Missile units too weak in this game

[homefry]

Anybody else think foot missile units are too weak in this game? (not missile cavalry)

When I'm filling out my army, it's usually a better idea to switch out the archers and put in some more heavy infantry.

Then when battle breaks out, just charge my army to the enemy. The enemy's archers will at most kill 10% of my forces, but by the time I reach them, their archers are pretty much useless.

They should've made archers capable of running faster and more effective.

[Lost Crusader]

There are many kinds of archers, from peasant archers with short-range low attack missiles, to high-range armor piercing ones of English longbowmen and good crossbowmen.
what faction do you play, and what archers do you use?

Personally, I don't consider foot archers to be weak. I always have at least 2-3 archers in my army. Put them on high ground and concentrate fire on one unit, and you'll see how affective they are. The perfect archer targets are units without the shield, and lightly armored ones. The archers are extremely useful against horse archers.
Also, when using the crossbows, they have to have a clear line of fire. If not, they will fire in high arc, which is not very effective. They can be behind your line, but you have to leave them some space in front, so they can shoot in a flat trajectory.

[Insurgent]

Archers RULE! The English/French/Welsh longbowmen can easily take out whole platoons of cavalry. I personally think all archers are effective though, even militia archers if they are used properly on a big castle wall.

Crossbowmen can also be very strong in a fight especially against slow heavy troops.

And there are certain archers who can protect themselves from cavalry using sharpened stakes. I think only the English/Turkish (and Welsh if you have Kingdoms) longbowmen can do this though. The stakes can be very useful.

[Ged]

Anither great (yet incorrect) post by homefry.

Archers RULE! The English/French/Welsh longbowmen can easily take out whole platoons of cavalry. I personally think all archers are effective though, even militia archers if they are used properly on a big castle wall.

QFT.

[Kiki52]

I've killed more than half a full 20 stack army with my archers, because the enemy just stood there getting shot. Archers are effective if the enemy chooses not to attack, but it seems like if they rush you their effect is limited. I think the perfect army balance for me is =
4-5 ranged infantry units
4 spearmen
4 heavy inf
4 heavy cav
possibly 3 horse archers or an arty or two if needed

I don't think having more than 30%-40% of your force as archers is effective because sometimes the AI chooses to slam into your lines. But still, 4 units of archers can still do considerable damage.

[Problem Sleuth]

The archers can already be more powerful than would be realistic, so don't whine. It's called using them intelligently; unlike most games, in this if you just send everything in one massively huge attack with archers directly behind, you die. You need to have more elaborate movements to deal with the enemy. Instead of expecting archers to be rigged and kill 90% of an enemy force, do as someone mentioned earlier. Focus your fire on spear units; it'll make the disassembly with cavalry that much easier. Or on their cavalry if you find yourself depleted when it comes to spears; by softening them up, when your HC charges them they'll be far easier to take down, reducing the time between impact and destruction, consequently allowing you to annihilate the poor suckers engaging your infantry.

This is all pretty basic, obviously. But use your imagination. Do what you think would work... And no, movies shouldn't be a basis for that, because there's no way in hell a regular arrow is piercing decent plate armor.

[homefry]

The archers can already be more powerful than would be realistic, so don't whine.

I wasn't whining. My first post was started as a matter-of-fact... just to start discussion.

It's called using them intelligently; unlike most games, in this if you just send everything in one massively huge attack with archers directly behind, you die.

What game are you playing? lol

And who sends their forces directly to the front?

Instead of using the 3-4 unit spots for archers, it would be more effective to fill those spots with heavy cavalry and then I'll be able to hit your archers with 1-3 units of cavalry while my other cavalry unit hits your rear.

You need to have more elaborate movements to deal with the enemy. Instead of expecting archers to be rigged and kill 90% of an enemy force, do as someone mentioned earlier. Focus your fire on spear units; it'll make the disassembly with cavalry that much easier. Or on their cavalry if you find yourself depleted when it comes to spears; by softening them up, when your HC charges them they'll be far easier to take down, reducing the time between impact and destruction, consequently allowing you to annihilate the poor suckers engaging your infantry.

This is all pretty basic, obviously. But use your imagination. Do what you think would work... And no, movies shouldn't be a basis for that, because there's no way in hell a regular arrow is piercing decent plate armor.

Instead of using 3 units of archers to focus fire on the spears, why not send 3 units of cavalry from all sides to that spear unit making them rout?... much more effective.


I'm not saying to make them more powerful. That could be 1 way, but you could make them faster, have more stamina, more numbers in 1 unit (150 men vs 120 for instance), make units rout faster, higher accuracy,

[Problem Sleuth]

Cavalry aren't necessarily viable in the Grand Campaign; it's pricey early-game.

