Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Effective against archers

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    ****
    Posts
    149

    Default Effective against archers

    is written in the tooltip for swordsman.

    1k Swordsman VS 1k Archers

    1k Swordsman die; 205 Archers die.

    'nuff said

  2. #2

    Default

    You have overlook a key battle mechanic, range. True if the swordsmen are near the archers they could kill them. But the archers start the battle from farther away, so while the swordsmen are getting to them they are picking them off. The dead archers are the result of the swordsmen reaching them however on the way there most of them died.
    "And then the great HTML gods said....let there be a search function!"

    Read My Great Mind Collection Thread --> http://bbs.evony.com/showthread.php?t=13109

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    ****
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silvadeath View Post
    You have overlook a key battle mechanic, range. True if the swordsmen are near the archers they could kill them. But the archers start the battle from farther away, so while the swordsmen are getting to them they are picking them off. The dead archers are the result of the swordsmen reaching them however on the way there most of them died.
    your point is invalid -- youre implying they are indeed ineffective against archers, because they have to run at them.

  4. #4

    Default

    if archers and ballistas kill everything else with such ease because of range, this can only mean one thing.That they either have to get lower accuracy/damage of archers and range units, or that they need to give more defence/life/speed to melee units. Its pretty obvious, correct me if i am wrong.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RottenMind View Post
    if archers and ballistas kill everything else with such ease because of range, this can only mean one thing.That they either have to get lower accuracy/damage of archers and range units, or that they need to give more defence/life/speed to melee units. Its pretty obvious, correct me if i am wrong.
    You're wrong.

    You'll need more than just an army of swordsmen. You'll want ranged, mounted, and foot soldiers too. Hint: If the archers are busy with other targets, perhaps the swordsmen will get close enough to do damage.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bravetarget View Post
    your point is invalid -- youre implying they are indeed ineffective against archers, because they have to run at them.
    ok... wow... for the 1 billionth time lets break this down.
    m
    100 people (group 1) are standing on one end of a football field (100 yards) and they want to kill 100 people standing at the other end of the football field (group 2).

    Group 1 wields swords, group 2 wields bows.
    Group 1 can only advance 25 yards per turn.

    1st turn - Group 2 attacks immediately since group 1 is in range. 10% (10 people) of group 1 dies in the attack leaving 90 people, yet group 1 makes it to the 75 yard line.

    2nd turn - Group 2 attacks immediately but since the range is closer accuracy is improved for this demonstration. Group 1 takes 20% casualties (18 people from group 1 perish leaving 72 people. Group 1 hits the 50 yard line.

    3rd turn - Group 2 attacks immediately, increased accuracy yields 30% casualties. 22 casualties are inflicted leaving 50 people from group 1 left. Group 1 stops at the 25 yard line.

    4th turn - Group 2 attacks immediately inflicting 60% casualties (its like shooting at the broad side of a barn. 30 of group 1's 50 die leaving 20 people. Group 1 achieves the 1 yard line and kills at 100% efficiency killing 20 of group 2's archers.

    5th round - Group 2 obliterates whats left of group 1's army.

    Group 1 - 100% casualties
    Group 2 - 20% casualties

    My math may not be perfect, but you get the idea.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    ****
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Aerose View Post
    ok... wow... for the 1 billionth time lets break this down.
    m
    100 people (group 1) are standing on one end of a football field (100 yards) and they want to kill 100 people standing at the other end of the football field (group 2).

    Group 1 wields swords, group 2 wields bows.
    Group 1 can only advance 25 yards per turn.

    1st turn - Group 2 attacks immediately since group 1 is in range. 10% (10 people) of group 1 dies in the attack leaving 90 people, yet group 1 makes it to the 75 yard line.

    2nd turn - Group 2 attacks immediately but since the range is closer accuracy is improved for this demonstration. Group 1 takes 20% casualties (18 people from group 1 perish leaving 72 people. Group 1 hits the 50 yard line.

    3rd turn - Group 2 attacks immediately, increased accuracy yields 30% casualties. 22 casualties are inflicted leaving 50 people from group 1 left. Group 1 stops at the 25 yard line.

    4th turn - Group 2 attacks immediately inflicting 60% casualties (its like shooting at the broad side of a barn. 30 of group 1's 50 die leaving 20 people. Group 1 achieves the 1 yard line and kills at 100% efficiency killing 20 of group 2's archers.

    5th round - Group 2 obliterates whats left of group 1's army.

    Group 1 - 100% casualties
    Group 2 - 20% casualties

    My math may not be perfect, but you get the idea.
    i understand how the battles are played out. you fail to see the point of my post; swordsmen aren't effective against archers despite what is implied, true?

  8. #8

    Default

    Thats why they are used as a defensive unit. In a fortified keep, where there are traps, logs, and archer towers to keep enemy archers busy while they advance. You wouldn't send an M1A1 abrams into a field of enemy wielding RPGs by itself.

    Hell, even throw an archer and a few other units into the mix and you would of done a lot better that battle.
    Last edited by Aerose; 05-25-2009 at 05:08 PM.

  9. #9

    Default

    You have to take into account accuracy revision. Its a lot easier to hit somebody at 25 yards then 100.

  10. #10

    Default

    The OP's point is that we are told swordsmen are effective against archers. They are not effective against archers. Obviously range is WHY they are not effective, but that does not counter his point at all.

    I think ideally...

    Swordsmen counter archers
    Archers counter pikemen
    Pikemen counter Calvary and Cataphracts
    Calvary and Cataphracts counter swordsmen

    Warriors really shouldn't even be a reasonable option for high end warfare. It should be a beginner unit at best.

    Of course, this isn't the actual state of the game =(

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •