Faster FU infantry with units for every role (halb+champ+woad).
You can go 100% infantry and siege without problems, even in the late game, very noob friendly.
Incas would be close second for me (I’m surprised it’s not on the list), but eagles late game cost too much gold for my tastes.
It’s easy. Only goths and malians can make pure infantry comps. And the goth one is way harder to stop, so they are better.
Ofc there are infantry counter civs like teutons, but as infantry play is rather rare currently this doesn’t makes a good infantry civ.
But I miss poles, actually.
As Napoleon said, “quantity is a quality of its own”. Halbs + huscarls made from barracks + maybe champions if the enemy tries to fight infantry with infantry, should take care of most threats.
Just pray you’re not fighting a civ that would destroy your infantry with a single unit, like the Aztecs or the Byzantines.
Any infantry civ with full upgrades can kill Goths. I’ve killed goths several times now with britons, because britons have fully upgraded infantry + a couple scorpions.
I’d say the best infantry civs are Aztecs because FU champions + Garland Wars and Vikings because of the anti-cav bonus that they get and extra life and also OP unique unit that can’t just shred any infantry besides maybe TK, Samurai and Jaguar. Strangely Vikings are not in this pool. Also if you take in consideration that Vikings have free wheelbarrow and handcart, they can easily beat goths with full infantry comp.
I actually have a video on this topic on my channel, but it’s in portuguese. Anyway here’s the link:
Vikings, Malay, Incas, Bulgarians are missing in the list
only malians and goths?
Aztecs, Vikings, Malay, Sicilians, Bulgarians, Incas, Japanese and even Teutons can go full infantry comps with ease.
With sicilians I somewhat agree, but I don’t like siv better than goth or malians in this regard.
The other civs mentioned lack an infantry unit that can take a lot of archer fire.
Of the choices listed, I went with the Slavs. Their tech tree is very complimentary of their infantry, with an excellent scout line, durable monks, and strong siege. The farming bonus is quite the boost, the free supplies helps with early efforts, and the military building housing bonus offering a handy fringe bonus. This was very hard as I am quite partial to the Japanese and the unlisted Vikings. The Aztecs are also quite dangerous. The unlisted Bulgarians have better Hussar support, but have inferior monks.
Incas have eagles with extra pierce armour.
All eagle warriors in general have good pierce armour and can take archer fire, Mayans with 100 HP from El Dorado and Aztecs with + attack can shread archers.
Anyways there is no point in measuring an Infantry civ based on “pure infantry” combos, because thats totally unrealistic unless you are playing CBA or something like it. The main comp should be infantry, but support units and eco are as important.
imo eagles count as cavalry type units. Fast, high pierce armor and countered by a slower infantry type unit.
Eagles are in no way a cavalry type unit. They are countered by knights and camels. Your comment makes no sense at all. Just because its fast it doest mean its cavalry. I’d suppose you would consider Karambit warriors a cavalry unit as well since they are fast, have some good pierce and are countered by a slower infantry type unit lol. I would consider a cavalry unit a unit that, in the first place, has a horse, a camel or an elephant.
Camels against eagles xD. Nice joke
Maybe it’s not popular to see eagles as cavalry type unit, but they actually play similar. Ant it makes sense cause they replace the cav lines of the other civs, so they must perform this.
And they actually do this quite fine, some even think they are too good as they aren’r as vulnerable to monks as heavy cav.
Actually Eagles have a bonus against cavalry
+2, +3, and +4 but its still not enough to counter any cavalry, just so they can pull up a fight.
It’s not popular to see because they are not. Yes, they serve as some sort of replacement, so those civs have some sort of mobility, but in no regard they are considered cavalry, that’s the point.
How Vikings, Bulgarians, Japanese and Teutons are supposed to counter Archers ?
How Sicilians are supposed to counter Infantry with their own ?
Malays can swarm indeed, using Karambits or post Imp. But in CA, it’s dubious.
Aztecs and Incas count though. Eagles + Superior champs / Kamayuks / add some pikes work.
I’ll quote myself:
Teutons have great siege, bulgarians as well and so on and so on. It’s just not realistic to compare infantry civs based purely on head on infantry and not counting support units and eco. Besides, as I just said, if you put one against each other, there is just no room for goths. Just look at tournments: Vikings = top ban civ, Aztecs = one of the, if not, the most picked civ. They’re all infantry civs.
Sure but the question was about which civ can go pure infantry.
It might be a dumb question though