Samurai Wars Unit vs Unit Chart

[Puzz3D]

Samurai Wars unit vs unit performance:

PT = portuguese teppo
JT = japanese teppo
YA = yari ashigaru
YS = yari samurai
SA = samurai archers
ND = no-dachi
NA = naginata
WM = warrior monks
CA = cavalry archers
YC = yari cavalry
NC = naginata cavalry
HC = heavy cavalry

Read the charts left to right.
A=excellent, B=good, C=average, D=poor, E=terrible

Melee performance vs target [+=advantage with charge]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

..........YA......SA......YS......ND......NA......WM.....CA......YC......NC......HC
YA.......C........D........E........E........E........E........A........A........B........C
SA.......B........C........D........D........E........E........D........E........E........E
YS.......A........B........C........D........E........E........A........A........A.......A
ND.......A........A........B........C+......D........E........C+......D........E........E
NA.......A........A........A........B........C........D........A........B........C.......D
WM......A........A........A........A.......B........C+.......A........B........C+.....D
CA.......E........B.........E........C.......E........E.........C........E........E.......E
YC.......E........A.........E........B.......D........D.........A.......C+.......B.......C+
NC.......D........A.........E........A......C+.......C+.......A.......D........C+......D
HC.......C........A.........E........A.......B........B.........A.......C+.......B.......C+


Ranged performance vs target [+=half step advantage]:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

.........YA.....SA.....YS.....ND.....NA.....WM....CA.....YC.....NC.....HC.....PT.....JT
SA......B.......B.......C.......A.......E.......A.......C+.....C+.....D+.....E+......B......B
CA......B.......B.......C.......A.......E.......A.......C+.....C+.....D+.....E+......B......B
PT......C.......C.......C.......C+.....D+.....C+.....C+.....C+.....D+.....D+......C......C
JT......C+.....C+......C+.....B.......C.......B.......B.......B.......C.......C.......C+....C+

[Tomisama]

Appling some serious study. Thanks Master CBR

And Congratulations on achieving your Brown Belt in the Art Of Samurai Warfare (something new has been added)

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...91&postcount=7

Edit:My apologies Lord Yuuki

I guess I had CBR on the brain because of the added ranking system?

The matrix above is quite a piece of work. I studied it for over an hour last night and will continue. Though I am sure it will improve my game some, I honestly have been considering taking an observers seat, just monitoring events. Getting older and slower, and more easily confused. We’ll see how it goes

P.S. Would you please explain "half step advantage".

[Tomisama]

to be sure revisions above are seen.

[Puzz3D]

The matrix above is quite a piece of work. I studied it for over an hour last night and will continue. Though I am sure it will improve my game some, I honestly have been considering taking an observers seat, just monitoring events. Getting older and slower, and more easily confused. We’ll see how it goes [/COLOR]

While the matchups seem intuitive to me, I realized after watching some replays that they aren't necessarily intuitive to everyone. Since we are playing without upgrades, a unit's performance remains constant, so the chart is valid for every battle. No upgrades also means that the only way to get an advantage is to make better matchups or make flank attacks. The five A, B, C, D, E categories work well enough to indicate the effectiveness of the melee matchups. Approximately:

A is 90/10 chance to win/loose
B is 70/30 chance to win/loose
C is 50/50 chance to win/loose
D is 30/70 chance to win/loose
E is 10/90 chance to win/loose

A flank attack gives the attacking unit a two letter increase in effectiveness for a couple of combat cycles. A rear attack is slightly better than a side attack. The + sign is there to indicate units which can shift a 50/50 chance to a 60/40 by charging.

For the ranged chart, the + sign is there because I needed more than 5 steps to convey the differences in effectiveness. It indicates an effectiveness about 1/2 way to the next letter level. Cavalry is at a disadvantage against shooters because it is a larger target than infantry, but it's not a full step disadvantage so I've used the + to indicate that. That's why, for instance, SA gets a C+ vs CA even though they have the same bow and ammo. There are probably some errors in the chart, but roughly:

A is 3 kills per volley on average at max range.
B is 2 kills per volley on average at max range.
C is 1 kill per volley on average at max range.
D is 1/2 kill per volley on average at max range.
E is less than 1/2 kill per volley at max range.

