A treatise on the advantages of proactive defending, or "why archers suck".

Seon is right. The straight PAD system will result in your coastal cities getting repeatedly sacked.

So let me propose this: You NEED garrisons in your coastal cities. This garrison should be in a size and strength proportionate to the city's exposure to maritime sneak attack. The PAD as you described it only works for land borders.

I haven't read all the thread with much attention, but it seems no one considered archers are much more dangerous now, with the right promotions, thanks to their new preemptive strike (forgot the exact name).

I think Yashkaf's pro-active defense is an interesting idea; it always has been in earlier Civ versions and remains so. The ideas he lists are sound; it’s the details that can be tricky though.

I often find it difficult in the axemen/archer stages of my Immortal/Deity games to do much more than lightly garrison my cities, let alone equip a mobile pro-active defense stack worthy of the name.

I do like actively seeking the battle in an area where the enemy’s promotions matter less or not at all. The A.I. axemen’s City Raider promotion (are we sure it’s always a CR and not an all-round Combat promo?) would be wasted in the plains or forests.

Successful attacks earn more XP than successful defenses but eliminating a weakened unit – a bloodied archer who’s already killed one or two axemen - earns us less than a full-strength first round kill so I’m not convinced the archer’s sacrifice was in vain at all. When the defending archer survives he doesn’t necessarily have to choose the City Garrison promotion – he may not even have the chance if Warfare hasn’t been researched (it's not a "must have" tech)– as he can do a standard Combat promo among others. Frequently, I’ll end up with archers with (at least) the Shock I (40% vs melee units) and other promos, not too shabby out of the mean city streets. Basically, I’m not convinced that the axemen vs archer situation is so dire for archers – though there’s only one civilization that I’d actually choose to prioritize archers over axemen.

The Ljosalfar, that’s the archer civilization, if there is one. The forest elves racial trait is Dexterous which gives their archers a +1 attack for a 4/5 unit (with a 25% hill or city bonus, so they’re not strictly urban defenders). Add the other starting Elven trait allowing double movement in woods, they can generally move quicker in the typical Elven forest terrain than the axemen stack . Elf Archers could be the pro-active defense stack Y recommends.

That’s generally not the way it works out though. Mainly ‘cause it’s the losses taken in attacking approaching enemy stacks; I can’t afford to trade 2 to 1 and count on the surviving archer to cash in on the XPs. If the A.I. can afford this arithmetic, then I’m in trouble already.

I still use Elven archers though. Their religion (FOL, necessary for the March of Trees World Spell) requires Hunting (604 beakers) which allows Archery research (504) anyway so it’s a minor sidetrip to acquire archers and the Elven Hero Gilden Silveric (absolutely awesome in the early/middle game). That’s my pro-active mobile defense team: Gilden and some archers.

It’s not so bad. First, Gilden & Co. are usually twice as fast in the Elven woodlands than axemen opponents. Waiting for Horseback Riding (604 beakers) to make available the Mobility I promotion isn't necessaryi for the Elf archers. Btw, once someone (other than the Hippus) get horsemen, we're starting to leave the part of the game where axemen are truly dangerous by themselves. Second, if the axemen stack ignores our hilltop, forested treetop defense (+25% fortification bonus, an early and easy Nature spell the Elves quickly get), Gilden takes out an axemen or two as they move past). Third, it's true axemen do generally have easy access to the Bronze effect (+1 attack, +1 defense) but that's not decisive in itself, while the research trip to Iron effects (+2000 beakers) is a huge research effort – larger than both the initial archer or axemen path. By the time of Iron effects, archers should have some magic support (in the form of Enchantment II’s Flaming Arrow +1 attack) or the arrival of the longbowmen units.

I guess I’m trying to say in an unfortunately long-about way is that the Pro-Active Defense is a good idea but archer’s don’t (necessarily) suck. They can actually work – esp. if you’re an Elven archer supporting Gilden Silveric. It does get extremely problematic if you're greatly outnumbered; at that point, I'd eventually try for a Helm's Deep defense.

