archers useless?

[Salahedin]

Salam.

So I love the archers but it seems to me they're not worth it. Even Cretan ones with one gold chevron are about useless if not top of a hill.

Oh and please don't advice me to use slingers : they're far more effective. Against my own troops I mean.

So is there a way to improve that? I know quite nothing in modding but I'm ready to try that if nothing else can improve their efficency...

I didn't try horse archers though. Are they better?

Thks

[Yyrkoon]

Sal, Archers are great if you use them in the right contexts and for the right purposes. Archers are perfect for taking out annoying skirmishers, lightly armored levies, or shirtless barbaroi. In my Getai campaign, I love archers because so many of the Celts, Sauromatae, and Illyroi nearby don't wear armor. When units have medium armor, archers are less useful. If you ever think archers aren't useful, try playing a sauromatae campaign and use horse archers. You'll discover they're insanely useful. Archers aren't meant to attack the enemy as they're running toward you unless they have no armor. Armored enemies should only be attacked when their backs or sides face the archers. One good idea is to engage the enemies and run your archers around behind and just start letting loose. Make sure you turn off fire at will because the AI wastes arrows like crazy and gets few kills out of them.

[Strategos Alexandros]

Units with heavier armour are more easily defeated by slingers, but archers are useful as a cheap alternative to light cavalry for taking out skirmishers. As Yyrkoon said, units with shields need to be outflanked by your archers.

[Mediolanicus]

And when you use slingers, just don't deploy them right behind your own forces and certainly not when they are shooting down. A bullet flies horizontally, an arrow goes in a bow.

In my battles slingers kill around 200enemies, archers around 80-150 on avarage (cretans sometimes even 250!).

[Salahedin]

against skirmishers in loose formation even 4 units of archers don't wear them down... and waste all their ammo. I'll try not to let them in fire at will mode though. Maybe I should change my Vanilla's tactics...

Any tips about slingers? I love to play on VH/VH, and it's almost insane. So I fight battles only on top of mountains (where archers are great) and on bridges, Bur defending a bridge with slingers is suicide... And no way to put them behind the lines ^^.

Lately my archers were only firing fire ("firing fire" is my english so bad or???) and I started using ballistae, but I think there's a problem : even the greatest stone-throwers are ridiculously small on the battlefield. Same size for all. (I'm playing the romani.)

I'll try to put my archers on the flanks or back. But I'll need some light infantry to protect them doing so... uh. Let's see if I survive ^^.

[Mediolanicus]

A tip : don't play on VH battle. It screws up the balance.
The AI gets insane stat bonusses, but doesn't get any smarter or anything.

[machinor]

Well, if you play on VH battle difficulty than you have no right to complain about archers' uselessness.

[antisocialmunky]

Play Hai. Really, if you think archers are useless after a stink of Hai...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

against skirmishers in loose formation even 4 units of archers don't wear them down... and waste all their ammo. I'll try not to let them in fire at will mode though. Maybe I should change my Vanilla's tactics...

Any tips about slingers? I love to play on VH/VH, and it's almost insane. So I fight battles only on top of mountains (where archers are great) and on bridges, Bur defending a bridge with slingers is suicide... And no way to put them behind the lines ^^.

Lately my archers were only firing fire ("firing fire" is my english so bad or???) and I started using ballistae, but I think there's a problem : even the greatest stone-throwers are ridiculously small on the battlefield. Same size for all. (I'm playing the romani.)

I'll try to put my archers on the flanks or back. But I'll need some light infantry to protect them doing so... uh. Let's see if I survive ^^.

VH destroys game balance, end of. The largest stone-throwers still use Vanilla models because we were unable to get the large models in game and animated properly. So that's not an issue either.

[Zeibek]

Play Hai. Really, if you think archers are useless after a stink of Hai...

Even better: play Saka. Even their normal foot archers are incredibly useful thanks to their insane range.

[Ca Putt]

or play sweboz, not because their archers ar good but they are very vunerable to archers :D

[antisocialmunky]

If you want vulnerable to archer, go with the Itchy Dwarves of Dacia.

[BenderBRodriguez]

are you playing with huge unit size? cause in small archers ARE useless, the denser the target is, the less likely that each arrow is going to miss, archer's fire arrow to the back of even a heavily armoured unit is almost equivalent to a cavalry charge, not quite as devastating, but the morale loss is huge

[Dayve]

Archers... just put them behind your lines and let them fire at light unarmoured infantry for best effect. If you see an enemies elite unit with its back to your archers, let them fire a volley into the back of that unit.

