Talk:Franks/@comment-93.39.155.136-20150513141255

In my opinion they are one of the worst civ in prolonged battles. Their heavy cavalry is very cost-effective, but not so superior to the one of others (full upgraded paladins have just 12 points more than ordinary paladins with bloodlines researched). Considering they don't have hussars, i'd prefer stable units of huns, magyars, persians and spanish. Plus they do not have strong cavalry archers, but average. This means that you CAN'T rely on army of cavalry, because armies with also monks, camels and pikemen would be dangerous for u. While instead spanish with their missionaries and conquistadors, turks with powerful cavalry archers, huns, magyars and persians have a much more well arounded army and you can create a self-sufficiente cavalry army.

They don't have a part this particularly strong units. Their navy is average (weaker than british one), they got hand canooner, but their archers are still mediocre (don't have bracel, thumb ring and arbalest!), siege mediocre. Before The forgotten their throwing axemen were almost useless and infantry line didn't have squires.

Your french army would be composed of almost only paladins, bombard cannon and handcannoner and few halberdiers, so not much versatile. I think that in the conquerors they are maybe the worst civ of all after the castle age, in the forgotten their only strong features are the cheap castles and chivalry (which for a civ like that is very useful, even if expensive).