What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I recall reading that their targeting is worse in Dom2, and losses to friendly fire is hard to avoid. So, is there any point at all in recruiting these guys? I'm not talking about crossbowmen here, just shortbowmen and longbowmen.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

The shortbow archers are horribly inaccurate. That said, I've routed a few armies with them, from morale or lucky commander kills=) So don't count them out yet! They're good at routing indys with no losses.

Archers are especially effective against Ermor - they can take out ghouls and unarmored zombies like mad, and don't hurt your own HI shield. However, if it is possible to do this in a mod, I plan to make zombie and skeletal units projectile-resistant. I want them to take half-damage from arrows, and if the only way I can do that is with an air shield, then by golly, that's what I'll do, even though it looks dumb=) Have you ever seen a zombie die in real life from blood loss, or having a vital organ pierced by an arrow? No? Me neither.

On the other hand, archers put a big drain on supply, so you really can't use them with any sort of -supply scale.

-cherry

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Archers are very good versus light troops. Use them.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Friendly fire from archers is very low in Dom2...this is one of the tweaks that Illwinter took care of during the beta.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I cant do without them. Its how you can best generate routs in the enemy without your frontliners having to take any hits. Even a shower from slingers can save the day such as chasing away enemy elephants.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Hmmm. I can well believe archers are effective against light troops. On the other hand, there's not a lot (except other light troops) that isn't. I guess the question becomes:

Is there any use for archers other than being one of the many options for despatching light troops? If not, are they the most cost-effective way of doing that?

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I love them, they r so cheap.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, it would seem that friendly fire accounts for at least fourth of my overall casualties so far. Especially when they fire a mass volley on that Last unit on the map while half of my army is chasing it at the same time. That's why I like air blessing, it keeps away arrows fired by *my* guys, not the enemies.

[ November 20, 2003, 01:22: Message edited by: HJ ]

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It depends. In general I'm not a fan of archers - I don't like killing my own troops - however there are times they are great.

Longbows are good for fast expansion with little or no loses - HI on hold and attack just in front of longbow.

Shortbow are fast to build and when you need a boost right then and there they are damn handy. 2 resource Machakan shortbow have filled a few holes for me. They also slaughter Serpent Dancers and I'm sure there other light armoured things you will have to worry about.

But all going well I won't use much bow or Xbow outside a race with a superior Version at the start - Marignon Xbow in Dom I and Man Longbow, might be others now. Placing the archers complicates placing mages as the Archers are valid targets - though you can make use of this. Targeting is crap and longbow or Xbow (the best Versions) will kill/wound your own super troops when pursuing.

I don't think the game depicts archers well. Targeting is both too easy and too inaccurate. Ranges seem odd in relation to the width armies deploy over and the speed troops move. Shorter ranges and greater accuracy could solve alot of problems. Archers are hard to get right both in computer games and tabletop wargames.

So sometimes yes and sometimes no, but I don't like archers and Xbow.

cheers

Keir

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Whats all this about the damage they do compared to infantry? I should do some battle simulations but my strong impression is that with archers my infantry Lasts longer, and without archers my expensive HI need replaced more.

They rout troops often before the troops reach me. They especially save my troops having to go head to head with some of the largest mobs in the game. And shooting at enemy archers often lets me take out an enemy commander which causes all his units to rout. For as cheap as they are I definetly feel they are worth more than the few more HI I might get instead

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Archers would be more useful if you could have an "Advance and Fire" command along with troops. It would allow the shorter range units more versitility as well as a few different approaches.

Also a Hold command on Units that you could more easily (ab)use. Right now there is only 1 option with Hold and Fire, you can't hold longer to take advantage of missle fire and in general your Archers with their accuracy are firing on your own troops more often than not if you are routing the armies.

I don't mind not being able to target commander/mages with archers but I do not not like the fact that if you have any archers they either act very idiotic, or if they are long range (Longbow, xbows) they will consistantly fire at the worst possible range even as your army moves forward.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Archers can be very effective. They also often goof up and kill your own men. If you're careful, you can usually avoid killing more of your own men than the enemy. However, I happen to get rather annoyed by them shooting my own guys - as I've said before, fixing this is at the top of my wish list, and the only thing that really bugs me.

PvK

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I just realized something I havent tried. My usual arrangment is an infantry front line and an archer second line. The infantry often has hold-and-attack or sometimes attack-closest

But a common historical situation would have been an archer front line set to fire at closest, and an infantry second line set to charge thru on attack-closest. Hmmmmm deserves testing

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I've tried it Gandalf. If you do; your main line gets butchered by enemy archers or cavalry (if they have any). You do have to position everything exactly just right and it would work, if the archers moved forward when an area is 'cleared' or safe.

You *can* put a small core of HI in the middle front as far as they go as the archerbait, then put in the top or bottom just a pixel back your archer patrol with another unit behind them for their 'front line' and it works fairly decently; but once your main infantry get forward, they will still get massacared, even if you chaincast Aim on the stupid bastards.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I haven't tried this exactly, but something close enough that I'm convinced it's feasible.

Exercise: take javelin-equipped light infantry, position them far up to the front, with your heavy infantry staggered just slightly back. LI orders to fire closest, HI ordered to hold and attack closest. The javelin volleys are usually about done around the time your HI engages. If the LI does happen to get engaged too quickly, depending on their morale they will either stick fast (and your HI comes in from the flank), or break and run. The fleeing LI will often take only minimal casualties, leading the enemy troops on a wild goose chase.

But in either event, a close range javelin volley can be devastating to independents which normally would put up a tough fight.

Then again, Ermor/Pythium LI is probably superior, so your mileage may vary.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think its very kool the Saber has "seen a zombie die in real life" ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif I think it would be awesome just to see one... I guess my city is boring. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Missiles will get much more interesting after the patch when "fire and flee" command won't mean that they will end up in a neighbouring province. Then we'll be able to utilize the first few volleys, which are the most important, and avoid the slaughter that happens with chasing routers.

Btw, I wonder what will happen with xbows and arbalests. Will they be able to shoot twice before retreating, or will those turns when they reload also count, and they'll only shoot once? The former would definitely be more attractive.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

With "Flaming Arrows", massed archers can be useful against even the seasonal spirits and other low-prot ethereals.
Flaming might not stack with other effects, 'tho; I have yet to see my undead archers burn somebody with their Banefire Bows even with Flaming Arrows on.

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I always thought that fire and flee should be fire and pull back. If I wanted them to actually flee then I would set it that way on their commander, not on them.

Hmmm does anyone know if "guard commander" with shooters amounts to the same thing as "fire at closest"? That would give some nice flexibility in an archer unit by controlling them with the commanders script. Attack one round (run up close), hold or fire, hold or fire, hold or fire, hold or fire, stay behind units (which would make him pull back but not leave)

NewSubject: I need to figure out what to put on the command line to get an icon on my desktop to go into a battlesim game the fastest. Straight into a game called BattleSIm using the mini.map, no intro, no fades, no music, low graphics for fast menus? or hi graphics for slow battles?

[ November 20, 2003, 12:49: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

Anyone seen the difference with short bow vs longbow? LongBows seem to be more accurate, but then Knights of Avalon were ping down the enemy quite efficiently...

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

I dont understand why I can attack rearmost but not fire at rearmost. Especially with longbows

Re: What\'s the verdict on archers?
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">When you attack the rear you eventually close up on the intended target and can choose who it is. Arrows do not have eyes and cannot decide whom to hit when they get to the rear. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif