Archer vs Chariot

[Thalassicus]

The least useful early units poll showed 3% of players avoid Archers, while 64% avoid Chariot Archers. Why do you believe Archers are more useful than Chariots?

• Position on the tech tree of the units.
• Archers do not require horses.
• Chariots are actually more useful than archers.
• Other (please explain)

 

[Ahriman]

I think a big party of the archer value is that it upgrades to composite bowman, while the chariot becomes rapidly obsolete.

 

[Dunkah]

This.

Combined with the horse requirement.

Don't archers get defensive bonuses as well?

 

[Fusilliban]

I had chariots in my head as weaker than archers, but maybe that's just because I usually see them next to composite bowmen. I'll try using them in my next early-warfare game and see how they go.

The complete lack of an upgrade is really what does it here. If I spend my early hammers on a unit, it needs to be useful now *and* later. If it did promote... a highly-mobile ranged unit is incredibly useful; in games where I've gotten a scout-to-archer, which eventually turns into a terrain-ignoring gatling gun, it inevitably becomes a backbone of my army. A chariot has lots of move in theory, but in practice most battlefields aren't entirely flat, and the wheels cope poorly with slopes and vegetation.

In vanilla I could get some serious use out of a chariot in deserts, which are the most common "big patch of flat" that I run into, but when deserts cost 2, chariots go from being "crazy mobile" to "less annoyingly slow."

If a chariot upgraded to a C. Bowman with +1 move I would build them until I ran out of horses.

 

[Lazaroth]

I haven't played in a while, but I can share my experience as it was a couple of months ago.
If you just compare archer vs chariot, the chariot always wins because of its additional moves. The reason why a chariot still is worse is rather what it upgrades to. I don't know how it's changed, but previously you upgraded archers to other ranged units. The chariot path however upgraded to melee units very quickly. I.e. not a very good defensive unit in the long run.
It was however even worse when ranged upgrades didn't change when upgraded to a melee unit, i.e. making most upgrades worthless.

 

[Core Xii]

I think I avoid horse units simply due to the complexity of movement and attack. Infantry units work extremely simple: You can either move two flat tiles or one difficult terrain tile. It's easy to plan my moves before executing them.

Horse units, in contrast, I never know what they can do in a turn. There are just too many factors to consider. Too much terrain, too much movement. I can't plan my army maneuvers.

 

[mitsho]

I agree that they are more complex to understand. And I agree that the missing upgrade path is a bad thing. Maybe just change them to upgrade into horsemen or knights is a solution.

Contrary to the poll above, I do think the position in the tech tree is a problem. I always get the wheel late since roads are not a priority for workers (trade routes pay only with somehow developed cities) and water mills take some time to build/buy. Also beelining Mathematics only makes sense if you want the catapults for conquests which in turn means that you are already scouting a lot or you are going to get the superior horsemen soon.

I could see making the Chariot Archer cheaper and weaker, but on tech column 1 (Animal Husbandry), and rename it to Chariot, allowing you to quickly tech it and then use it as a alternatie scout that is faster on flat terrain and robuster/can avoid barbs than the scout.

But apparently (due to the poll), I'm totally wrong here.

 

[Ahriman]

Maybe just change them to upgrade into horsemen or knights is a solution.

They do upgrade to Knights. But that comes far too late to save them. I think they need to upgrade to horsemen, with promotion swapping, so that they stay useful through the classical era.

 

[Thalassicus]

I believe chariots should be useful for a decently long time. If we upgrade chariots to horsemen, anyone going the horse path on the tech tree will see chariots go obsolete before one even finishes construction.

One possible way to give Chariots long-term value is to compare them to future units (bowmen) instead of past units (archers). Chariots do come between the two on the tech tree, after all. If we make them forward-looking, Chariots would be ahead of their time, so their usefulness would last longer. This is a simple matter of giving them +2 strength with a corresponding cost increase to match. I'm going to experiment with that in some test games.

 

[Ahriman]

I believe chariots should be useful for a long time.

I don't think that is feasible. A 6/9 unit is just not going to be very useful against strength 16-18 swordsmen and horsemen.

Is there a way to decouple obsolescence from upgrades? So you could allow the chariot to upgrade to a horseman without necessarily making it obsolete?

 

[albie_123]

Making them on par with composite bowmen would be a good start.

 

[Thalassicus]

Is there a way to decouple obsolescence from upgrades?

Yes, ObsoleteTech is a field in the Units table, while the latter is done with the Unit_ClassUpgrades table.

<Units>
  <Row>
    <Class>UNITCLASS_CHARIOT_ARCHER</Class>
    <Type>UNIT_CHARIOT_ARCHER</Type>
    <PrereqTech>TECH_THE_WHEEL</PrereqTech>
    <ObsoleteTech>[B]TECH_CHIVALRY[/B]</ObsoleteTech>
    ...
  </Row>
</Units>
<Unit_ClassUpgrades>
  <Row>
    <UnitType>UNIT_CHARIOT_ARCHER</UnitType>
    <UnitClassType>[B]UNITCLASS_KNIGHT[/B]</UnitClassType>
  </Row>
</Unit_ClassUpgrades>

 

[Stalker0]

For me, its simply the comparison to horseman that kills them for me.

