Originally Posted by
Genius of the Restoration
If the enemy is advancing it is usually because they have superior power according to the pre-battle calculator. All missile units are much less efficient in these battles, because it's highly unlikely that you'll get to use all your ammo. The real boon of missile units is when you can reduce the number of casualties taken by your troops. This is easier to do when the enemy is the defender because once you stop shooting they'll retreat to their original position, allowing you to start all over again. The problem with slingers is that in this situation, they have to fire on the unit at the front, and most likely from the frontal arc that doubles the shield value, causing very little casualties. Archers have the ability to fire over the top of these front units, but a slinger's trajectory doesn't let him. I wouldn't usually take many (or any) missile units in a scenario where I knew the AI was going to come for me. In this case, where the enemy has little or no cavalry, I'd stock up on extra cavalry myself. Depending on the infantry, I don't think slingers are great for what you've described either. Their measly attack of 4 won't do much against the unprotected rear of a heavy infantry unit andI don't imagine it would do anything at all against the front. Additionally, while your slingers are trying to take out heavy infantry with crossfire, their flat trajectory would make it difficult to manoeuvre cav in behind (to inflict the morale penalty) without being hit, though the low attack of slingers wouldn't worry me too much really. I'd also be concerned about how many units this takes to get the effect you're after. Also, Carthage lacks temples that provide experience and missile weapon upgrades, so they lose out there and have to start with just the basic slingers. Spain might have more hope.