So, a 60 man SA gets about 3 kills per volley on a WM. The SA has 36 ammo which means it has the potential to kill 108 WM. At 1000 koku for a 60 man WM, just killing 1/2 of a WM with 10 volleys more than pays for the 400 koku SA.

One interesting thing to explore in the stat is whether or not it's cost effective to use a SA to help win an otherwise equal gun battle. To be effective, the guns have to inflict some casualties on enemy melee units after winning the gun battle.

Basically, each unit has a proper way it should be used. If some of your units get into a disadvantageous situation, the only way to compensate for that is to gain an advantageous situation somewhere else. The morale level has been chosen so that units typically hold at least down to 30 men unless they are seeing friendly units rout. Outnumbering by itself will not cause the enemy to run away. So when the battlelines close for melee, individual matchups are still important. If you are at a disadvantage on the battleline, there is time to execute flanking moves even with infantry. However, if the flanking path is obstructed by enemy units, you won't get there in time to save your battleline.

I don't think quickness is the key in Samurai Wars. You can't really do anything that the enemy can't respond to. The key is working the enemy into an untenable postition by maneuvering and by the accumulation of small advantages. You have to be careful not to overestimate the value of advantages gained which is something I have a tendency to do. Also, since the game uses an RPS combat system, the ranged, sword, spear and cavalry components have to be combined for the best results. For instance, it would be better to have a YS + ND in a two unit group operating away from the main army than either a YS + YS or ND + ND. The problem with having 2 YS is that cavalry will simply avoid it, and with having 2 ND is that cavalry will jump on it. There is an RPS system within the cavalry types, so you can have interesting cavalry engagements, but these have to take place away from spear infantry.

I'd like to see the tactics become second nature so that players can think at a strategic level during the battles which is why I made the charts. For instance, in the last 3v3 on Sunday, replay STW_3v3_57, we were initially very successful in repelling Tosa's cav attacks on our right flank, but he persisted with support from CBR cav and they succeeded in drawing some of our infantry units off the hill down into the valley on the right. However, almost all of our cavalry was on the left preparing for an assault to gain the high ground there which, if successful, would have given us complete control of all the high ground on the map. So, the action on the right was not compatible with the strategic plan, and tactically our units in the valley were lacking cavalry support.

So, keep playing and we'll work harder on team coordination.

[Togakure]

Excellent information, thanks a bunch. These seem obvious, but I thought I'd better ask to be sure:

Where it says "B is 3 kills per volley on average at max range," is meant "B is 2 kills per volley on average at max range," correct? Otherwise this is the same as the previous line, for A.

Where it says "C is 10/90 chance to win/lose," is meant "E is 10/90 chance to win/lose," correct?

***

Any comments about the Hatamoto unit?

With naginata, doesn't it make sense not to attack with them, but line them up in ranks in Hold Formation and move them into melee, letting them defend as they go--like many players use Byzantine Infantry in VI? Their defense stat is strong, not their attack, so by pushing into the melee without click-attacking a unit, their defense stat is in effect, correct? The chart shows a D rating for NA against monks. WM attack stat is 5, and defense stat is 2; NA in Hold Formation attack stat is -3 and defense stat is 9 ... WM still has advantage if attacking because of the morale penalty it inflicts, and the NA's two less base morale to begin with. But does this really result in a D grade? Or is the chart assuming the NA are click-attacking in Engage at Will mode?

Are No Dachi truly "terrible" against Warrior Monks? I assume this is because of the difference in defense and the morale penalty incurred when attacked by monks? What if the No Dachi attack the monks and get in a good charge before the monks can attack? Might they rate a "+" in this instance? I'm surprised that they rate E, rather than D (I haven't done the math; I base this on intuition and subjective observation). Granted, the cost difference is significant--two NDs for the cost of one WM. Yeah, I guess it makes sense that a monk would eat a ND unit for dinner one on one, all else being equal. I've still got upgraded NDs from MI on my brain.