What game are you playing?

Just about every RTS.

I

nstead of using 3 units of archers to focus fire on the spears, why not send 3 units of cavalry from all sides to that spear unit making them rout?... much more effective.

Higher losses, fewer returns; 1 unit of archers, 1 unit of spears, 1 unit of cavalry would be the best, as it allow you to have an anvil for lower costs and with fewer casualties. Although I would recommend a 1:3:2 ratio in general.

I'm not saying to make them more powerful. That could be 1 way, but you could make them faster, have more stamina, more numbers in 1 unit (150 men vs 120 for instance), make units rout faster, higher accuracy,

The accuracy is fine; longer range, less physical damage, more morale damage.

I wasn't whining. My first post was started as a matter-of-fact... just to start discussion.

I apologize.

[homefry]

Going off of this same idea, the cavalry are way overpowered.

I've gotten so rich towards the mid-late part of my campaign that I only construct armies with cavalry. This simply means complete ownage.

But having a more balanced army is more fun. Much more battle tactics involved than simply plowing through the enemy with cavalry.

[Problem Sleuth]

Again, they're expensive; they seem more balanced in the Stainless Steel mod in that you can buy 4 and 9/20ths Italian Spear Militia for the same price as a single unit of Mailed Units. While they are goddamn -powerful- if you have good timing, they become far less cost effective, and make up a far smaller part of your army. Not only that, but later game cavalry lancers are stronger - but also expensive as hell. You're looking at nearly 2k apiece, which becomes far less worth it when you consider pikemen a juiced up a bit.

Also, yeah. More balanced armies are fun, especially when you're heavily outnumbered. Challenges are awesome... As long as you win at least a quarter of the time, that is. Any less, and it's freaking annoying.

[Pyrebound]

I used to dislike archers until i played apaches in the americas campaign: http://img156.imagevenue.com/img.php..._122_690lo.JPG

[Bond]

Also, yeah. More balanced armies are fun, especially when you're heavily outnumbered. Challenges are awesome... As long as you win at least a quarter of the time, that is. Any less, and it's freaking annoying.

I agree/disagree with that - A balanced army where you have open slots in your army going up against a full AI stack is the best(if you have the right units to win the battle mind you..even if you don't it's still fun).

And like everyone has already beaten to death..archers have their uses and should be in your armies. I usually go with 1-2 and if I'm playing a faction that gets more missile units(italian factions and what not) I'll bump it up to 3-4

[homefry]

Archers are great when fighting the natives because the natives don't break. It's better to have 1 unit fight to the death with another enemy unit while your archers are raining arrows killing them off.

But if you're going to be fighting a European nation with regular morale, then it's more efficient to have 1 unit engage while you send another unit around to flank and make them rout.

[Khassaki]

Anybody else think foot missile units are too weak in this game? (not missile cavalry)

When I'm filling out my army, it's usually a better idea to switch out the archers and put in some more heavy infantry.

Then when battle breaks out, just charge my army to the enemy. The enemy's archers will at most kill 10% of my forces, but by the time I reach them, their archers are pretty much useless.

They should've made archers capable of running faster and more effective.

On the flat archers will get butchered, put them on a hill and they will do the butchering. Run them out from your left flank as the enemy close and they will do damage against the shieldless side of the enemy - javelins are better than bows for this and naffatun the best of all.

Uphill and one unit using flaming arrows will usually mean the enemy will rout when the flank charges arrive - make sure you front line has good moral though or they will be panicked into running as well.

One spear block blocking a street and 4 archers firing into the congealed mass of troops jamed into the street kills lots of stuff too.

No army tried to make do with just foot archers, they are an imporant PART of the army, but not critical.

[Xix]

Playing my first game (bought the game just before Christmas - I know I'm a year late to this awsome game) as English and I have found archers to be an indespensible part of my army. While having more infantry would probably result in me winning the same, but I believe with far more losses at the end of the battle.

Here are some of my experiences last night with using archers:

In one battle I set up a front line of 5 units of 60 longbowmen (with set stakes) and two units of 30 sherwood forest archers all set in a single line with the sherwood archers in the center (all set to skirmish). I also had 4 units of knights templar (2 on each flank), 3 units of armored swordsmen and 5 units of dismounted english knights (?- the ones with 21 atk) and two units of spearmen.

The battle was against the danes who employed 7 units of dismounted heavy knights plus 2 units of crossbowman and a catapult with the rest of the enemy troops consisting of militia spearmen and 2 units of heavy cav.

