Guide to playing Patala competitively

[Shovah32]

I think he means light bandar warriors with the sticks and stones weapon, or something like that.

[Kuritza]

Yep. Light bandar warrior throws sticks and stones twice per round, and if you amass them in decent numbers, with some suicidal shieldmen in front of them, they clear chaff very efficienly. They arent that good for small clashes because of their awful precision, but when you go against 300+ meanads, satyrs, lobo guards, madmen etc, precision doesnt matter much.

[KissBlade]

The problem is, the purpose you described are better served by Elephants/Blade Winders. I can't really picture scenarios where you're not better off just saving your gold for those instead. The Longbows serve a more specific role as artillery. STick and stones might shoot twice and all but considering the price and the lack of durability, it's pretty meh since Patala has access to lots of crappy missile anyway.

[Edi]

I suppose a lot of that depends on what research difficulty you're playing. Just bumping research to hard makes the wait for Bladewind significantly longer.

[Kuritza]

Elephants -
No, sometimes they arent a better answer to chaff. Maybe if you can hire 30 of them all of a sudden, they are. But if you can only hire 5 elephants (imagine you're short on gold), they are quite vulnerable and wont hurt enemy as 25 light bandari.
Bladewind -
For Patala (late age) maybe... against Pangaea. Because Rlyeh will easily mind duel your bladewinders into untimely grave. Same goes for elephants btw, they are 5x times easier to mind blast than light bandari.

Price and durability is the same as for bandari longbowmen. And stone is not such a crappy missile when a big bad bandar is holding it, dmg 12 is better than a longbow arrow. Its only downside is terrible accuracy, which wont matter when enemy chaff is everywhere.

[Humakty]

I am a wannabee Arcos player (more success with fire nations...)and what I learned is that elephant are too costly to rely upon if you want an empire.

If you want them to be in sufficent numbers, so that they can literally crush any opposition before getting tired, you'll have too few battle groups, and you won't be able to fight on a sufficent number of fronts.

I've been able to win some battles with monkeys without using elephants, I think the big problem with them is having reinforcements after each noticeable engagements, as your troops tend to die easily.

[KissBlade]

I can't feasibly picture hiring those light bandar warriors over longbows in the beginning. And early mid, when elephants come into it's own and national troops are just about to be useless, they're still way more effective than light bandar warriors. The scenario you gave was mass chaff. Mass chaff allows you to build troops of your own too. 500 gold is still better served with elephants because those elephants will last you and it's not difficult to script them and place them to do heavy damage. You don't have to worry too much about friendly fire either as you will if you went light bandars. You can't go, well Ryleh is going to blah blah blah. That's nation specific because I can just as easily say light bandar warriors drop like flies to any sort of falling fire/frost, blade wind, archers etc. There's a lot more counters to them than elephants. And if you're forced to scatter into too many armies without a big solid main army you're fux0red anyway. In any MP, you should have ONE maybe TWO main armies around mid games with thugs/mini SC's scattered about to put out any small fires.

In short, Light Bandar Warriors are not good with their current stats cost. You can argue this until your blue in the face but until they have better range and better precision, I doubt I'll be changing my mind anytime soon.