One thing I miss from VI (if you can believe that) is the speed and turn around rate of light cav (i.e. Alans, Steppe Cav, etc.). I'd always imagined Yari Cav to be like these, but they don't seem to react like them in BETA8. Feints and harrassment seem a bit impractical so far, and limits their use to fast anti cav, or flank/rear attacks and cleaning up abandoned ranged units--which Cav Archers do just fine. H1 CA only cost 20 koku more than YC. At H0 they fire as quickly and accurately as foot archers, over the same distance, and with the same ammo ... and only cost 200 koku more. Gonna have to try these puppies next weekend.

Speaking of which, doesn't it make sense that the rate of fire and accuracy when shooting from horseback would be just a wee bit less than when firing from foot?

Heh, ok ... I'm all over the proverbial map. Time to sleep. Fun games today guys! Thanks.

[R'as al Ghul]

One thing I miss from VI (if you can believe that) is the speed and turn around rate of light cav (i.e. Alans, Steppe Cav, etc.). I'd always imagined Yari Cav to be like these, but they don't seem to react like them in BETA8. Feints and harrassment seem a bit impractical so far, and limits their use to fast anti cav, or flank/rear attacks and cleaning up abandoned ranged units--which Cav Archers do just fine. H1 CA only cost 20 koku more than YC. At H0 they fire as quickly and accurately as foot archers, over the same distance, and with the same ammo ... and only cost 200 koku more. Gonna have to try these puppies next weekend.

This seems a matter of perception. When playing VI in the v1-tourney all cav seemed too slow in comparison to Samwars. But then I looked up the stats and it turned out that YariCav has the same speed as AlanMercs. I checked the values for turn rates again and they are equal, too. YariCav is one of my favourite units but it's tricky to control them. One needs some practice to handle them properly.
Are you sure that H1 CA cost 1020? Seems a bit much.

Speaking of which, doesn't it make sense that the rate of fire and accuracy when shooting from horseback would be just a wee bit less than when firing from foot?

Yes, it does. But we play in the teppo-period where archery was less important than before. At that time only a small number of Samurai would still use the bow, most had changed to Yaris on horsebacks. Those that still used them were excellent shooters. So, we argue that our CA are so good in what they do, that their proficiency equals that of foot archers. Yes, a weak argument, I know, but it's for the good of the gameplay.

R'as

[Puzz3D]

Where it says "B is 3 kills per volley on average at max range," is meant "B is 2 kills per volley on average at max range," correct? Otherwise this is the same as the previous line, for A.

Where it says "C is 10/90 chance to win/lose," is meant "E is 10/90 chance to win/lose," correct?

Yes you are right. I've corrected both of these things in the post.

Any comments about the Hatamoto unit?

It's intended to be useful as the taisho's unit, but not so effective that it gets used as a standard unit. It's original cost and combat stats were adjusted after analyzing multiplayer battles, and I think we succeeded in placing it in the intended role. The taisho himself has 6 hitpoints (this can't be changed) which basically doubles the hatamoto unit's effective size, and his unit gets +2 morale which is why a taisho unit works better than a non-taisho unit. The relatively low cost allows the hatamoto to be held back from melee longer than you can with a higher cost unit such as NC or HC. It can be very effective in the later stages of a battle since it's fast and maneuverable.

With naginata, doesn't it make sense not to attack with them, but line them up in ranks in Hold Formation and move them into melee, letting them defend as they go--like many players use Byzantine Infantry in VI? Their defense stat is strong, not their attack, so by pushing into the melee without click-attacking a unit, their defense stat is in effect, correct? The chart shows a D rating for NA against monks. WM attack stat is 5, and defense stat is 2; NA in Hold Formation attack stat is -3 and defense stat is 9 ... WM still has advantage if attacking because of the morale penalty it inflicts, and the NA's two less base morale to begin with. But does this really result in a D grade? Or is the chart assuming the NA are click-attacking in Engage at Will mode?