(P.S. I didn’t mention the Drill promotions (the “first-strike” chances) or the “Defensive Strike” archer abilities mostly because I think the 10% chance to do 5% damage isn’t too impressive although the combat example in another thread seemed more potent. I do know that having seen hundreds of archer combats (I do use archers a great deal) I haven’t noticed all that powerful a change in archer effectiveness. Certainly, nothing to write home to Evermore about.)

yah...a "some-what" supporter of the archery units

i just wanna point out one thing, u forgot to mention:

the elves also, get the combat bonus in forests (and the forest bonus works for BOTH attack and defense, unlike the hill bonus which only works for defense)

also, when u get the tech that gives the guardian of the forest civic...u get the ability to get the forest 2 promotion...

the ljosalfar civ IS definately THEE archer civ. this makes them quite competent with archery units (especially if u stay in the "trees"-forests).

though, i still feel it is very possible to compete with any civ using the achery units against other civs using the popular metal line units (axemen).

immortal and diety is quite a different matter... "turtling" or die (at least for me) !!!!

but if u are able to have time to engage with the barbarian units, as everyone knows, they are there to exp farm initial exp/levels/promotions for new units in the early game. for some reason people do this with their warriors and axemen, but for some reason completely do NOT realize archers can be used too as well....

The Elven archers do get an automatic 10% Attack bonus in woods, but, ironically, they don't get the Woodsman I promotion (30% attack and defense in forests) - it's restricted to the Recon and Melee troop categories.

And the Woodsman II bonus is awesome, but it's only for Recon troops and Beast units. Ironic, but perhaps they thought it necessary to tame the Elf archers?

Of course, to be able to get the Woodman II promotion, you first have to have the Guardian of Nature civic, which requires the Hidden Paths tech (1300+ beakers to unlock one promotion and a late middle game/ endgame civic!) And before Hidden Paths, we need the Ways of the Forest tech and... at that point, we're no longer in the early/late early game where axemen are the main threats.

So we'd be leaving Y's treatise timeline.

I neglected Hunters too; I think at 90 Hammers production cost, they're somewhat pricey but they're also early 4 strength units obtained along Elven "required" tech paths, can easily gain the Woodsman I promotion you mentioned, and start with 2 movement points making 'em faster than archers outside forests. They also get a 10% strength bonus to start.

I suppose their cost and their non-existent city defense bonuses make me treat them poorly: I can get three archers to defend my city (directly if need be) for the price of two Hunters who don't get any city defender bonus. And frequently, I'll retreat into a city for a point-blank defense.

Y's post though does make me think "Hmmmmm...how would a Hunter-centered pro-active defense work out? Why not try it?" With a quick Apprentice Civic (after researching the valuable Education tech), the Hunters could start at Woodsman I, making them decent early Ljosalfar defenders. Plus, Hawk flyers would become available too, making Y's early-warning reminder possible.

Thanks for the comment.

I neglected Hunters too; I think at 90 Hammers production cost, they're somewhat pricey but they're also early 4 strength units obtained along Elven "required" tech paths, can easily gain the Woodsman I promotion you mentioned, and start with 2 movement points making 'em faster than archers outside forests. They also get a 10% strength bonus to start. -jonathonstrange

anotehr quick addition:

there's no anti-recon promotion too which helps "hunters" though they do have a penalty against attacking cities so it's somewhat a fair-good balance.

i used to be able to rush FOL, roughly around the time some one can get to axemen (though this usually meant skipping archery, which isn't a better choice since a hero unit, gildan, helps quite a lot. much more powerful than many axemen to a degree or proper circumstance). but that was a few versions ago...not sure about now

hunters used to be "all the rage" for defense. i'm not sure about now, but there doesn't seem to be any change...so hunters should still be awesome....

archers as city defenders are good against axemen. however, if horsemen still have the natural 40% vs archery units, that they at least did have, they tear/torn archers up defending cities. this is where hunters really take prominance, and hunters are jsut as good on city defense as archers are against axemen as well.

hunters were extremely powerful (and not just for city garrison-protection), and now they are even more powerful and i don't see any current changes that weaken them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Y's post though does make me think "Hmmmmm...how would a Hunter-centered pro-active defense work out? Why not try it?" With a quick Apprentice Civic, the Hunters could start at Woodsman I, making them decent early Ljosalfar defenders. -jonathonstrange

AND JUST AS GOOD ON OFFENSE (in the "trees"-forests anyways, especially with ljossalfar) (and can kill/capture animals)

hunters were the versatile-do everything "miracle-godly-uber unit" and i don't see any reason why they still aren't.

you new players, u don't even know the prowess of hunters j/k
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this jsut got me thinking.....

i never tried this, but what if:

u used hunters and archers and gildan JOINTLY together. they are both along the exact same tech line (in fact hunting directly leads to archery). half the hunters could be for dealing with horsemen and the other half of hunters for axemen. this than open up archers for whatever u want.

