Using militia line in ranked

I try using this line in almost every ranked match. I’m so tired of the forced knights/xbow meta. I use militia line + siege workshop every chance I get. Add in just enough pikes to counter cavalry.

To be quite honest, the militia line is basically worthless and I’d be better off going full pike + siege but I just love using them so I handicap myself. I find it puzzling how the devs are so scared of militia line being playable outside of an early drush or incredibly niche civ matchup and situation, but I don’t mind playing the game on hard mode to use them. Whenever I pull wins with them it feels great. I’ve accepted the devs are satisfied with knight/crossbow being played every game and militia never being used.


Funny thing, you can just ignore slow and expensive militia army and countinue to raid enemy eco with knights or xbows. Buch of scorpions or house walls enough to keep militias our of your town. It must be changed or militias will always be useless. Give them enourmous amonut of bonus damage (+10) againts building so enemy will be sure he will be death as soon as militias reached his base if he does not defend himself.

Yep and you can guarantee your opponent has one or the other, or both. It makes me unbelievably sad when I see a match with Hera, Viper, or any other pro player and they get an infantry civ or face an infantry civ opponent. None of their matches every feature militia line outside of 2-3 of them in a drush early game. It pains me seeing people get Vikings or Japanese and then they just make archers with knights. I’m constantly checking pro players youtube accounts to see if they played or fought an infantry civ recently and it’s always knight/archer line, with monks, skirms, light calv, and spearman line when needed. Never militia line plays.

Truly sad.

1 Like
  1. Militia-line +1 bonus damage vs buildings

  2. Arson -50 food and +1 bonus damage vs buildings

  3. Longsword upgrade increases speed to 0.95


Just make Squires and Arson available in Feudal. That way MAA can run from archers and break through house walls. Problem solved.

1 Like

Nah this wouldn’t fix it. You can really tell how weak militia line is by looking at all the nice civ bonuses they get and then realizing that these civs still don’t play militia line.

For example, your suggestion of Squires + Arson being available in Fuedal age. Celts have a better than squires 15% speed boost in Fuedal age and they get it for free. Still a garbage unit for them. Teutons gain armor per age, still a garbage unit for them. Japanese gain 33% attack speed bonus, still garbage. Vikings get a health bonus, still garbage.

If militia line is garbage even with civ bonuses, then the base line truly is terrible. You will often see civs with no bonuses play archer and knight line, as a comparison. Those lines are just so good that even with no bonuses they see play.


Wow yeah you’re right!! Give this man a whiskey!

That’s why we see so much mass MAA , LS and even champ play from Celts… oh wait

Yep. And it’s mainly due to pros not wanting or being bothered about it.

Romans proved how much you can buff the MAA line and still isn’t good enough (with centurions they’re far better than any civs MAA line in almost any situation and still aren’t good enough even on a civ with a good eco)

1 Like

I have seen Celts achieve significant success with prolonged MAA investment.

The biggest problem with MAA is being able to be chased down or escaped by archers in the Feudal Age. Celts can chase them down or escape, which allows them the tactical advantage, and actually allows them to be useful.

There’s a reason their MAA opening has a 61% WR at 1200+ and 80% WR at 1900+.

1 Like

Except I’m not talking about using a very small amount of militia line in dark/fuedal. I’m talking about using them as a core part of your army in castle or imperial. Think of your last 100 ranked games at whatever ELO you are. Did you see any significant amounts of militia line play in your past 100 matches outside of early drush/fuedal? Now go try and find pro players using them in castle or imp in significant amounts.

It’s just so incredibly rare or it’s in the one niche where they’re useful. It’s boring and there’s no reason for the unit to be so terrible it’s almost never used significantly.

Here’s a decent example of what Celts can do.

You’ll never be able to go JUST MAA, but just by keeping your MAA alive through feudal it can justify going LS and from then on, you can get good value for the rest of the game.


Militia line loses to both knight and Xbow line in combat while being slow and pop inefficient at the same time. It’s just a bad unit line. I do give credit to the dev since they’ve been trying to buff militia line but all these buffs are jut not enough.

