Maybe it's just me, but the archers seem /really/ strong.

[Spacepup18]

I picked up this mod recently, and was getting my viking on, conquering up the coast of Norway, when I get attacked by the Vestfold. 1000 men to my 700, I figure I should be able to hold the settlement. I split my army up to hold the two lanes the enemy was coming down, everyone starts getting into combat an- Holy hell how are my men dropping so fast?!

A full unit of Vikingr were cut down to around 40 before they got into charge range when I figured out what was happening. Each time they fired their bows 4-6 of my Hirddmen would bite the dust from arrows fired into the front of the unit! Not including all the other men from other units in the same general mash-up.

In the lane with the archers, about 450 men including my general were wiped out to a man.
In the lane without them, by the time everyone else was finished dying my unit of second tier spear men had 137 of 150 men left.

I understand archers are powerful, but with the armor values of this game I was not expecting it to be like charging goblins at an elven archer unit in TATW.

[Heathen Storm]

If they were using the Hlaðir archers, that would be why. They are longbowmen and EXTREMELY powerful. But they were historically great, so its supposed to happen. But to combat this, just put your units in loose formation and they'll only drop by one, maybe two per volley.

[Casual Tactician]

All archers have the "AP"-ability for their bows/arrows afaik. That's "Armour Piercing" and means, that only half of the armour value of the target is used (so armour: 8 is actually only armour: 4). Odd that they get killed so easily though, as the shield value counts double againts incoming missiles from the front and left iirc.

PS: This might sound didactic. But I wasn't sure if you are aware of that, and how armour and shields work.

[carth]

All archers have the "AP"-ability for their bows/arrows afaik. That's "Armour Piercing" and means, that only half of the armour value of the target is used (so armour: 8 is actually only armour: 4). Odd that they get killed so easily though, as the shield value counts double againts incoming missiles from the front and left iirc.

PS: This might sound didactic. But I wasn't sure if you are aware of that, and how armour and shields work.

this was also the case against melee troops or am I mistaken?

[Úlfhéðinn]

Sure, but on melée troops their high defense skill makes it harder and the battles last longer.
If I have archers units unmoddified I usually win easily even agains difficult odds.

I have 2 suggestions for you to correct this. Either stop playing with archers or lower their attack rating by 2 and remove armor piercing value in EDU. That should make them less effective.

[-Myth-]

If you remove AP then no archer in the game will be able to hit those 30 or 40 def units. The Welsh Saethwyr also rape face when it comes to lead battles. Autocalcing them is much better since cav has been made largely ineffective. Yet still infantry gives me the most trouble. Say, the retired huscarls guarding London - goddamn immortal they are.

[Casual Tactician]

this was also the case against melee troops or am I mistaken?

Partially... the shield value is taken into account x1 for melee attacks from the front and left, but it's taken into account x2 for incoming missiles (e.g. javelins, darts, stones, arrows etc.) from the front and left.
So if you wan't to fire at a unit that has a decent shield, then try to do that from that unit's right side (respective your left side) - or of course the rear, which is always best.

[Gibu]

Doesn't shieldwall help ?

[Casual Tactician]

Doesn't shieldwall help ?

I guess the shield wall helps in melee, as the enemy can only attack the índividual soldier from the front, where he has his full defense value from armour + shield + skill (whereas attacked from the left of right - which is more likely without the very dense shield wall formation - he lacks the skill or shield value).
Against missiles the shield wall it might be worse than the standard formation, as normaly it's better to put a unit into loose formation when attacked by missiles, as more of them will land between the soldiers reducing hits.

[Úlfhéðinn]

If you remove AP then no archer in the game will be able to hit those 30 or 40 def units.

Remember that defense skill does not work against missile units and that is by far the higher defense value on most units. And AP only halves the Armor value, which in most cases ranges from 4-8 with a few exceptions.

[kingtigertank]

archers seem useless in this mod to me - and cavalry seem only useful for killing archers and chasing routers. Heavy infantry seems to be the way to go.

[Z'nbnz]

If you remove AP then no archer in the game will be able to hit those 30 or 40 def units. The Welsh Saethwyr also rape face when it comes to lead battles. Autocalcing them is much better since cav has been made largely ineffective. Yet still infantry gives me the most trouble. Say, the retired huscarls guarding London - goddamn immortal they are.

This is incorrect.

The defense stat is not used when shot at.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

; stat_pri_armour Details of the man's defences
; armour factor
; defensive skill factor (not used when shot at)
; shield factor (only used for attacks from the front of left)
; sound type when hit = flesh, leather, or metal

Please remove the ap from all composite_arrow in the stat_pri_attr
Besides an occasional crossbow, archers were not piercing armoured units in this time period.

[Heathen Storm]

Please remove the ap from all composite_arrow in the stat_pri_attr
Besides an occasional crossbow, archers were not piercing armoured units in this time period.

