Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Archers

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    75

    Lightbulb Archers

    ok i've noticed since the "Turtle" patch that made defence so insanely important, archers are getting killed at stupid high rates...

    i lose more archers than warriors, and the warriors are supposed to be on the front lines.

    how realistic of a battlesystem is it when the guys standing off to the side are dying faster than the guys going toe to toe with the blades and pikes?

    i understand the need for a more balanced battle system... but my god man it takes days to build a respectalbe archer regimen, and you guys are killing them off in minutes.

    if you're not gonna change the fact that my archers are now essentially fighting on the front lines... plz make them easier to train... it's getting a little rediculous

    what you should do is go play ceasar III and steal their battle screen... it's small, it's simple, it allows us to arrange our troops in formations so the right ones die first.



    also small side note... are ballistas essentially paper weights now? i mean no matter how many i send in, it doesn't seem to kill the other guy quicker, or cut down on my casualties... i understand the need for more balance... but ballista is supposed to be a game changer... otherwise why spend so much time building them? unless... why not add 45 minutes to your marching time
    Last edited by Met7797; 06-14-2009 at 03:12 PM. Reason: wanted to ***** about nerfed ballistas as well as faster archer deaths

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Your archers run faster than warriors. Try something quicker than your archers.
    ~Success without the possibility of failure is meaningless.~

    Queen Daisuke

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    75

    Talking nope

    they are not faster than pikes, and my pikes took 0 casualties while i lost half my archers
    and against cav no less... the unit that exists solely so pikes have meaning...lol
    Last edited by Met7797; 06-14-2009 at 03:32 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    75

    Default

    but i think that's the point... why are archers faster than warriors???

    what midevil war movie have you ever seen where the archers were on the front lines,
    and the warriors waited patiently behind the archers???

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Long Island, New York, USA
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Met7797 View Post
    but i think that's the point... why are archers faster than warriors???
    Lighter armor perhaps? You know those green tights weigh less.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Met7797 View Post
    they are not faster than pikes, and my pikes took 0 casualties while i lost half my archers
    and against cav no less... the unit that exists solely so pikes have meaning...lol
    Cavalry don't sit there and wait, they go after the archers/siege right away. Pikeman arent worth bothering with as a unit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Met7797 View Post
    but i think that's the point... why are archers faster than warriors???

    what midevil war movie have you ever seen where the archers were on the front lines,
    and the warriors waited patiently behind the archers???
    The nomenclature in this game is off. Warriors = Conscripts. Essentially villagers with pitchforks.
    ~Success without the possibility of failure is meaningless.~

    Queen Daisuke

  7. #7

    Default

    I thought Archers stopped when they were within range.

    It makes sense that they would run to a point where they would hit the target (not that it makes sense that they sit there being pelted by arrows, but that discussion's for another time), while warriors and pikemen are restricted by range and must run farther.

    I think Archers are Archers' first priority, no?

    There's also the matter of who's ignored. Scouts are the fastest, but they make bad meat shield because they are ignored by Archers.


    Илья, Server 1

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarchy View Post
    I thought Archers stopped when they were within range.
    They do. Nobody has said different.
    ~Success without the possibility of failure is meaningless.~

    Queen Daisuke

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Oxford England
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Archers are very good how do you do a post?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Metropolis
    Posts
    75

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Sobekeus View Post
    Cavalry don't sit there and wait, they go after the archers/siege right away. Pikeman arent worth bothering with as a unit.

    The nomenclature in this game is off. Warriors = Conscripts. Essentially villagers with pitchforks.
    if i remember correctly, villagers with pitchforks were instrumental in warfare before technology came along...

    again that's my point... why are pikes useless when traditionally they are cav killers...

    and how can they run right through a regimen of pikes, and not take a single casualty?
    my point is something should be done about unit arrangement...
    it's not accurate, or probable that a unit meant for standing off to the side and
    shooting arrows into the ongoin battle are able to be reached before having to fight through the throngs of infantry standing in front of them...

    this is warfare 101 ppl

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
  •