Sergeants: Rhodok vs. Swadian

[Talezteller]

They both have heavy armor, the Rhodoks have better stats but the Swadians have more proficiency.

WHich is best, particularly in the context of a castle garrison?

[matteo]

rhodok is the best :p

[kaiyl_kariashi]

Rhodok. Their gear is MUCH better...especially weapon choices, the proficiency difference is negliable and really only matters for ranged attackers, and even then it's not nearly as important as their gear (rhodok sharpshooters have the highest proficiency of any ranged, though only slightly more then Vaegir Marksmen..but their real strength is that they're ALSO equivilent to a teir 3 infantry when forced into melee range with decent melee weapons and tanky armor).

Miltary Hammers wreck everything due to their ridiculously high damage for a blunt (and while not good vs heavies, the miltary cleavers are still at least competent close-range weapons), while those crappy spear-bill things the swadians have, have the same issues as all polearm type weapons, completely worthless in close range.

That is of course assuming you actually fight the battle. In terms of simulation, you want to pack your castle full of as many tier 0 recruits as possible because the ONLY thing a simulated siege cares about is numbers, the type/quality of troops has no impact if you aren't leading it yourself.

If you assume a castle will come under siege and you plan to fight it yourself, then stick with some Rhodok sergeants as they'll generally do better vs everyone else (especially if you manually select for an all miltary hammer sergeant force (by killing off any cleaver users yourself). Though even cleavers are useful vs sarrind/khergit/vaegir attackers or low to mid-tiers of the other factions.

Swadians are pretty much a 1 trick pony with their heavy cav...everything else is below average to average, which are areas everyone else (except Khergit) have at least 1 specialist and gives them an edge. I'd actually argue the knights make better infantry then the sergeants do, especially in the context of sieges where their crap athletics doesn't hurt them as much as being in the open field and dehorsed does, on the other hand...they're also a lot more expensive, so it's kind of silly to use them in a garrison.

[76561188078797539]

Brodok 4 lyfe.

Kaiyl gave an excellent breakdown of the reasons that I wholeheartedly concur with.

Also, the crossbowmen have lower rate of fire - and that's a GOOD thing in siege battles. It means fewer projectiles wasted on the same opponent, and sustained ranged support through most of the fight. I'd rather have my crossbows regularly taking potshots on the enemies assaulting the choke-point (and disrupting any gain they make in taking a foothold on the wall), than do it the Vaegir Way (tm) - kill a few of the attackers while littering the ground with all the arrows, then sit with thumbs up their... noses.

Also, just.. Brodoks. Power to the Democratic People's Republic of Brodokia... with yours truly as the unanimously elected (what do you mean, electorial fraud? OFF WITH HIS HEAD!) king monarch Vault Overseer Glorious Leader.

I can has nukes, Taleworld?