What's so great about NON units?

[debeest]

It seems that many people go to considerable lengths to obtain NON units. NON units certainly have their advantages, but I wonder how much they really add up to. Is it really such a great idea to spend 40 shields to disband a city in hopes of getting a NON settler (which, after all, is likely to be kind of far away from your own cities where you would use it)? Or to build a city and a barracks and then sacrifice it to the barbs in the hope that the barracks will survive and let you bribe vet NON units?

Here are the advantages of NON units that readily occur to me:

1) Shield support is free.

2) Settler food support is free.

3) No unhappiness from units in the field under representative governments.

4) When you are required to withdraw units to the nearest city to honor a peace agreement, NON units have nowhere to go and remain where they are.

What else can you add?

[rah]

That about sums it up. Not sure about number 4. (not much experience with that one, but it sounds weird.) I thought they retreated to the closest city, even if they were homed somewhere else.

Against the AI in SP, it can be fun to set up these kind of bondoggles. But it isn't that big a deal, Unless you're playing an OCC game where support issues are considerably more important. Early in the game it's nice to have non-ships. But once your civ has matured. Unit support and happiness is not that big of a problem.

In MP, totally different. We usually play 2x production so unit and food support are meaningless. And if you're going for all our war, You're usually not in a representative government or you've balanced your field troop appropriately that it isn't an issue. You also don't set up a barb factory for an oppentent to take advantange of. The only time non-units are really important is prior to monarchy when your cities are small. Later it's not worth expending a lot of extra resources for them.

RAH

[TCO]

I'm usually in monarchy or fundy. So sheild support is not an issue. Wimpy demopublicans are different of course...

[atawa]

Rah is right, all units return to the closest city.

[Goingonit]

Another advantage is that they can't be disbanded due to loss of home city (for obvious reasons).

[atawa]

Cant remember last time I lost a city to AI though

[rah]

The AI can do that? Of course my memory may have failed me.

RAH

[Marquis de Sodaq]

debeest, I think you sum it up. In a representative gov't, they are wonderful to have until your cities shield production is high. Then it isn't such a big deal. However, early on (republic, mostly), it does make a difference. The happiness issue is also important if you want to wage a war while in representative gov't.

Besides, gathering all those barbarian mercenaries is kinda fun. You save many many turns of unit building, instead focusing on other things.

[Straybow]

When I do decide to go on a conquest it can actually be good to let the enemy recapture a mid-sized city. They're on another continent and you have to ship everything over. If you have Com you get about ½ the city size in free NON Partisan units, even if you don't have Gue. They don't have to be transported. They can guide your strong units through ZOCs.

[atawa]

Not to mention they can block the AI's reinforcements rushing to the scene by fortifying on mountains next to roads.

[Ming]

Yeah... non units have their advantages early in the game. But if you are playing into the modern era, who cares. Even with Leo's, all those wonderful barb units you bribed will be canon fodder and nothing else.

[War4ever]

the larger the map the better the use for non units...of course in mp.....non units are of great importance..then again any unit from a hut is of great importance

[TCO]

When EON creates an extra unit for himself, does he make it a non unit?