Lack of Ranged Units Kils this Game

[TheLastRonin]

Velites are worse than useless and the battles basically boil down to smash this infantry unit into that or if you have cavalry do the same but with flanking... Snorrre...

Shogun 2 Fall of the Samurai had melee, ranged and artillery all working in tandem for exciting combined arms battle... Basically Rome 2 has one unit time... Nondescript melee dude...

Such a let down...

[lawandorder82]

You also have slingers archers levees and velites so update your buildings

[TheLastRonin]

You also have slingers archers levees and velites so update your buildings

Slingers: Boring...
Archers: Require the right regions... Underpowered...
Levees and Velites... The same crap... Can't even really be called a ranged unit with how pitiful the range is...

Just sad... So sad...

[Garensterz]

maybe he's looking for a homing missile squad. Dont worry there will be a DLC for that

[D E C]

Sooo what do you want then? If archers, slingers and peltasts are not enough?

[TheLastRonin]

Sooo what do you want then? If archers, slingers and peltasts are not enough?

Viable ranged combat? A way to actually do significant damage outside of melee?

I guess that's too much to ask though... Better go back to rugby simulator 2013 (also known as Rome Total War 2).

[ikyu828]

Viable ranged combat? A way to actually do significant damage outside of melee?

I guess that's too much to ask though... Better go back to rugby simulator 2013 (also known as Rome Total War 2).

you can use artillery, it can do more dmg than skirmisher or you can play as nomadic faction and using horse archer
i'm using a full stack of horse archers and no problem so far (vh), if you run out of ammo you can retreat and hit them again on the next turn

[Zwirbaum]

I don't know which game are you playing but skirmishers/velites/peltasts are killing machines. (As long as you use standard amunition).

[Pushupbrah]

I don't know which game are you playing but skirmishers/velites/peltasts are killing machines. (As long as you use standard amunition).

This....

You have to be trolling OP. The velites/peltasts massacre any infantry they come up against. Focus fire 4 units onto 1 infantry and that unit will be dead in 20 seconds.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

Ranged units weren't very good, other than in specialized regions, during this period.

Shogun 2 had very powerful ranged units, because the Samurai were traditionally horse archers. Their entire style of combat is based fundamentally on archery, and they do not have very heavy armor. (Plus it was in 1500 AD or so.)

FotS obviously had good ranged units because... Well, they were rifles.

The Eastern archers, like Persians Archers, frequently get upwards of 150 kills in my battles. On top of that, they have a big moral effect on enemies.

And javelins... Holy javelins will utterly destroy a unit. I don't know what game you are playing, but in my game, Velites are badass.

[TheLastRonin]

Maybe it's the ETD mod.

[Sint]

Archers: Require the right regions... Underpowered...

Against what ? You can't expect archers to win agaist heavy armored infantry especially when they use large shields .
I actually think that they are to strong...

[Elitewolf]

Ranged units weren't very good, other than in specialized regions, during this period.

Shogun 2 had very powerful ranged units, because the Samurai were traditionally horse archers. Their entire style of combat is based fundamentally on archery, and they do not have very heavy armor. (Plus it was in 1500 AD or so.)

FotS obviously had good ranged units because... Well, they were rifles.

The Eastern archers, like Persians Archers, frequently get upwards of 150 kills in my battles. On top of that, they have a big moral effect on enemies.

And javelins... Holy javelins will utterly destroy a unit. I don't know what game you are playing, but in my game, Velites are badass.

You forget shields: Archers in Shogun 2 use iron tipped arrows versus mostly leather armor (in the case of ashigaru) and no shields whatsoever. Very deadly. Side not: Why exactly did the Japanese stop using shields? I remember from the S2 threads shields were used long before the samurai but they stopped using them at some point.

Meanwhile, in Rome 2 nearly every unit has a shield. These shields have a MASSIVE impact on ranged damage: A roman shield blocks 50% of projectiles, completely negating their damage. So, hearkening back to the days of ME2 and RTW,, you need to get to the weapon side or behind the unit to deal a lot of damage. Exceptions are pikemen and cavalry (both carry shields which only block 10%)
This whole block chance is far more important than the armor bonus because armor decreases damage but blocking prevents it.

And to return to underpowered ranged units: That's because most of them sucked. The west never really had much love for ranged warfare (except for people like the english and the cretans) Archers are generally archers with weak hunting bows and bone/woodd-tipped arrows, slingers use light hunting slings and pebbles. Professional stuff like cretan archers and Rhodian slingers with good equipment were much more effective, but still not that effective against heavy infantry.
The third factor is HP: the first one or two volleys will rarely kill, but soldiers will die quickly after that. Especially noticeable with high HP units

[xxxMoRaVexxx]

Maybe the OP is used to Shogun 2 battle mechanics were missiles can decimate almost anyone in range. Although that is most likely because it fits the setting of the game.