The enemy deployed in line facing me and immediatly charged my position with all their heavy infantry. In the short time it took to close the distance my archers had caused significant damage so that by the time the enemy had gotten close enough to cause my archers to fall back through the waiting lines of DEK and AS that they were quickly torn apart by the my waiting heavy infantry.

(While all this was happening my templar knights had destroyed the crossbowmen and the catapult and were now setting their sights on the enemy leader.)

In the end I had easily slaughtered the enemy - as one would expect given the troop quality diference I had.

After the battle I checked to see how al of my archers had done in relation to each other.

The sherwood archers caused as many casualties as the other archers even though they were 30 man units vs 60 man units. Oh - in addition because the sherwood archers had 2 hitpoints each I didn't lose a single archer from the units - all the other archer units had losses of 1-3 men.

I noticed this same trend as I progressed through battles - the sherwood archers would have similar kills to retinue longbowmen when facing heavily armored troops, thought the retinue longbowmen would easily outkill the sherwood archers when facing lightly armored troops. The sherwood archers also never took a casualty - even when they breifly engaged in melee with dismounted knights (I disengaged them quickly, but the archers killed a few knights in melee while withdrawing and suffered no losses)

Another thing - I was happily supprised one battle when I was facing a very large formation of very heavy troops and I tried a gambit with my sherwood archers.

Both our lines were deployed in the center of the map so I had precious little time once I clicked the start button to come up with a strategy. I saw from the forces arrayed this would be an extreemly bloody battle for both sides(the denmark army had tons of heavy infantry again) and thought that if I could only kill the opposing general fast I might be able to rout the enemy from the field rather quickly saving as many of my own troops as possible.

I immediatley sent my sherwood archers sprinting forward towards a woodline on the enemy flank. The opposing general saw my archers break out from my formation and set his bodyguard into pursuit mode, bringing his troop into a full gallop. I didn't expect this but knew the only chance my sherwood archers had was in making the realtive safety of the woods where they could do the fighting on their term. (I also orderd two of my templar knight units into position to charge the opposing general if he continued his charge at my archers.

Well, it was a very close race (and I was pausing every second so i could view the progress of the battle from all angles, the enemy front line heavy infantry was also begining their charge at my lines (didn't go well for them - charging up a hill into the staked lines of hardened retinue longbowmen (with a rank of dismounted english knights right behind them) isn't a good idea) but the archers made the woods JUST ahead of the thundering enemy calvery (at this time I ordered my two templar knights into charging the rear of the enemy general as he had turned his rear to me to pursue the archers that ran past his lines). And then something strange happened, the enemy general stopped dead in his tracks, mere feet away from my sherwood archers - and did nothing. I can only assume that they had become invisible as soon as they hit the woodline.

Of course they turned around immediatly to face my onrushing tidal wave of death that is the templar kights, but this only gave my archers an extreemly tempting target to attack the rear of the generals unit mere feet away. As soon as the templars hit I hit from behind with the archers and soon the enemy general was dead. (as soon after the entire enemy army as units started routing in a cascade effect) Again - my sherwood archers took zero casualties.

They are extreemly expensive to keep on staff, so I don't think they are worth the price to have them replace the retinue longbwmen. But - they are fun to play and give you added options on the battlefield.


Anyway, like I said above, I am sure I could have still won the battle if I used all heavy infantry, but I also believe I would have sustained much greater losses to my own troop. I greatly value being able to keep my invading armies intact as much as possible so I need few trips back to my castle to retrain injured units.

[The Sixth Wizard]

Archers aren't going to win you heroic victories (Agincourt doesn't happen in this game as the AI cavalry actually FLANKS you unlike those french retards...) but they are cost-effective if used right, and when you have the high ground they are devastating.

Take my advice - turn skirmish off. If your missile units run away, they'll be destroyed by the enemy cavalry, and if the enemy has no cavalry, you have enough time to micromanage the units yourself. Don't be lazy...

I use crossbows as they may have been used in the middle ages, for screwing over enemy infantry and other richer targets that are immobile. I once flanked a superior enemy force of infantry that was fighting in the city square with crossbowmen: instead of a costly infantry fight-to-the-death or a cavalry charge that, once halted by the enemy (they were multiple Italian Spear Militia) would kill some of my valuable knights, the spearmen were ripped from behind and I gained THREE xp points. I dislike the Genoese crossbows and the mercenary version as they seem like overkill: you don't design crossbow units to have expensive armour and shields, you design them to be cheap, expendable and do the job right. The point of them is to get four for every enemy knight and plug the bastards.

I don't usually get to high quality longbows or composite bowmen in campaign but I used the stake laying ones a few times in custom battle and they seemed good en masse. The longbows especially smashed every enemy, with heroic victories on slopes with spear infantry support for strays. Use King Henry's tactics.

Fire arrows are excellent jobs for the few archers you can't figure out what to do with. Stick them on a hill with skirmish OFF (I love Desert Archers for this because of the range) and just rain fire on the flanks of your enemy. Try not to value archers too highly, again, they're for being cheap and doing the job.

If the archer/infantry ratio is about even and you have no high ground stop them shooting and use them as infantry support and flankers. This is what a multiplayer guy did to me when I wasn't expecting it and he very nearly broke me under raw numbers.

For sieges: use archers on the walls only against ladders and siege towers, the firing's screwed against rams and it's a waste of time. However the wall bonus gives your usually crap melee archers the ability to rout the attackers and I sometimes sneakily run after them off the walls. When attacking keep them back until the infantry have the walls and then flank the square with them instead of cavalry as it is much more cost-effective.

Lastly: javelins and naffatun.

The most effective way to use javelins is to keep them well protected. They aren't any cheaper than archers and die much more easily due to the shorter range. I use them as flankers and support infantry mainly.

Naffatun should be put on the flanks of your army with skirmish off or if the enemy has cavalry inbetween your infantry. They will rout the enemy infantry in a few throws so be ready to finish the rest of the bastards off and run them down...

Okay that's all I can think of. Ta-ta.

[Xix]

Sometimes it is wise to take off the skirmish option, of course it is all situational as to how yours and the enemy troops are arranged. I will trypically leave skirmish on as I like to place a line of armored swordsmen and dismounted english knights in a line behind the archers.

If the enemy charges my line he first has to endure a withering hail of arrows and when he reaches the stakes the archers fall back through my lines of heavy infantry who will charge the attackers just as they are making their way through the stake lines. This coupled with a well timed calvery charge in the rear of the enemy and the entire enemy army usually quickly routs (especially because my cav has two primary objectives: 1st take out any ranged troops, 2nd kill enemy general - though sometimes I'll focus 100% on the general if I am facing top of the line troops and I am outnumbered)

If I do not have a lot of heavy infantry then I'll set some archers with skirmish off. Then when the enemy approaches 1 or 2 of my archer units will sacrifice themselves by staying in place to give the rest of the archers time to fall back far enough to start the process all over.

[smoak]

Whatever faction I play, I ALWAYS have at least 6 units of archers in my army. You can think that's stupid but it's really basic math. 6 times the archers = 6 times the amount of arrows. Put 8 units of archers in a double line behind yout infantry (you only need 6 units of them as well) and watch it rain arrows on your enemies. Don't move forward! By the time they reach your lines they are already 'shaken' and rout verry quikly. If it takes to long, flank them with your cavalry... works from peasant archers to retinue longbowmen.

note: when the enemy reaches your lines stop firing at once. You will hit too many of your own soldiers. Start firing again when they rout but watch out for your own cavalry.

8 units of archers in your frontline cities can fight of any form of besieging. put 4 units of spearman behind your gate to be sure though.

[Problem Sleuth]

(Agincourt doesn't happen in this game as the AI cavalry actually FLANKS you unlike those french retards...)

First off, the archers didn't win Agincourt; the longbows and arrows caused few casualties. It was when they joined the melee to flank cramped French lines that they did some damage. And the French either had to fight them then and there and go without flanking, or wait another day to attack.

If the archer/infantry ratio is about even and you have no high ground stop them shooting and use them as infantry support and flankers. This is what a multiplayer guy did to me when I wasn't expecting it and he very nearly broke me under raw numbers.

Mm. I've done that with a pure Mercenary Crossbowmen force while fighting off a sally. They have the same melee stats than Italian Militia, as well as a powerful ranged attack. It was especially nice because I got them by buying off a city, so it was a cost-effective method of killing enemies... And it lowered my upkeep by a ton, as well.

[Skyline Pete]

Whatever faction I play, I ALWAYS have at least 6 units of archers in my army. You can think that's stupid but it's really basic math. 6 times the archers = 6 times the amount of arrows. Put 8 units of archers in a double line behind yout infantry (you only need 6 units of them as well) and watch it rain arrows on your enemies. Don't move forward! By the time they reach your lines they are already 'shaken' and rout verry quikly. If it takes to long, flank them with your cavalry... works from peasant archers to retinue longbowmen.

note: when the enemy reaches your lines stop firing at once. You will hit too many of your own soldiers. Start firing again when they rout but watch out for your own cavalry.

8 units of archers in your frontline cities can fight of any form of besieging. put 4 units of spearman behind your gate to be sure though.

Doing this will earn a lot of your generals dread traits. While theoretically it's a good tactic it was considered dishonorable back then. I'm still learning not to do it so much.