Evony‎ > ‎Combat‎ > ‎

Swordsmen vs Warriors for Fodder

The gadget spec URL could not be found
This is one of the only guides that promotes the building of swordsmen, and I have to say I believe this is wrong on many levels.  Clearly building warriors for fodder is a better way to go according to this article. 
 
The gadget spec URL could not be found
Sword vs Warrior for fodder.
 
It is generally accepted that everyone will attack with archers, so to defend against 4,000 archers, the following is needed

Unit Amount Needed Build Time Wood Iron Food Eaten Speed Load
Warrior 15000 4hr 8min
1,500,000
750,000
45,000 per hour
200
300,000
Pikemen 8000 10hr 45min
4,000,000
800,000
48,000 per hour
300
320,000
Swordsmen 8000 16hr 35min
1,250,000
3,250,000
56,000 per hour
275
240,000
Archers 4000 12hr 45min
1,400,000
1,200,000
36,000 per hour
250
100,000
Cavalry 4000 18hr 10min
2,400,000
2,000,000
72,000 per hour
1000
400,000
Ballista 1300 36hr 5min
3,900,000
2,340,000
65,000 per hour
100
0
Catapults 1000 516hr 30min
5,000,000
1,200,000
250,000 per hour
80
0

*Assumes 6 barracks, a hero with 132 attack, and all technologies researched

*Catapults also cost 8,000,000 Stone

So if you follow this chart, you will see that its actually better to stick with warriors over sword because:

1)  Faster to make the equivalent

2)  Sword are resource hogs, especially when it comes to iron.  (better to save your iron for your archers)

Most guides I've read, and in personal practice, don't ever mess with swords.  As ground units are mostly fodder in the grander scheme of things, so you are better off bulking up the warriors.  I am in a high level alliance, and we are always caught in the middle of wars, and I have to say, I have never seen anyone use sword for anything.   Even defense its better to just bulk up the warriors, as they are easier to feed. 

Comments