In R2TW, specifically in western regions of the campaign map, factions there have weaker missile units because the main objectives of ranged units there are harassing enemy formations, while further east, missile units are more for killing than 'morale damagers'.

[Lycurgus78]

You forget shields: Archers in Shogun 2 use iron tipped arrows versus mostly leather armor (in the case of ashigaru) and no shields whatsoever. Very deadly. Side not: Why exactly did the Japanese stop using shields? I remember from the S2 threads shields were used long before the samurai but they stopped using them at some point.

Meanwhile, in Rome 2 nearly every unit has a shield. These shields have a MASSIVE impact on ranged damage: A roman shield blocks 50% of projectiles, completely negating their damage. So, hearkening back to the days of ME2 and RTW,, you need to get to the weapon side or behind the unit to deal a lot of damage. Exceptions are pikemen and cavalry (both carry shields which only block 10%)
This whole block chance is far more important than the armor bonus because armor decreases damage but blocking prevents it.

And to return to underpowered ranged units: That's because most of them sucked. The west never really had much love for ranged warfare (except for people like the english and the cretans) Archers are generally archers with weak hunting bows and bone/woodd-tipped arrows, slingers use light hunting slings and pebbles. Professional stuff like cretan archers and Rhodian slingers with good equipment were much more effective, but still not that effective against heavy infantry.
The third factor is HP: the first one or two volleys will rarely kill, but soldiers will die quickly after that. Especially noticeable with high HP units

Elitewolf - I think you're missing the point - RTW2 is very one dimensional. Your stats aside (and how reliable they are I question), the original point about always smashing through the centre with heavy infantry makes for a very boring game.

[GussieFinkNottle]

No idea what you are talking about, this thread is just so wrong.
Missile units are devastating, javelinmen tear up enemy armies and slingers are a real hazard to my men in barbarian areas
I agree archers are underpowered but not the other 2

[Elitewolf]

Elitewolf - I think you're missing the point - RTW2 is very one dimensional. Your stats aside (and how reliable they are I question), the original point about always smashing through the centre with heavy infantry makes for a very boring game.

My stats come from Roach in the strategies section. He has made a document listing all the different weapons and armors and their stats. I looked it up when I calculated how many arrows it took to kill a roman legionaire from the front. I believe it was 15.

Of course it does. Spamming praetorian guard/oathsworn makes for a boring game. So why do it? That aside, it was simply the nature of warfare at the time. Phalanxes were the epitome of boring warfare: You have a bunch of greeks in armor with shields pushing at each other like a classical moshpit with spears. The romans (after marianus) did not even HAVE any ranged units. At all. (discounting auxiliaries here) It's also why the medieval era is probably more interesting from a gameplay standpoint: More heavy cav, crossbows and longbows to counter heavy infantry.

I do agree that the lack of variety is a sticking point for Rome 2. Hell, Rome 2 has three different types of armies: Cav (nomads) pikes&spears (hellenics) and heavy infantry (Romans and barbarians). It's even worse because nearly all playable factions are hellenic. There are no dacians/thracians, no iberians, no desert tribes and if you don't pay 7 bucks, no nomads either. Sure, mods fix that problem but it would be better if CA did it themselves. So no pontus, baktria and seleucids (all hellenic factions with an eastern flavor) as free DLC, but luistani, odryssian kingdoms and garmantia instead

[Sint]

You forget shields: Archers in Shogun 2 use iron tipped arrows versus mostly leather armor (in the case of ashigaru) and no shields whatsoever. Very deadly. Side not: Why exactly did the Japanese stop using shields? I remember from the S2 threads shields were used long before the samurai but they stopped using them at some point.

Well it's true that ashigaru used lighter armor but the armor worn by Samurai was as heavy as plate armor and made from iron(overlapping plates).

Why exactly did the Japanese stop using shields?

Well I'm not an expert but :

Their main meele weapon was the Yari and they used it with both hand
Knights when begining to use plate armor also ceased to use shields ,and used mostly two handed wepons like the poleaxe ,because they didn't need them anymore:

A plate armor and also heavier japanese armor(not as good as plate = lager gaps ) protects you from arrows and you can't really penetrate them even with a warbow.

[CheesyFreak]

OP obviouslly has never used Bactrian horse archers with heavy shot.

also Javelins in base game destroy everything in their reach if they have a chance to shoot.

[PeonKing]

Yeah I have no idea where he is coming from. Pretty much the only reason why I can ever win a unwalled settlement defense without a garrisoned army is because of the javelin units in the garrison. The spear levy's just hold them in place when you take the javelins and hit them from a flank/behind. Getting like 120-200 kills with the lowest tier of a ranged unit is nothing to scoff at. You start getting to the higher peltast levels with ammo % increase, and you pretty much slice up a good 3-4 units without taking any casualties with 3 units of peltasts.

I mean I guess he's remembering how ranged units were used in S2, where they seemed to have way more ammo so they were constantly attacking the whole battle where in R2 my ranged units tend to run out of ammo before the battle is over.