I think that's all of them, except the ballista. Though basic infantry aren't great, either, since a mass of militia the same cost will tend to beat them. My analysis:
There's little reason to recruit skirmishers when you could recruit archers, since archers are much more powerful for the same maintenance cost--easily worth the extra muster cost, if having powerful units is the goal--and most realms spend far more on maintaining units than on mustering them. But skirmishers are at least proportionately about as useful as archers at a lower cost, so it's not bad to have them if the goal is to have the archery trait and a large army rather than to have a more efficient one with more raw power.
Cavalry, meanwhile, are less than half as good as knights for more than half the cost, and if the goal is to have more units with the cavalry trait or a high movement speed, outriders would do that more cheaply, and with half the upkeep cost. Cavalry just seem to be units for someone who can't train knights... or for an army that's sick of losing outriders in every battle due to having no fodder to take hits for them.
Ballistas are pretty inefficient, too, but they're the only siege weapons that can possibly keep up with an army, so that might be useful. Plus it's a cheap way to neutralize enemy siege superiority.
Militia are very good for the cost and very useful for roles where the only statistic that matters is the number of (infantry) units present. They're also great for absorbing hits. Light infantry are... not good for that. Especially since they have the same hit points as militia, and you might as well muster regular infantry instead for the same maintenance cost and mix in militia if you really need numbers.
Guards are the only fast heavy unit, and they're tough. I think they're fine. They're expensive, but it's harder to lose them in battle than almost any other unit, especially if you have knights in your army. Knights are much better if you're not after the heavy trait, though.
In my opinion, it should only be possible to obtain militia from the levy, and militia should be the best unit a levy can provide (Alined could then raise veteran militia, not veteran skirmishers that have the same HP and three times the maintenance cost). If all militia units were levied units, it would be harder to obtain such excellent fodder, especially since only the first levy in a year is militia and the rest are just 'levy'.
Have we ever seen 'levy' units in the game? I don't think I have.
Post by SouthWestern Traders on Apr 16, 2018 20:22:14 GMT
I think Engineers are a better siege unit than Ballista, but I don't have the unit list in front of me. Besides that, most armies will march at a slow pace anyway, so the speed of Ballistas is meaningless. Catapults are the most useless, because Trebuchets are the superior siege weapon (/meme).
Morale being important, there's little reason to ever recruit militia or light infantry, since you could likely recruit something better. Unless you just need raw numbers, in which case recruiting militia is useful.
Engineer is a different trait from Artillery, so even if they're better, you'd want both. Trebuchets are superior to catapults, but they do cost significantly more, they can't move without help, and they don't fit on a single ship, so catapults are much easier to deploy.
I don't think morale is a reason to avoid using militia, since an army with more militia does more damage and takes less damage proportionately, so its morale is less impacted than that of a smaller, more elite army. But I'm not really sure how morale damage works, and if it disregards relative size and strength that'd definitely give high morale units a major edge.
Post by Mercia(andreas) on Apr 16, 2018 21:41:31 GMT
An army have a morale rating equal to the average morale of its troops, and morale damage is taken based on the success of the battle tactics arrayed against it. But unless the enemy have cavalry traits or you need to hold the ground, little damage is taken from your moral breaking.