The defensive stat is always in effect whether or not you click on the enemy unit. Clicking on the enemy unit causes your unit to charge which gives it the charge bonus. The naginata unit only has a small charge bonus, and it's probably not worth breaking formation to get this bonus. The WM doesn't inflict a morale penalty just by attacking, although cavalry does when attacking infantry in the MTW/VI engine.

The D grade for NA vs WM is due to NA having 6 combat points and WM having 7, and due to the WM's individual men moving faster. This seems to benefit them in making multiple attacks after they gain a numerical advantage. The D not a precise rating, but, as I recall, tests showed it to be closer to a D than a D+. Switching the naginata to hold formation doesn't change the outcome of that matchup, but it does allow the naginata to hold out longer.

I see the unit in a defensive role or as a blocking unit while you flank with another unit. Some players do get good use of it in attacking. It can be used to tie up the more expensive WM for a long time which will give a temporary advantage somewhere else. You could shoot the WM with an archer while the NA engages it with minimal loss to the NA.

Are No Dachi truly "terrible" against Warrior Monks? I assume this is because of the difference in defense and the morale penalty incurred when attacked by monks? What if the No Dachi attack the monks and get in a good charge before the monks can attack? Might they rate a "+" in this instance? I'm surprised that they rate E, rather than D (I haven't done the math; I base this on intuition and subjective observation). Granted, the cost difference is significant--two NDs for the cost of one WM. Yeah, I guess it makes sense that a monk would eat a ND unit for dinner one on one, all else being equal. I've still got upgraded NDs from MI on my brain.

Yes. Avoid this matchup at all costs because the no-dachi will loose very quickly so it won't buy you enough time to make a counter move. The no-dachi do have a higher charge bonus, and that's what you should try to take advantage of when using them. They are intended to be used as a flanker, although, they can defeat YS straight up. If you can charge into a stationary WM, then you can give the no-dachi a +, but I would do it into a flank. The chart is for units fighting frontally with both units charging. Two ND standing side by side can beat a single WM. Engage frontally with one ND in hold formation, and move the other to attack the rear of the WM. The two ND will win.

Upgraded ND were very strong in MI, but this was the result of a mistake in the way weapon and armor upgrade costs were calculated in MI. In original STW, they were better balanced, although, they were usually upgraded there as well but so were YS. This served to close the gap between the weaker YS and ND and the stronger NA and WM which weakened the RPS gameplay. It has been argued that the RPS gameplay in Samurai Wars may be too strong, but consider that you can still beat a WM with two YS just as you could in original STW with no upgrades applied to the YS.

One thing I miss from VI (if you can believe that) is the speed and turn around rate of light cav (i.e. Alans, Steppe Cav, etc.). I'd always imagined Yari Cav to be like these, but they don't seem to react like them in BETA8. Feints and harrassment seem a bit impractical so far, and limits their use to fast anti cav, or flank/rear attacks and cleaning up abandoned ranged units--which Cav Archers do just fine. H1 CA only cost 20 koku more than YC. At H0 they fire as quickly and accurately as foot archers, over the same distance, and with the same ammo ... and only cost 200 koku more. Gonna have to try these puppies next weekend.

Units turned faster in STW than they do in MTW. We investigated all the parameters that might be used to increase the turn rate, but they didn't have any effect. A game mechanic also affecting this is that, in the MTW/VI engine, the unit leader has to move to the front of the unit before it will head off in the new direction. Combined with the larger 60 man cavalry units in Samurai Wars this causes cav units to change direction slower than the 40 man units of MTW/VI. Alans and Steppe cav were often used in 2 ranks to charge and feint allowing them to reverse direction quickly. If you put a 60 man cav unit in 2 ranks, it becomes quite unwieldy. On the other hand, a 60 man cav unit can remain useful after more encounters than a 40 man unit.

