EMPIRE: Greatswords or Swordsmen?

[Mr. Jackpots]

So Ive been running halberdiers with swordsmen for awhile and I was wondering if doing halberdiers with greatswords instead would be a direct upgrade?

[THEDOSSBOSS]

definitely

[Mr. Jackpots]

Originally posted by THEDOSSBOSS:

definitely

Figured as much, was just worried that greatswords and halbediers having no shields would make them melt.

[Algol]

Swordsmen have such meager stats that they melt to decent archers/artillery even despite having shields. Now, greatswords can chop many things up, go for them.

[Decimus]

I usually use greatswords to flank, swordsman are cheap units (and they will last longer if you make the armour and the general upgrades to them), i can afford to lose some of them, loosing greatswords units costs money and time (2x to make them). Halberdiers are good as it says, against large units. But you have to adapt to the situation, dont go full greatswords and full halberdiers, etc ... seen some go only handgunners, but in hilly areas, they are useless, have a mixed combination of troops, there are different types of enemy combatants... thats the key thats going to secure you victory.

[SleepyNarwhalz]

Greatswords are pretty much a direct upgrade, yeah. As long as they don't have to face concentrated AP missile fire they should be a much better unit.

[PuttBlug]

Originally posted by Alex Jones:

Originally posted by THEDOSSBOSS:

definitely

Figured as much, was just worried that greatswords and halbediers having no shields would make them melt.

The extra 70 armor of the greatswords nulifies the lack of bronze level shields. Plus they have much better stats all around.

[SleepyNarwhalz]

Originally posted by total warrior:

Originally posted by Alex Jones:

Figured as much, was just worried that greatswords and halbediers having no shields would make them melt.

The extra 70 armor of the greatswords nulifies the lack of bronze level shields. Plus they have much better stats all around.

Unless you go up against AP missiles, in which case it doesn't.

[PuttBlug]

Originally posted by SleepyNarwhalz:

Originally posted by total warrior:

The extra 70 armor of the greatswords nulifies the lack of bronze level shields. Plus they have much better stats all around.

Unless you go up against AP missiles, in which case it doesn't.

True, that's why you have to weigh both the negatives and positives of the units and decide which type comes out on top in most situations. Any well rounded army should be supported by cavalry and missile units so enemy gunners shouldn't be a problem.

Swordsmen would do slightly better against gunners but much worse for their actual purpose which is to beat other melee infantry units.

[NO 1H DUEL PLEASE]

especially now that honest steel applies to greatswords. Yeah go for them.

[LuNi]

Greatswords are great so if you can afford them replace the swordsmen with those.

[Empiro]

You should always replace Swordsmen with Greatswords if at all possible. Pretty much better in every way.

However, my army trends more Halberd heavy in my own late games. Greatswords aren't that good compared to lots of other infantry. It's better to have Halberds hold the line and charge from the flanks with cavalry.

[PuttBlug]

Originally posted by Empiro:

You should always replace Swordsmen with Greatswords if at all possible. Pretty much better in every way.

However, my army trends more Halberd heavy in my own late games. Greatswords aren't that good compared to lots of other infantry. It's better to have Halberds hold the line and charge from the flanks with cavalry.

Maybe have at least a couple greatswords to use against high tier infantry during sieges. You never know.

[Hurricane]

So op needs to onow if a t1 unit is better than a t4 unit?

GS are mucher better than SM but you can still use both its best to tie up units with SM and flank with GS cav and archers will rek them they need to get in to melee fast.

This is the same reason high tier cav rek low tier anti cav they are just better units and thats why they cost a hell of a lot more and need loads buildings to create and have higher upkeep.

[Anaztazioch]

On multiplayer - they are
On Capmpaign - not anymore

If you look at bonuses from Honest Steel, MA, MD, damage, armor, HP you will see that:

Swordsmen needs to attack GS 10 times to kill (there is RNG extreme that makes them need 9 or 11)
Now GS needs to hit between 4 and 6 times, and the RNG doesnt need to be extremely lucku/unlucky to make such big differences.

Also, since Fatigue lowers MA, and swordsmen have higher MD - early fatigue works their favour.
Exhaustion which lowers armor works even more against GS.

Now if you look at Halbardiers:
38+8 = 46 MD - Honest steel works for them
25+8 = 33 MA
54 HP and same armor as Swordsman

Halbardiers need to attack GS 6 times (hit 3 times) and RNG extreme can force to attack 7th time
GS needs to attack Halbardier ALSO 6 times to kill him.

Conclusion - you take GS only to tank ranged fire as armor and HP > Shields, but in melee Halbardiers are better than both GS and Swordsman.

GS is only unit that can be beaten by lower tier units of same race. Try and put any infantry vs Har-Ganeth, Swordsmasters of Hoeth, Black Orcs, Hammers...

Only comparable crap unit to GS are Bestigors with their poor 20 MD

[Wyvern]

Originally posted by Anaztazioch:

On multiplayer - they are
On Capmpaign - not anymore

If you look at bonuses from Honest Steel, MA, MD, damage, armor, HP you will see that:

Swordsmen needs to attack GS 10 times to kill (there is RNG extreme that makes them need 9 or 11)
Now GS needs to hit between 4 and 6 times, and the RNG doesnt need to be extremely lucku/unlucky to make such big differences.

Also, since Fatigue lowers MA, and swordsmen have higher MD - early fatigue works their favour.
Exhaustion which lowers armor works even more against GS.

Now if you look at Halbardiers:
38+8 = 46 MD - Honest steel works for them
25+8 = 33 MA
54 HP and same armor as Swordsman

Halbardiers need to attack GS 6 times (hit 3 times) and RNG extreme can force to attack 7th time
GS needs to attack Halbardier ALSO 6 times to kill him.

Conclusion - you take GS only to tank ranged fire as armor and HP > Shields, but in melee Halbardiers are better than both GS and Swordsman.

GS is only unit that can be beaten by lower tier units of same race. Try and put any infantry vs Har-Ganeth, Swordsmasters of Hoeth, Black Orcs, Hammers...

Only comparable crap unit to GS are Bestigors with their poor 20 MD

Holy necro, and it seems you're using some horribly dated numbers to boot(probably from WH1 id guess, but if that was the case honest steel was +12/+12)

Swordsmen have 69 hp, Halberds 73 and Greatswords 76

Between emperors finest and strength of hardship swordsmen gain +13 MD and +8 MA, plus some peripherals that won't really matter in most cases(more LD and magic resist)

With honest steel and taste for battle greatswords get +12 armor and +12% damage stacked on +5 MD, +5 MA and 15% physical resist.

Halberds combine emperors finest and taste for battle for +13 MA, +13 MD, +15% Physical resist.

tech gives +10% WS and +10 armor to the halberds/swords, and +10% WS and +5 armor to greatswords.

Halberds might hold better vs top of the line AP infantry, but will suffer a lot vs non-AP stuff, even with upgrades, and cant hold vs shooting. Then of course is the bonus vs infantry, which takes maxed greatswords to 52 MA vs infantry as opposed to the 45 on halberds. Greatswords also hit a lot harder vs infantry because of their bonuses, hitting with 34 AP WS and ~14 non-AP as opposed to the halberds ~22 and 9. Halberds do have expert charge defense and can get a crazy 69 MD, but given their other limitations, I'm not at all sure they're the better line unit than greatswords.