. and therefore have more ground units hitting back). Thoughts?

If you can breakthrough and the provinces are undefended that can work quite well. If your enemy is the one that breaks through, you may have a problem depending on what your enemy is using and whether you have defensing units and what type.

Recon: I have used ACs to recon what is ahead especially if I'm expanding much quicker than I can build air bases or the enemy didn't have air bases. If the province is undefended, I send the fastest unit in the area, which might be an AC, to capture the province.

Forcemarched ACs are vulnerable to AT, infantry or tank defenders. If you have clear superiority, that is fine. If not, not so much.

Airplanes: I've also caught some planes in provinces with no ground units defending. Players should usually guard their airplanes with at least a ground unit(s) so the planes will defend if the base is attacked. Players tend to overestimate how long it will take an enemy to reach their air bases.

Research: It depends on what level you research you ACs to. If you don't take time to research higher level ACs, other units can be faster or as fast. If you take time to research higher levels, you aren't researching something else. Researching higher level ACs makes more sense in longer games.

Can't catch forcemarched AC;

1) If the enemy has a defending ground unit, he doesn't need to catch an autopiloted forcemarched AC.

A forcemarched AC is more likely to lose to a defending AC, especially a high condition defending AC. Even worse against defending tanks.

if the forcemarched AC is heading toward an enemy AC and you aren't watching, the enemy could send an AC or other fast unit toward your AC and engage before you notice.

2) Lone ACs are vulnerable to tac bombers. They are bomber bait if they come into tac bomber range.

If you have superior forces, almost any strategy can work. If your enemy and you are nearly equal, you need to adjust to what your opponent has and viceversa.

strategic Bombers:

I have ocassionally build strategic bombers. They are more useful in long games.

1) They can be used to diversify stacks and absorb damage.

2) They are also useful for long range recon

3) They can sometimes be useful for degrading enemy fortifications and province morale.

One of the rare case of Strategic Bomber used in this role I have seen is my Ally in the Worldmap who started in South Africa and who owned the South Eastern half of Africa, while I had the North Western half as Libya. He was at war with Madagascar, a much weaker player but with a top-tech and more powerful fleet and who was doing night-landing on his shores. S-A army could not defend all his shores since Syria (who owned all the Arabic peninsula + Turkey) was accumulating troops on the border and S-A suspicious against his "ally" => myself. Madagascar had an high-tech fleet (including cruisers) while he did not, and was spamming subs + doing raids with LT and AC. South-Africa finally built a fleet of strat bombers and annihilated all of Madagascar IC and kept it down. Sure, Madagascar kept its fleet, but no way to produce troops for its raids, and no way produce interceptors either.

That was situational, but beautiful.

I like it! Great situation where you can't really invade the enemy but you have air superiority. Better and more powerful than spies to reduce his infrastructure assuming you have air superiority. I can see that working for/against the UK, Japan and Pacific Islands. Can't wait to give it a try.

1) Heavy Tanks-A light tank is my best friend, and I only use medium tanks against a tank army. I rarely produce heavy tanks because they are slow and expensive, where light tanks can easily be mass produced.

2) Nuclear Carriers-I've only ever produced one, and I hardly ever used it. It's oil guzzling and I prefer to research aircraft carriers and build a few, rather than using the Nuclear Carrier.

3)Rocket Fighters-I've never produced them and only researched them once, because I prefer to mass produce interceptors.

4)SP Anti Air-Useless, Anti-Air is mainly defensive, and fast enough for me on its own.

5)Railroad Gun-Too slow. It is vulnerable to Air and must be defended by ground troops.