  1. Give them a new tech that reduces infantries pop space by half (like in aoe1)
  2. increase movement speed by 5% per tier upgrade (total of 20%)
  3. Move arson to feudal or give militia line +1 bonus vs building per tier upgrade
  4. Gamberson also gives +1 melee armor (this is mostly to help them against knight in castle and hussar in late game)

I try using this line in almost every ranked match. I’m so tired of the forced knights/xbow meta. I use militia line + siege workshop every chance I get. Add in just enough pikes to counter cavalry.

To be quite honest, the militia line is basically worthless and I’d be better off going full pike + siege but I just love using them so I handicap myself.

I think it is because the meta has influenced your habits. I think the meta in pro games has basically nothing to do with the game the others play. But people copy pro playstyles, because they think it is universally good instead of good for pro play specifically.

Here is why the militia line is good:

Militia line is good against Spear line.
Militia line is good against Scout line.
Militia line is good against Knight line.
Militia line is good against Camel line.
Militia line not too bad against Archer line, because you can solve the problem with just more Militia.
Militia line is good against Skirmisher line.
Militia line is good against Ram line.
Militia line is good against Mangonel line.
Militia line is not too bad against Scorpions, because you can solve the problem with just more Militia.
Militia line is good against Bombard cannons.
Militia line is good against Monks.
Militia line is good against Buildings.

On the other hand:
Militia line is bad against Cavalry Archers.
Militia line is bad against Hand cannoneers.

So the amount of counters is low. Why should I bother making Cavalry or Archers when such are countered much more easily?

militia is bad against scouts in Feudal, when it matters most
militia is bad against knights in Castle, when it matters most
militia vs camels is good, but doesn’t usually matter
militia is bad against archers, unless you’re Malians

militia being bad vs knights in Castle age is what I’d like to see fixed most. We could see where to go from there.


No. It depends. Militia hit faster with their earlier timing. A proper infantry rush should be 3x Man at arms + Scout in opponent’s base before they even have made their first scout. And man at arms still beat scouts in equal numbers. Man at arms buy you time to get your ranges up. Follow up your man at arms with fletching archers + a few spears. Or towers + more man at arms. Militia line is a dark age / early feudal age transitional unit. That is, until late game if you get gambeson champions. Can be devastating if combined with onagers or halb, depending on what opponent is making.

No unit is underpowered, you’re just using them wrong. You need support units. If you only make knights they die to pikes + monks. If you only make crossbow, they die to skirm + mangonels. Stop making single units and make a balanced army, that’s how you’re supposed to play. If you really have to buff them to make them viable beyond dark age / early feudal, just make Squires and Arson free when you hit castle age.

1 Like

Blatantly false. You’re claiming the developers are god-like entities that created a perfect balance in an RTS game. This is never true.

1 Like

No, it isn’t false. I think you’ve just misunderstood what balance means. Every unit in the game has a weakness. It’s your job as a player to think about that weakness and make a secondary unit to fill that weakness based on what your opponent is making. It’s not up to the devs to buff every unit you think is weak just because you want to make only single unit army compositions. That’s not how the game works.

And there is no such thing as perfect balance. If you buff one thing, it indirectly nerfs something else. So it’s a constant battle of fixing one thing then fixing something else because of the first thing you fixed. Then repeat that process x1,000. That’s what the Devs have to do and it’s a really difficult job, I don’t envy them at all. Right now in 2023 the balance between civs is the best it’s ever been. New civs are always slightly OP, it helps sell the DLC which is understandable. But they never stay OP long term.

If you look at 100 pro matches you’ll be lucky to find significant militia line use in 5 of them. In those 5 they were probably playing against a Mesoamerican civ. They’re not even used much in intermediate player matches either.

No, that’s simply not true. You’ll see militia line in almost all of them. You’re just ignoring their primary use, which is late dark age / early feudal age. Those early fights with militia / man at arms dictate the pace of the game and they often decide who will snowball that early momentum into an eventual win.


You failed to read the opening post of this thread. I acknowledge militia line sees use often, but only in the sense that 2-3 are made as a drush or early fuedal attack and then they are dropped completely. You enjoy the current meta so you’re fine with militia line having no play in castle or beyond.