Do you go all in on Spearmen or do you wait for Men at Arms or do you do 50/50?
I preferibly use cavalry and ranged units, before using melee infantry, except if I use a infantry civ.
Melee Infantry is very weak this patch.
When i Learned about counter-units, and Spying the enemy army, i stopped to make armies by anticipation. First, i watch the enemy composition and latter, i make anoter composition that counter that.
The only case i would have and army of 50/50 would be playing as HRE if the enemy has a composition of “only cavalry” and nothing more. Another one, i would make another composition i suppose.
It depends. There is not an only answer for that.
MAA are good if your enemy has a lot of archers or if you need to tank arrows from TCs or Towers. They are specially good for english in feudal because they need only 15s to be trained, while HRE’s MAA take 30s. So you can’t all in with 1-2 barracks with HRE’s MAA, but you can with english. Feudal MAA’s have many counters like Knights, Royal Knights, Keshiks, Ayyubids camels, Camel Archers, musofadi warriors, etc, so you need to know when it is a good idea to all in with MAA.
Spearman are good if your enemy has cavalry and spearman and if you want to quickly take out a tower or a lonely TC. They need only 15s to be trained and they are cheap. Civs like HRE or Abassid have good spearmans. French’s spearman will gain +1 damage for free when you build the blacksmith, but they are weak against archers.
In conclusion, there is not answer for your question. You need to know when you have to go Spearman or MAA. Both can be useful or useless depending on the situation.
It totally depends.
Pretty much the only purpose of spearmen is to counter cavalry.
So if the opponent has cavalry, or will soon in order to counter something else I’m making, I will likely make them. Otherwise I probably won’t make any.