The YC is intended to be a flanker and anti-cav unit. It doesn't have high enough morale or high enough melee power to fulfill a frontal assault role, although, it can defeat ND which is the weakest sword unit. The asault cav role is fulfilled by the NC and HC units.

In general, upgrades are not worth their cost (especially a valor upgrade which costs 70%), although, in some cases an upgrade might be worth using for its surprise value. A valor upgrade on a CA is not going to be worthwhile because you will still have less combat points than a YC. The CA has evolved over time to what it is in the 11b stat. It was originally more expensive, had less morale, more combat points and less accuracy. Most feedback was that it should be lower cost and a more effective shooter. We did that, and now we see the unit used more. The cost had to remain higher than the foot archer since the CA has higher mobility. The bow was improved, and the melee power lowered. The CA will still loose to SA and to teppo in a shootout. The CA is very good at provoking a response from the enemy when used on a flank which can open lines of attack for the melee cav units. It's also pretty easy to loose a CA to a YC with almost no compensation.

Speaking of which, doesn't it make sense that the rate of fire and accuracy when shooting from horseback would be just a wee bit less than when firing from foot?

That might seem intuitive, but I think Orda would say firing from horseback could be just as accurate and just as fast as from foot. I would say only if the unit could fire when moving would there be some sacrifice in accuracy. It's true, that in original STW, CA had less accuracy than SA. However, in original STW, a unit retained it's full unused ammo regardless of its losses which maintained the total killing capability of its ranged weapon. In MTW/VI, dead men take their ammo with them. We compensated for this by increasing ammo from 28 to 36 arrows. However, because CA take more losses in a shootout with SA, they loose more potential than they did in original STW. The change in accuracy for CA in Samurai Wars was gradual (0.4. 0.5 and finally 0.6 accuracy) using multiplayer feedback. The improvement in the accuracy to equal that of SA maintains the original playbalance better, and as a consequence also makes the unit more dangerous when not countered. The same can be said of SA. They are more dangerous when not countered than they were in original STW. This increases the RPS gameplay which makes rushing more of a risk unless the enemy has taken too many shooters.

Heh, ok ... I'm all over the proverbial map. Time to sleep. Fun games today guys! Thanks.

The battles were good. Thanks for playing. BTW, I had a power failure which is why I left abruptly.

[Togakure]

Hi R'as (John, formerly Toga, here). Sounds good to me. I was mainly curious to hear the rationale. I realize the team has been over the stats with a fine-tooth comb. Thanks for the explanations.

Yes, when I looked at the stats of the YC, the speed and manueverability stats are the same as Alans. So indeed it must be perception, likely due to the animations. I've only played a handful of SW games, and have been playing STW SP exclusively since I left VI. I need to re-acclimatize to the VI engine to get a better sense of things.

Yep, unless the costs are different in actual MP than in Custom Battle "MP" for BETA8, raising the honor of Cavalry Archers from zero to one increases the cost from 600 to 1020. I think this is a good deal considering what you get. The morale in BETA8's version of the CA is much more robust than the CA of old (STW MI). Unless I'm reading things incorrectly, the base morale of CA in BETA8 is 6; in STW MI, it's 2. In MI their low base morale made them fragile; a player had to be very careful using them in melee at all. With a base of 6, and 8 with an H1 upgrade, they should be expensive as they are more useful from a melee standpoint. CA are still ineffective in head-on melee against anything but archers and guns, but they can be very useful flank- or rear-attacking an already engaged unit, and running down routing units. Combine this with BETA8s improved archery capability, paying the same price as you would for a YC for a highly mobile range unit that can hang in and provide support melee when needed seems reasonable. Now I understand why Tosa's CA were running around attacked units in Wedge formation .

The same applies to Naginata Infantry in regard to base morale increase in SamWars over MI. I think this is a vast improvement for the unit. NA were rarely used in STW MI (except when using the 1.03 stat, which doubled its base morale), because the cost/performance ratio just didn't pan out. I am looking forward to experimenting with them; they look like they could be effective for the cost when using multiple units as a defensive wall against shock troops, supported by YS vs. cavalry.

Back to cav: other H0 cav slaughter even H1 CA 1v1, as they should. Tested that last night. On 1v1 tests on the horselands map, I was suprised that HC beat YC rather decisively in about a dozen tests. NC defeated YC also, another surprise, but took more losses, and didn't do as well if the YC got a solid charge in and the NC didn't. It doesn't seem like the spear bonus/penalty quite compensates for the YC's reduced morale based on a handful of, granted, simple tests.

Having fun. Thanks for all of this.

Edit: Regarding YC versus NC and HC: an unobstructed high-speed charge makes all the difference. The tests I ran last night were NC under my control charging YC under the AI's control at high speed. When I reversed this, YC under my control devastated NC controlled by the AI head on. They had a harder time against HC, but won more than they lost, though they suffered considerably more losses against HC.

[Togakure]

Ah! I didn't see Puzz's post. Excellent explanations, as always. Thanks.

Aha ... the +2 morale penalty inflicted by monks when they attacked a unit was a hard-coded STW feature, and as this is the VI engine it doesn't apply? Makes sense to me. Good to know--I was factoring in the attack penalty as I matched up units yesterday (I rarely use monks because of their cost, but they scare me when an opponent has them ... *laughs like Masakage Yamagata in Kagemusha*).

Thanks for the reminder about cav inflicting a morale penalty on infantry--I'd forgotten about that also. TW MP has been out of mind necessarily for a while. Now I can afford to join you all on many Sundays for SamWars though. I am really looking forward to some more fun.

Interesting about the defense stat in regard to the Naginata. Some very good VI players taught me how to use Byz Infantry more effectively in the manner that I described. But that unit also benefits from 100 men, so maybe that contributes to why the technique described works well with them. I tried the technique in a few custom battles with Naginata after we played last night, and it didn't seem to work so well. They also got chewed up by cav, which supports the grade system which you've provided.

Your explanation about YC response time makes perfect sense also--that the unit leader must move to the front, that the unit size is bigger. I will have to use them like I did in STW, which is fine.

Yes indeed, the surprise value for upgrades is the only reason why I've been investigating them. I imagine that a unit might be more experienced (valor) or have higher quality weapons or armor than the average. As only one point of added valor, weapon, or armor is practical cost-wise in BETA8, upgrades can't get too out of hand. Really, the surprise "benefit" is well paid for, so I'm not so sure they're practical. I will try a few things and see how it goes, but to be honest, I love being able to not worry about them and just choose a H0 army that works well. Puts the focus where it should be--on field strategy and tactics, and team play.

If any host-capable SamWars players would like to meet at other times to play, I am willing. I'm off today, and am usually around de-workifying at night during the week from 8-11 PM EST USA. I would enjoy the practice and good company. If anyone is game, PM me. I check the forum a couple of times a day usually.

Thanks again, Puzz3D and R'as (and Tosa, CBR, Toda-Watanabe, and Warman for the fun games and company yesterday).

[R'as al Ghul]

Hi R'as (John, formerly Toga, here).

Hi mate!
I saw your posts in the tournament field and I figured that it's you.
I deliberately left most of the points for Yuuki to answer. I assume it's all clear now?
One thing, YC can seriously harm HC when they get their charge right but in a melee fight they loose with heavy casualties.
A good approach for manouvering YC is to imagine a string attached to the unit, as if you pull a toy on wheels around. With some practice you can achieve an almost continuous movement. As with the toy, you need to keep the string tense, meaning before the YC've reached their target you need to issue a new order and the angle of the new movement order must not be too acute but rather straight. (Does this make sense to you?)

Hope to see you this Sunday.