Don't let your archers fire at enemy skirmishers. Their formation is too loose and effect will be absolutely minimal. Use light cavalry for enemy skirmishers.

[Cbvani]

Salam.

So I love the archers but it seems to me they're not worth it. Even Cretan ones with one gold chevron are about useless if not top of a hill.

Oh and please don't advice me to use slingers : they're far more effective. Against my own troops I mean.

So is there a way to improve that? I know quite nothing in modding but I'm ready to try that if nothing else can improve their efficency...

I didn't try horse archers though. Are they better?

Thks

Archers are great at eliminating enemies behind wooden walls.

[PershsNhpios]

My good Salami! You are terribly mistaken! On any sane, sensible difficulty level, have you place a unit of enemy 'Oplitai between two units of Toxotai, and seen the results? So long as their backs are turned to one unit, they shall be reduced to a pittance within five volleys! Oh aye!
Archers are more valuable than slingers to me - excepting if I play as the Casse!

Never miss an opportunity to create a cohort of Bosphoran archers in your army - or three!
Absolutely marvellous!

-- Don't play on VH. I heard that it is a mortal sin.

[Salahedin]

Thank's for the tips. That make me think I should stop using the same type of units in my stacks. I mean : Is love to see my legios all witn the same type of units, that is with the romani (under Polybean reform)
1 or 2 General(s)
6 pedites extraordinarii
4 Triarii
2 Principes
2 Velites
2 Equites romani
2 Mercenary archers or slingers, type depending on where I'm fighting

That's my classical built for any full alll-purpose stack, followed by small reinforcement to resplenish it.
Apart from that I have half-stacks of gallic mercenaries to guard frontiers witn spain and sweboz (on a bridge hehe):
5 Neitos
4 Archers
1 Brihentin cavalry

A full stack of hellennic mercenaries doing wonderous things on top of a moutain:
1 General
4 High number mercenary greek phalanx (don't remember the name)
2 Mercenary hoplites
2 Classical hoplites
4 Pelsastai
6 Cretan Archers

What do you think of these builts? And that leads to another question: as for the romani, what are yours? and against wich opponent would you use each?

[Mediolanicus]

Much too many elites to my taste...
But then again I can fight with a balanced army because I don't fight on VH...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Thank's for the tips. That make me think I should stop using the same type of units in my stacks. I mean : Is love to see my legios all witn the same type of units, that is with the romani (under Polybean reform)
1 or 2 General(s)
6 pedites extraordinarii
4 Triarii
2 Principes
2 Velites
2 Equites romani
2 Mercenary archers or slingers, type depending on where I'm fighting

That's my classical built for any full alll-purpose stack, followed by small reinforcement to resplenish it.
Apart from that I have half-stacks of gallic mercenaries to guard frontiers witn spain and sweboz (on a bridge hehe):
5 Neitos
4 Archers
1 Brihentin cavalry

A full stack of hellennic mercenaries doing wonderous things on top of a moutain:
1 General
4 High number mercenary greek phalanx (don't remember the name)
2 Mercenary hoplites
2 Classical hoplites
4 Pelsastai
6 Cretan Archers

What do you think of these builts? And that leads to another question: as for the romani, what are yours? and against wich opponent would you use each?

:dizzy2:

Those stacks are insanely expensive. You can't be making a lot of money there.

A Roman stack, representing a full Consular Army should look something like:

4 Hastati
4 Princepes
2 Triarii
4 Velites
1 Pedites Extraordinarii
1 Equites Extraordinarii
1 Equites
1 General
2 Specialist/local units.

The army should leave Italy looking like that. Obviously composition changes after a few battles, for starters that army is very slightly cav-heavy, as the Roman ration is something like 1:8 (I haven't actually done the sums).

[gran_guitarra]

Well for the Polybian period the Legions had a group of 300 Cavalry in a 4500 man Legion. This means that the ration would be about 1 mounted soldier out of every 15 members of the army.
That is a rough estimate, though. ANd to be honest my knowledge of Roman military is mainly from a book I read (Roman Warfare, by Adrian Goldsworthy) and History Channel documentaries (which are often wrong or incongrous).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That is true, but the allies supllied 900 cavalry for the same number of infantry.

[theoldbelgian]

:dizzy2:

Those stacks are insanely expensive. You can't be making a lot of money there.

A Roman stack, representing a full Consular Army should look something like:

4 Hastati
4 Princepes
2 Triarii
4 Velites
1 Pedites Extraordinarii
1 Equites Extraordinarii
1 Equites
1 General
2 Specialist/local units.