On open terrain maps, I do use chariots more than archers and even c.bowmen, their mobility lets them beat any of those units.

However, horsemen are still better, so once I have them I will start killing chariots in order to get horsemen and that is a lot of wasted hammers.

 

[mystikx21]

What Stalker said. Horsemen do basically the same things, only better in most cases. Chariots are better at defence, but archers and foot soldiers are better still (cheaper or don't require resources).

If we can upgrade chariots to horsemen (but remain available much as UUs do), I'd be fine with that. I could build a few of them to get some promos against barbs and raiding.

 

[Ahriman]

If we can upgrade chariots to horsemen (but remain available much as UUs do), I'd be fine with that.

Yes, I think this would be a significant improvement.

 

[mitsho]

They do upgrade to Knights. But that comes far too late to save them. I think they need to upgrade to horsemen, with promotion swapping, so that they stay useful through the classical era.

Duh, yes. What I wanted to write originally is that then they should upgrade to knights but knights should come earlier so that they themselves get their dominant roles they had in the early middle ages (before the advent of pikemen).

If we can upgrade chariots to horsemen (but remain available much as UUs do), I'd be fine with that. I could build a few of them to get some promos against barbs and raiding.

I do agree, but then couldn't we just delete the unit and make the horsemen come earlier? What's the unique use / role of Chariot archers then?

As I see it from a historical perspective, Chariots are one of the really early units, the one that Egyptians and Hittites fought each other with and that were used in the flat plains of Mesopotamia and later on by backwards people as Boudicceas Celts, but just to get to battle. So wouldn't it make more sense if the Chariot was a really early unit instead of one going adjacent to Classical Era (=Hellenistic and Roman Empire Armies) units?

A really radical idea (just throwing it out, don't stone me): What if the Chariot Archer upgrades to Composite Bowman?

Have it be an alternative to Archery which you could ignore in that case and use the increased movement of the Chariot means you need less of them to defend. But you'd need to hook up the horses first

That probably would require renaming Archery and the Wheel though.

 

[mystikx21]

Stone him! (well you did say Jehovah).

I'm not sure the composite bow is a fair upgrade path because of the resource requirement and mobility change. The argument for "just to get to battle" also applies to mechanized infantry units and dragoons to increase their mobility. I'm not sure it's necessary to alter the unit to be essentially a dismounted archer to reflect this.

I would say a combination of moving it earlier in the tech path and changing its upgrade/obsolete path would make it reasonably useful. I do think (from using Warcs with Egypt and Horse Archers with Huns esp) that they have a role in covering retreats and harassment of enemies that can be useful and is distinct from the way horses (or archers) are best used. That argues against deletion entirely, but may be more an argument for the UUs.

So we could delete the unit too.

 

[Ahriman]

What I wanted to write originally is that then they should upgrade to knights but knights should come earlier so that they themselves get their dominant roles they had in the early middle ages (before the advent of pikemen).

I don't see any reason to move knights or start messing around with the tech tree.

And in-game, the pikeman unit really represents medieval spearmen, rather than actual late medieval/Renaissance pikes.

So wouldn't it make more sense if the Chariot was a really early unit instead of one going adjacent to Classical Era

When most eras are only 2 columns, I don't think you can say that "one adjacent to era X" is basically the same as "in era X". Crossbows are adjacent to gunpowder guys.

The other issue is that the game doesn't actually have non-UU horse archers, which are certainly important in the classical era.

A really radical idea (just throwing it out, don't stone me): What if the Chariot Archer upgrades to Composite Bowman?

I'd vote no, I think horse units should upgrade to horse units.

 

[Thalassicus]

The other issue is that the game doesn't actually have non-UU horse archers, which are certainly important in the classical era.

I agree with this.

[If Chariots upgrade to Horsemen] couldn't we just delete the unit and make the horsemen come earlier? What's the unique use / role of Chariot archers then?

As I see it from a historical perspective, Chariots are one of the really early units, the one that Egyptians and Hittites fought each other with and that were used in the flat plains of Mesopotamia and later on by backwards people as Boudicceas Celts, but just to get to battle. So wouldn't it make more sense if the Chariot was a really early unit instead of one going adjacent to Classical Era (=Hellenistic and Roman Empire Armies) units?

I've considered moving chariots 1 tech level earlier, to where horses are revealed, to extend the gap between them and horsemen.

 

[Zaldron]

I voted tech location (that's my secondary reason), but the upgrade path is the primary reason I prefer archers. Many times chariots don't survive until you've researched chivalry.

EDIT: I'd be ok with chariots upgrading to horsemen and obsolete at chivalry, OR upgrading to CBows.