(if the collateral damage? that archers now has works on offense....u got a city siege 'er or does it only do colateral when attacked? even if it only works on defense, that's STILL incredibly powerful as it protects your stack from another stack..like those guarding the city or if you meet the enemy stack in the field, also u CAN use the drill line with it's first strike as a somwhat alternative to catipults in "softening" up targets/cities)

I'd like to see what the OP thinks of archers in Fall Farther. They get ranged attacks there, allowing them to weaken enemies a little before direct combat. Makes them significantly more useful

I was restricting myself to Yashkaf's early middle game treatise where axemen/archers were the most common troops available - I think that once horsemen become widely available to the non-Hippus civilizations, then we're leaving the axemen mega-stack effectiveness time. Enter horsemen, adepts, swordsmen, etc. to diversify defenders and attackers.

hegemonkhan: Good points about hunters, particularly about their dealing with enemy horsemen - for me, as a primarily Ljosalfar player whose early game uses archers extensively, finding Tasunke's horsemen next door is always cause for concern. Then I welcome hunters existence more.

You've got me thinking about why I (an Ljosalfar player) mostly don't use hunters. I can't dismiss their 90 hammer cost for one thing; that's 50% more costly than an archer without being 50% more effective. There's also the double construction speed for Elf archery ranges that encourages archer use: they're so cheap and quick to build. Plus, last and not least, for a pro-active defender whose favorite leader is Amelanchier (traits: Raider/Defender): hunters are recon units and recon units can't pillage!

Not being able to pillage dooms hunters for me. They're good for active defense and I won't neglect them but I do so love to send out archers through enemy forests for a quick town/village pillage (double coins for Raider leaders). I'd forgotten that about hunters - when you leave the game or play different civs for too long, you forget details and I've been playing the Grigori, Hippus, and Amurites for the last few months.

WarKirby: I've always thought that ranged combat was neglected but I'd forgotten about that mod too. I suppose once we get mages and fireballs and maelstroms and start poisoning blades and summoning spectres, we forget the simple things: an arrow fired at range!

p.s. hegemonkhan: I really really rely on Gilden Silveric; he's an awesome resource for the early Ljosalfar survival: there's many, maybe most, games where he's been the primary reason for our continued existence when faced with the A.I. axemen rush. Gilden does severe damage (esp. if we've got Orthus' Axe - weird for an archer Hero to use an axe for double attacks per turn) to the enemy; he's frequently at the 200XP range early on. It's an Ljosalfar strength to have him and a weakness too; an entire civ's early survival depending on a single Hero.

Still, a Gilden-led pro-active combat team is my version of the Y treatise.

This entire strategy is based solely on abusing the horsehockey Civ4 AI. Wow, congrats! You found an obvious flaw in the AI and wrote up a means to abuse it for its stupidity.

Hey, guess what, I can abuse the AI too! Instead of bothering to defend all of my ocean based resources, all I need to do is defend the one closest to the enemies border. Sure enough, they will throw ship after ship at my defending stack. All the while all of my other resources are totally undefended! Awesome huh?

Please try this in MP. I'd love to raze half your cities they are only defended by a single warrior. Notice I said raze, because your vaunted PAD stack is gonna be sitting there looking mighty dumb surrounded by city ruins while I am comparing the cost in hammers for my raiding party of 5 movement horsemen versus you rebuilding half your cities.

? How is it an abuse of the AI? What does that mean in the context of not garrisoning what the enemy can't easily attack? Why would anyone bother to defend all of their ocean based resources, to use your example, if the enemy's not going to attack them? Wouldn't that be the smart thing to do? Are people placing ships and troops on top of their resources everywhere? Haven't they heard "That he who would guard everything, guards nothing" or do they feel it unfair to do something else, would be abuse of the AI?

Did he claim it was a viable MP strategy? Clearly anyone who lightly defended their cities in MP is asking for someone to make a quick raid capturing and leveling their cities - which would be very tempting to try as the rewards would be high. Maybe Yashkaf should've said it's only a SP strategy, but wasn't that pretty obvious?

dsdfdsdfdsdf

Please try this in MP. I'd love to raze half your cities they are only defended by a single warrior. Notice I said raze, because your vaunted PAD stack is gonna be sitting there looking mighty dumb surrounded by city ruins while I am comparing the cost in hammers for my raiding party of 5 movement horsemen versus you rebuilding half your cities.

Click to expand...

Actually your game will hit an impassible repeatable OOS before you can research horseback riding. That's what tends to happen with FfH MP. Not to mention the sheer stupidity of acting like a game with a randomly generated map and a huge number of actions with unpredictable outcomes can be any good as a competitive multiplayer game (and disucssing the finer points of balance and strategy tends to be pointless for multiplayer games played in a non-competitive manner). But hey, keep fooling yourself into thinking that anything other than SP matters for balance if it makes you feel better... lord knows you probably need the self esteem boost.