Celtic archers??

**Birka Viking** · 03-23-2007, 23:23

I cant recruit Celtic archers anywhere when I play the celtic factions...Is this a bug or do I have a bad install?

**Arkatreides** · 03-23-2007, 23:44

Celtic archers (Sotoroas) are only available after the first Celtic reform.

**Fondor_Yards** · 03-24-2007, 01:26

Your not missing out on much. Celtic archers suck, just use slingers instead.

**Kugutsu** · 03-24-2007, 11:49

They are pretty pointless.

Compare:
Iaosatae: Damage 3, Ammo 40, Range 200, Armour Piercing
Sotaroas: Damage 3, Ammo 15, Range 143

The archers are slightly better in melee, but who uses missile troops in melee anyway... In my opinion the celtic slingers give the balearic ones a run for the best slinger in the game spot, simply on account of the obscene range.

**antisocialmunky** · 03-24-2007, 12:09

The only reason you'd even need archers is to break units with their fire arrows. The AI loves doing that.

**Birka Viking** · 03-24-2007, 12:22

OK thanks for the answers

. I just wondered were they were lol...And no I never use them, I always use slingers...

But then I have another question...Is slingers supose to be this good with endles of ammo and Armour Piercing shots?? Becouse they outclass celtic archers who hardly have any ammo at all???

**The Celtic Viking** · 03-24-2007, 12:37

Originally Posted by Kugutsu

The archers are slightly better in melee, but who uses missile troops in melee anyway...

Who uses missile troops in melee? I do! Bugimannoz make fine flankers when their ammo is spent.

As for sotaroas, I still think they have a use (although not a huge one). Flaming arrows can be good to have when defending in a siege, to destroy the enemy siege machines. Pretty much like the Greeks toxotai.

**antisocialmunky** · 03-24-2007, 13:20

Originally Posted by Birka Viking

OK thanks for the answers

. I just wondered were they were lol...And no I never use them, I always use slingers...

But then I have another question...Is slingers supose to be this good with endles of ammo and Armour Piercing shots?? Becouse they outclass celtic archers who hardly have any ammo at all???

Yes, pretty much. Any archer west of Syria kinda sucks. Slingers are accurately portrayed as the walking ownage they were for the most part.

The only ranged weapon that comes close is the Composite Bow and maybe the Indian Longbow - I never tried those. Think of them as a cheap replacement for vanilla Forester Warbands.

**Anthony** · 03-24-2007, 13:42

Slings were a more effective, accurate, longer range weapon. The only longer range weapons of the day would be specific eastern bows. There were western longbows, but that's more or less solely a physical description. They weren't made for firing that long of range, and were probably either just a regional method of production, or they were used to fire a heavier type of arrow (such as the case of Rhaetic longbows; Rhaetic arrows are a bit heavier). Archers are included both in means of completeness and historicity though. Archers were used by barbarian peoples in levy, probably because it was quicker to levy hunters. Slingers in the mythological demi-history of Ireland are held in extremely high esteem. All the members of the Fianna were slingers, for example, and trained extensively in its use. Viewed realistically, it becomes apparent a trained slinger would be a valued soldier. His weapon hits accurately from a great distance and can outrange any of the bows many people would be familiar with. The same problem then would be time, and expense. A slinger would be a trained soldier (at least in the use of his sling), and could demand more treasure than a hunter with his bow who has no real training. Of course, also, training takes time, and, as mentioned, it'd just be quicker to levy archers from hunters.