Umm... Yeah they were. During this time period, any unit with armor had leather, chainmail or the occasional scale mail. Have you ever seen what an arrow does to chainmail? It pierces it. Because chainmail is made from iron rings that are pressed together in a random pattern, arrows force their way into the armor and can pierce through it.

[General_Meevious]

I agree that arrows are doing too much damage.

My mailed, shielded infantry units take heavy losses from even low tier archers, if they get just one volley of flaming arrows off before I reach them, I'm down by maybe 15%. I have to leave my heavy units behind if I'm going to attack an army with archers, because I can't risk having expensive units brought down to 20-40% each battle from arrowfire.

I would deploy an archer army behind a broad 3-5 unit shield wall for every battle, but I don't think it's realistic to have large numbers of archers, so I hope the armour piercing is fixed.

@Heathen Storm: Arrows had to be specialised for this purpose, so I would expect only some (very high tier) archer units to pierce. The proportion of chain/scale units in a historic army isn't relevant; chain/scale armour is immune to most arrows and it should also be this way in the mod.

[Heathen Storm]

@Heathen Storm: Arrows had to be specialised for this purpose, so I would expect only some (very high tier) archer units to pierce. The proportion of chain/scale units in a historic army isn't relevant; chain/scale armour is immune to most arrows and it should also be this way in the mod.

You have a great point mate, and I agree. Low level like Leiðangr and Hunters and such shouldn't have AP, but Hlaðir longbowmen, Welsh Longbowmen, and any other powerful (long)bowmen should definitely receive AP.

[Z'nbnz]

You have a great point mate, and I agree. Low level like Leiðangr and Hunters and such shouldn't have AP, but Hlaðir longbowmen, Welsh Longbowmen, and any other powerful (long)bowmen should definitely receive AP.

They could pierce leather, but I don't really consider that armor. More like padding. Longbows can pierce plate but,

The English use of longbows was effective against the French during the Hundred Years' War, particularly at the start of the war in the battles of Crecy (1346) and Poitiers (1356).

They were around before then but did not dominate battles. It takes years of practice to master a longbow.
Most if not all armies didn't incorporate it in the 8th century.

In this mod archers dominate. Very ahistorical.

[-Myth-]

Umm... Yeah they were. During this time period, any unit with armor had leather, chainmail or the occasional scale mail. Have you ever seen what an arrow does to chainmail? It pierces it. Because chainmail is made from iron rings that are pressed together in a random pattern, arrows force their way into the armor and can pierce through it.

You are talking out of your arse son. You obviously don't know the properties of historical mail armour. It is virtually impenetrable to arrow fire. The modern day tests done with a 130 lbs longbow shot from 2 meters, point blank, at a piece of crappily made mail (so called "chainamil" a DnD term by the way) do not do the piece of armour justice.

I will not argue with you further, but I suggest you do some reading on the topic, maybe ask the guys at ARMA or someone else who has researched the subject and has some sources for you to access.

To the others saying longbows were effective against plate - lol, just lol. Research the 100 yers war and WHY the English won those famous battles. Research how they had men-at-arms mixed with the longbowmen and how the longbowmen themselves charged in battle with their hammers and swords. How weather, terrain and morale played a part.

The most the arrow could do vs a man clad in plate is to hope to hit the weak parts of the joints, or knock down the horse trough its barding.

[Celtichugs123]

Guys, keep away from the offensive and sarcasim directed at people with the intent to annoy or offend. Please, we ask that you respect the threads and posts of the people of this Forum and repsect our Forum.

Thank you, Celtic.

[Cymry]

To the others saying longbows were effective against plate - lol, just lol. Research the 100 yers war and WHY the English won those famous battles. Research how they had men-at-arms mixed with the longbowmen and how the longbowmen themselves charged in battle with their hammers and swords. How weather, terrain and morale played a part.

Hm, what you are referring to is the battle of Anzincourt, which took place at the end of the 100 years war. The English won mainly because of the mud through which the french had to walk, but also because the archers could break every cavalry charge and because the french crossbowmen didn^t shoot.

Actually longbows WERE able to penetrate plate armour, but the french learned during the war to improve their armor ( mainly having better (milanese) plate armor, and with better shaping of the armor (no flat places - only round ones) )

So i think Z'nbns is right that the use and effectiveness of longbows during the 100 years war was dominant at the start

EDIT: BTW just look at the numbers at Anzincourt: 6000 archers and about 1000 men at arms... they had to be effective

[Heathen Storm]

You are talking out of your arse son. You obviously don't know the properties of historical mail armour. It is virtually impenetrable to arrow fire. The modern day tests done with a 130 lbs longbow shot from 2 meters, point blank, at a piece of crappily made mail (so called "chainamil" a DnD term by the way) do not do the piece of armour justice.

Normally, I would follow an insult like that with a "troll" remark but i'll refrain. Instead, I'll invite you to take a look through any historical text from the time period, especially The Norse Sagas. There are many accounts throughout history of a leader being slain by an arrow piercing their mail hauberk. I have also seen many of my fellow Nordic historians agree that arrows could be deadly to a man wearing mail.