R'as

[Togakure]

Hi mate!
I saw your posts in the tournament field and I figured that it's you.
I deliberately left most of the points for Yuuki to answer. I assume it's all clear now?
One thing, YC can seriously harm HC when they get their charge right but in a melee fight they loose with heavy casualties.
A good approach for manouvering YC is to imagine a string attached to the unit, as if you pull a toy on wheels around. With some practice you can achieve an almost continuous movement. As with the toy, you need to keep the string tense, meaning before the YC've reached their target you need to issue a new order and the angle of the new movement order must not be too acute but rather straight. (Does this make sense to you?)

Hope to see you this Sunday.

R'as

Yes, very clear. Yuuki-san schooled me in a couple of games last night, on Yamato (wow, forgot how fun--and how hard--that map is!), and Nagashima. The maps were great! I have so much to unlearn and learn, it's exciting. I took two HC and he had two YC on Nagashima. The strengths and weaknesses were illustrated well in our contest. Yuuki, thanks so much for the excellent training and fun games.

Yes, thank you for that analogy, R'as. These kinds of tips help a lot. I will practice the technique using Custom Battles to develop a feel for it. My biggest challenge will be to let go of MI preconceptions and "subconscious" tendencies, and adapt to the SW Way. I'm jazzed.

Unless something unforeseen comes up, I will be there on Sunday. Once you teasingly called me "devil" after an MI game lol. I have this funny feeling the situation is going to be reversed now, hehehe. All in good fun. Cheers.

[Puzz3D]

Masamune,

Don't forget to set the mouse speed and map scroll speed in the game options to something that's comfortably fast. The default values are a bit slow, and can put you at a disadvantage against players that are using a faster speed.

[TosaInu]

Hello,

Footarchers in that era were most likely ashigaru. While there were certainly marksman among ashigaru, these archers were mixed in with teppo to sustain fire when the arquebus had to be reloaded. Coordinating the rate of fire was important. The cost of this is, typically, reduced accuracy and power (drawweight).

The samurai of the old (we assumed the CA to be them, sort of) were destined to be warrior/archer from birth and had to hit a moving target. That requires accuracy, they probably also had stronger bows and better arrows.

The hatamoto resembles a mounted archer better, be it that the engine doesn't support shooting while moving.

I like M2TW in that it supports individual looking soldiers in a unit. It's (mostly) cosmetic only, but maybe we'll get the mixed combined units (gun, archer,spear ashigaru squads and sword, poleaxe, mace MAA) and get an even better approximation of battles.

[Togakure]

Hello,

Footarchers in that era were most likely ashigaru. While there were certainly marksman among ashigaru, these archers were mixed in with teppo to sustain fire when the arquebus had to be reloaded. Coordinating the rate of fire was important. The cost of this is, typically, reduced accuracy and power (drawweight).

...

This was well-illustrated in the game on Sunday where you defended with R'as against Yuuki and Tomi. Both of you were using archers in this manner.

It would be interesting to play a pre-firearms game or two or three. This would bring archers and archery into focus.

[TosaInu]

This was well-illustrated in the game on Sunday where you defended with R'as against Yuuki and Tomi. Both of you were using archers in this manner.

Yes, during the rainpatches. Tomi did that too. What the ashigaru squads did was that the archers fired when the guns were reloading.

It would be interesting to play a pre-firearms game or two or three. This would bring archers and archery into focus.

Yes, it would. The mapchoice will also make a difference. 8 guns per army on an open map can work, a map like Tano asks for more archers (patches of small hills and trees).

A hatamotos only game is fun too.

[Puzz3D]

Yes, during the rainpatches. Tomi did that too. What the ashigaru squads did was that the archers fired when the guns were reloading.

Players do use archers in Samurai Wars to support guns even when it isn't raining. They do this to win a skirmish between teppo, and it can be effective. It's also possible for a player to use archers exclusively in lieu of guns. I would say you have to be very good to do this on an open map because archers are more expensive than guns.

[TosaInu]

That's true Puzz3D. An archer can help to weaken the enemy gunline, especially when it can fire out of a wood or from behind a small hill, while the gun can't return fire.