The army should leave Italy looking like that. Obviously composition changes after a few battles, for starters that army is very slightly cav-heavy, as the Roman ration is something like 1:8 (I haven't actually done the sums).

actually folowing the eb description of the velites there should be as much as the triarii

[desert]

I think the ratio was 2 Hastati: 2 Principes: 1 Triarii for the Camillan Era, and 1:1:1 for the Polybian era. Or was it the other way around?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

There are 200 Velites per unit, based on the surviving documentary sources I reckon that the Velites outnumbered the Princeps and Hastati man for man because 600 infantry were removed from each Socii Alae to make up the Extraordinarii.

[Fluvius Camillus]

When put to good use, archers are a valuable resource on the battlefield, it's a pity EB decided to reduce the ammo capacity.:no:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think the ratio was 2 Hastati: 2 Principes: 1 Triarii for the Camillan Era, and 1:1:1 for the Polybian era. Or was it the other way around?

It is the other way around, I'm afraid.

Edit: I did the sums, the ration is exactly 1:7, Cavalry: Infantry. That's based on 1800 Socii Cavalry, 600 Roman Cavalry and 8400 infantry each.

[desert]

Ok, thanks for the correction. :2thumbsup:

[PershsNhpios]

I retch and quiver at the thought of the History Channel documentaries... Ugh.

Grown men playing dress-ups and hitting each other with plastic axes.

Their executive producer must be the most redneck, pro-american Jew in the entertainment business.

[Tartaros]

Don´t know if it was said befor - but also try to use flaming missles.
i for myself make very good experience with this (also, i like it, when the enemies are toasted...).

[Cambyses]

If I am using archers my first target is always opponent slingers and archers, especially horse archers (unless heavily armoured). Once they are all dead its time to move onto the light infantry. Generally in a big battle where you have a large number of archers its not worth engaging the lines until you have run out of arrows. In these circumstances its also difficult to get behind the enemy, so the best tactic is to shoot diagonally across the field so as to avoid the shield.

If you onl have a couple of units of archers then the old running behind and shooting is useful (so long as you have the cavalry advantage that is...) Archers are also pretty useful at running down enemy routers, and a suprising number of them are effective at flanking manouvers.

[Sagittarius]

I like playing VH/VH too. I did not notice that it would destroy balance very badly. Armies about the same size and quality are 50/50 to win or loose versus AI , so it is ok to me, adds more fun to the game, high losses even if you win also make you to think about reserves. And good for those who are bored of easy victories over enemy. Playing so far as romany - very easy to play nation as you can spam tons of cheap armies and relatively cheap auxiliaries ;) 209 BC and conquered whole italy, carthage, spain, galia, illyria, greece, germany (80 settlements under control). Planning invasions on british isles and dacia. War with egypt is total stalemate. Around 250 battles won, 40 lost. Result seems pretty balanced to me. AI stupidity is compensated by morale boost and slightly better fighting troops.
Now about the use of archers and slingers - if I can maneuver - I usually shoot enemy heavy infantry from behind - missile troops in this way kill everyone, and score a lot of kills. If you stand defensive on bridge - slingers are VERY useful. You are right, you cannot place them behind your units. But you can place them on the side on the bank of the river ;) So.. no units of yours are getting in the way of their rocks ;) This way on VH slinger do score 150-200 kills even without chevrons, just make sure you allow enemy to pack densily on the bridge ;) By the way - I use archers also from the sides while defending bridge. No need to make them shoot all at once - one missile troop shoots from left flank, the other - from right flank. When they are out of ammo - they are being replaced by new missile troops.

[Subotan]

I treat Archers like snipers, slingers like armour-piercing shells, and skirmishers like shotguns.
If you stik to that analogy, you should be fine.

[Indomenos]

i've actually never found that placing slingers behind your infantry does any damage to them whatsoever unless you forget to tell them to stop once they get into hand-to-hand melee. in fact, in EB MP the placement of massed slingers behind of thin wall of pikemen is a decisively effective tactic and doesn't cause casualties to your own forces. admittedly, you may lose one or two of your own men every so often, but i find those are reasonable casualty rates in the long term if it allows you to protect your slingers behind your infantry and gives them a chance at uninterrupted fire.

[Prussian to the Iron]

you're not using them in bulk. usually i try to have a general, a heavyt cavalry, a light cavalry, 10-11 infantry units(heavy), and the rest archers/skirmishers. (skirmishers becaus it'shard to egt archers)